Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I?m trying to coalesce some thoughts I?ve had on a number of threads, so apologies if not all this appears novel.


It is clear that right now, ED traffic and traffic patterns bear no resemblance to anything recently measured in planning future alteration to the area?s roads. Vehicle traffic is down across the area, by 60-80% if government averages are to be believed, and usage of public transport has fallen off a cliff.


It is very likely that it will take some time ? perhaps up to 18 months ? before we reach a ?new normal?. Although this might be the old normal, I personally think this is most unlikely. I suspect that the volume of working from home for former office workers will stay high, and that those who do travel into work will not be travelling all at the same time (staggered working hours) and far fewer will be risking public transport. This will have the effect of reducing congestion and concomitant pollution. [And if it was true that people were driving in to ED to commute through to the centre, I doubt whether this will still be true, or to the same extent].


Although the council would, I am sure, be pleased if we all moved to bicycles, it must be remembered that ED and surrounds are hilly and quite far away from the Centre (City & West End) ? and indeed that ED residents are not all spring chickens, leading me to guess that a reliance on private cars (particularly as these are seen as very much more ?Covid-19 safe? than using public transport) ? especially amongst the elderly or otherwise frail ? will increase; meaning that Southwark?s war on private cars does need to be reconsidered.


And certainly undertaking road change schemes before a ?new normal? develops and is acknowledged would be at best a waste of money, and at worst an attack on residents. ?Bicycle or use public transport? cannot now be the Council?s go-to solution, nor is locking cars out of areas any longer acceptable.


But what do others think?

If you read what Khan is now proposing it does not seem worthwhile even thinking about what traffic flows, people traveling will be.


His latest gem, buses to only carry 15 people, more bike lanes and no plan for the tube.


People will not bother even leaving their homes.


I vote we make him Mayor for life as it is impossible to get anyone as clever ever.

I see why buses have been made free to minimise contact with drivers, but it was quite the sight to see buses driving down (actually struggling down now parking legislation has now been abandoned) Rye Lane with buses full again, with passengers clearly not going to/from work, just taking advantage of the free ride. No doubt traces of Coronavirus on many of the surfaces and handles of the vehicle. Hardly a good idea when trying to contain a global pandemic killer virus.

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I?m trying to coalesce some thoughts I?ve had on a

> number of threads, so apologies if not all this

> appears novel.

>

> It is clear that right now, ED traffic and traffic

> patterns bear no resemblance to anything recently

> measured in planning future alteration to the

> area?s roads. Vehicle traffic is down across the

> area, by 60-80% if government averages are to be

> believed, and usage of public transport has fallen

> off a cliff.

>

> It is very likely that it will take some time ?

> perhaps up to 18 months ? before we reach a ?new

> normal?. Although this might be the old normal, I

> personally think this is most unlikely. I suspect

> that the volume of working from home for former

> office workers will stay high, and that those who

> do travel into work will not be travelling all at

> the same time (staggered working hours) and far

> fewer will be risking public transport. This will

> have the effect of reducing congestion and

> concomitant pollution. .

>

> Although the council would, I am sure, be pleased

> if we all moved to bicycles, it must be remembered

> that ED and surrounds are hilly and quite far away

> from the Centre (City & West End) ? and indeed

> that ED residents are not all spring chickens,

> leading me to guess that a reliance on private

> cars (particularly as these are seen as very much

> more ?Covid-19 safe? than using public transport)

> ? especially amongst the elderly or otherwise

> frail ? will increase; meaning that Southwark?s

> war on private cars does need to be reconsidered.

>

> And certainly undertaking road change schemes

> before a ?new normal? develops and is acknowledged

> would be at best a waste of money, and at worst an

> attack on residents. ?Bicycle or use public

> transport? cannot now be the Council?s go-to

> solution, nor is locking cars out of areas any

> longer acceptable.

>

> But what do others think?



Its a real worry..I dont drive can't ride a bike and aged over 60 I dont want to try and learn on Londons roads..I'll have to return to work in the west end post lockdown and the idea of overground and tube and the canada water interchange terrifies me.

Buses aren't really a viable option as I would need to take 2 and it takes well over an hour, I think its less of a risk taking two 15 minute train rides than sitting on a number 12 where the windows dont open for 60minutes

Buses, bike lanes and more pedestrianisation. The school run needs to stop, children can get to school by walking and bike. There is a child obesity issue, yet they seem unable to walk to school, my journey was a 2 hour round walk. Unfortunately too many 4 wheel drive private schools around ED. With parents bringing their precious ones by car every day. Yes.. I am feeling grumpy today. Fewer cars - cleaner air.

Its a real worry..I dont drive can't ride a bike and aged over 60 I dont want to try and learn on Londons roads..I'll have to return to work in the west end post lockdown and the idea of overground and tube and the canada water interchange terrifies me.



Electric moped, 50cc equivalent? Don't need CBT if you have an old driving license; if you don't have one, it's just a day. No pollution, no C-charge or T-charge.


I suspect they're going to have to hurry up and legalise the 250w class e-scooters for road use also, which will be a lot less expensive and likely exempt from CBT, but they'll be speed limited to something pretty slow - 12 or 15mph.

wulfhound Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> > Its a real worry..I dont drive can't ride a bike

> and aged over 60 I dont want to try and learn on

> Londons roads..I'll have to return to work in the

> west end post lockdown and the idea of overground

> and tube and the canada water interchange

> terrifies me.

>

>

> Electric moped, 50cc equivalent? Don't need CBT if

> you have an old driving license; if you don't have

> one, it's just a day. No pollution, no C-charge or

> T-charge.

>

> I suspect they're going to have to hurry up and

> legalise the 250w class e-scooters for road use

> also, which will be a lot less expensive and

> likely exempt from CBT, but they'll be speed

> limited to something pretty slow - 12 or 15mph.


I'm scared to ride a moped as I can't ride a bike I fear a moped would be similar but faster and having got this far without ever being on a motorbike or moped I'm scared to try..at this rate I'll be walking!

Clearly, there are no easy answers regarding transport as we ease lockdown. But I really hope that the council do not step back on their commitment to promote active travel, and to do what they can to reduce the dreadful amount of pollution in the borough that is caused by cars.

It depends a bit on how lockdown is lifted, what restrictions remain in place and for how long and what (if any) mitigation (eg masks, social distancing) is used on public transport. Masks are difficult - mostly for security reasons and while you might have commuters willing to risk a short bus journey, how many would be willing to be surrounded by masked individuals...? It's something not publically acknowledged at the moment but it's a major concern; you basically swap risk of a virus for a much increased risk of crime.


It is impossible to replace reduced mass transit capacity with private cars. If car sharing isn't possible due to social distancing, every previously full rush hour bus will generate an additional 30-40 cars. Within London, if you drop public transport by 85% or so, that's an additional 8 million journeys you have to "move" to somewhere else. You don't have to have a huge amount of experience commuting in cities to know that 8 million additional car journeys will be complete and utter gridlock.


The only way to even partially replace lost mass transit capacity is active travel. There's the equality issue as well because (while it varies borough to borough), the figures are that roughly 1/4 - 1/3rd of Londoners don't have access to a car. So if you prioritise cars, those people are disadvantaged further because the roads are clogged solid making it dangerous to walk or cycle and impractical to take the bus due to the congestion.


Most cities (towns, boroughs etc) have virtually no capacity to quickly increase their capacity for cars but most can increase the bike and pedestrian capacity relatively quickly and cheaply. Lambeth have already done a fair bit in and around Brixton and Herne Hill and they put in place a borough-wide Emergency Traffic Order to allow the changes.


The smart thing for Southwark to do is put in place a temporary version of the Healthy Sreets Plan NOW - it can be done relatively quickly and cheaply using fencing, plastic wands, planters etc although you can't put in camera-controlled permitted turns (as talked about at EDG / Townley Road) as fast, that's a fairly major logistical task to install and programme it. There's your trial period straight away with the knowledge that it can be quickly and cheaply removed again (rather than several months of roadworks to rebuild junctions again).


Some of it will depend a bit on work patterns - will people continue to work from home where that's possible? What about schools, how can social distancing be maintained in school classrooms, sports facilites, changing rooms nd on coaches to and from school? In the Healthy Streets thread is a whole raft of complaints / issues with coaches but if you have to go from 25 coaches to 50 to fit all the kids on in a socially distant manner then that's gridlock again... But if kids can't go to school, the parents can't go back to work so...???


And you've got to admit, the area with far fewer cars is really nice. Less traffic noise, less pollution, it's nice to see families and kids riding bikes along streets previously solid with cars. And if every open shop is going to have a 2m-spaced queue of people outside it then there isn't enough pavement space for everyone so the only option is to expand into the roads. This is being done worldwide now, it's not something that just Sadiq Khan is talking about - if anything the message is now coming from Government that this has to be done otherwise the pollution and gridlock will kill the economy just as badly as coronavirus has.


This cartoon shows where we've sort of blindly stumbled to with car culture:

201411-tingvall.jpg

Just need to take back some of that yawning chasm of car space and make it people space.

In that spirit


Gov.uk today? ?2 billion package to create new era for cycling and walking includes?

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/2-billion-package-to-create-new-era-for-cycling-and-walking?utm_source=cde539b3-ac15-4d45-8e16-68d2a7ca7db6&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate



Fast-tracked statutory guidance, published today and effective immediately, will tell councils to reallocate roadspace for significantly-increased numbers of cyclists and pedestrians. In towns and cities, some streets could become bike and bus-only while others remain available for motorists. More side streets could be closed to through traffic, to create low-traffic neighbourhoods and reduce rat-running while maintaining access for vehicles.


Vouchers will be issued for cycle repairs, to encourage people to get their old bikes out of the shed, and plans are being developed for greater provision of bike fixing facilities. Many more will take up the Cycle to Work scheme, which gives employees a discount on a new bike.

sally buying Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Has a new money tree orchard been discovered


https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/coronavirus-and-the-ultimate-magic-money-tree/20/03/


There's a related article linked in that one about "austerity" as well, both are worth a read.

Plus that money isn't new, it's a re-announcement of previously allocated funding, just been repackaged and brought forward a little bit.

Sally Eva Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In that spirit

>

> Gov.uk today? ?2 billion package to create new era

> for cycling and walking includes?

> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/2-billion-packa

> ge-to-create-new-era-for-cycling-and-walking?utm_s

> ource=cde539b3-ac15-4d45-8e16-68d2a7ca7db6&utm_med

> ium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_con

> tent=immediate

>

>

> Fast-tracked statutory guidance, published today

> and effective immediately, will tell councils to

> reallocate roadspace for significantly-increased

> numbers of cyclists and pedestrians. In towns and

> cities, some streets could become bike and

> bus-only while others remain available for

> motorists. More side streets could be closed to

> through traffic, to create low-traffic

> neighbourhoods and reduce rat-running while

> maintaining access for vehicles.

>

> Vouchers will be issued for cycle repairs, to

> encourage people to get their old bikes out of the

> shed, and plans are being developed for greater

> provision of bike fixing facilities. Many more

> will take up the Cycle to Work scheme, which gives

> employees a discount on a new bike.




It seems to me that the Govt is floating more and more unwanted and ill thought of ideas to deflect people from their mishandling of the virus situation.


Put Khan in charge of silly ideas and money wasting and you will suddenly realise just how bad it all is getting.


If you have a pet idea that is of no value please list here as it appears that funding will be given immediately to stop people realising that they are giving up rights without any proper discussion in the HOC.


Big brother is growing every day.


Be aware.

A low-powered moped is a very different beast from either a bike or a motorbike. Has neither the balance demands of the former, or the terrifying-for-many, exhilarating-for-some acceleration and power of the latter.


The talk around the pending legalisation of lightweight e-scooters suggests that those, unlike mopeds, will be able to go anywhere cyclists can, i.e. cycle lanes, cycle paths in parks, and permeable road closures, and therefore away from cars a lot of the time. Could be quite liberating for people who are reasonably agile but for whom bikes aren't an option.

Dear Rupert


I know one of the poor souls that is trying to work out how we try to get things moving, maintaining some sort of revenues for our public transport, stopping everyone getting into their cars with the result impact on carbon emissions, air quality and congestion, whilst building on the benefits we have seen from the increase of active transport.


Behind every Grant Shapps or Sadiq Khan their is a hard working public spirited official looking at the options and trying to come to solutions.


Its easy to snipe. What are your answers? Gauntlet laid down.


If I do have a axe to grind it is cowardice since the 2000 fuel protest to take on motorists and the motoring lobby. Things may have changed due to the exceptional situation. Or perhaps you are one of rrrsss hammering down Brenchley Gardens at 60mph enjoying the lack of traffic, on your unnecessary journey without fear of speed enforcement. Yes, opposing that big brother nonsense that we shouldn't be allowed to drive when we want, where we want, how we want.... Hopefully we will be seeing some of the lessons of the ban on smoking and future generations will ask "did people really smoke in restaurants, did people really drive like twots?"


The current and previous Mayors may have done a lot to criticise but have also done things to increase public transport and active travel. Ironically each have benefited from the legacy of the previous one.

My answer is very simple allow the hard working people carry on to try and get things solved and moving. Their work is very much appreciated.


Do not try and pass policies under the cover of the virus which appears to be happening. When this current problem is understood fully we can have an open and frank debate with all people of the UK to see where they would like to go and not the policies of a few.


I am 74 years of age I do not go hammering down roads in my car.

It's unprecedented times.


No need to insult each other.


Personally, I'm enjoying fewer cars about and hope that continues.


There is short term, mid and long term and strategies/modelling is based on different scenarios.


It's not about deflecting scrutiny over how the virus was handled, which arguably should have been stricter with enforcement. It's about safely getting the economy back and people working safely, while mitigating the challenge from those who think they are invincible and safety rules need not apply.


People who use their cars for unnecessary journeys will just have to stop, there won't be room on the roads. It will be essential journeys only; the volumes on public transport will increase staggered rate as expected.


People really need to take responsibility and a good hard look at the reason they are travelling

rupert james Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My answer is very simple allow the hard working

> people carry on to try and get things solved and

> moving. Their work is very much appreciated.

>

> Do not try and pass policies under the cover of

> the virus which appears to be happening. When

> this current problem is understood fully we can

> have an open and frank debate with all people of

> the UK to see where they would like to go and not

> the policies of a few.

>

> I am 74 years of age I do not go hammering down

> roads in my car.



Hi Rupert, You don't appear to have answered Malumbu's question: what is your fully worked up policy proposal that will simultaneously keep congestion within manageable limits; permit everyone to keep 2m away from everyone else; and not disadvantage those already disadvantaged (and therefore likely unable to buy a car etc.)?


Looking forward to your suggestion. You may find there is in fact no simple answer.

rupert james Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My answer is very simple allow the hard working

> people carry on to try and get things solved and

> moving. Their work is very much appreciated.

>

> Do not try and pass policies under the cover of

> the virus which appears to be happening. When

> this current problem is understood fully we can

> have an open and frank debate with all people of

> the UK to see where they would like to go and not

> the policies of a few.

>

> I am 74 years of age I do not go hammering down

> roads in my car.


I disagree, this is EXACTLY the excuse we need to get some proper transport policy changes done under the umbrella/smokescreen of coronavirus. These changes need to overall be a modal shift to walking and cycling. In your case these are not directly aimed at you obviously, but will make the roads clearer for those like you who do need to use a car. (Although you should go to a bike shop and give an e-bike a try, you'd be amazed how much fun they are and plenty powerful enough to deal with the hills round here.)


Up until now road use has been increasing steadily and policy has been to keep throwing money at road schemes just to keep our heads above water supporting this transport mode. Powerful lobbying interests have prevented successive governments having the balls to do anything about it.


I sincerely hope that this crisis can become a turning point, and that we have reached peak car usage. I am out cycling every couple of days and whenever I cross over the M25 in Kent it is deserted. This, along with the astonishing figures on short-term reduction in pollution, gives a window into what the future could look like. It enables a narrative that policymakers can use to effect the shift in policy away from further road mega-projects to instead spend the money spent on other forms of transport.

Most posters seem to have leaped straight into solution mode - often riding familiar hobby horses - but partly my point was that solutions are only valid in the light of the problems they are solving. I am suggesting that the post 2020 traffic and travel picture in ED, once stabilised, is very likely not be be the one that planners assessed in 2019 when confirming their road and transport plans.


Some suggest rushing forward, and indeed extending, existing plans - but does that make sense when we don't, any longer, know what problems we are solving, or the priorities in solving them? Air quality is important, but so is the ability for the elderly and infirm (and i.e. families that want to travel together) to be able to move round. If public transport is much truncated, and if it is no longer sustainable 'at the price' when it can only operate at 30% loading, for instance, then a policy which offers bike or public transport only will lock-up swathes of the population in their homes - when that public transport is either not available, or too pricey - unable to move further than they can walk? Is this socially acceptable? [i can't imagine Freedom Passes lasting longer than TfL's bankruptcy].


But whatever solutions we do come up with, and whatever hard choices have to be made, let's at least do so knowing what we are actually facing, rather than committing expenditure now on favoured 2019 solutions.

But it's not an either/or picture, no-one is saying that everyone has to ride bikes all the time.


There's a finite set of road space in East Dulwich (and indeed in pretty much all towns and cities). Most of that road space is already not far off capacity at least some of the time, if not quite a lot of the time. It takes AGES to build more roadspace, you're talking years to plan, approve and construct a new highway or bypass or housing estate with the corresponding road network.


We can fairly safely assume that some working patterns will change dramatically - much more working from home, remote meetings and so on which will remove a percentage of journeys from the roads and public transport. But obviously not everyone can WFH, there's still going to be a need for travel to and from work.


In the short term at least, we can also assume that a lot of leisure facilites - gyms, restaurants, cinemas, theatres, museums - probably aren't going to open up at anywhere near capacity so again, that removes a percentage of leisure travel. International tourism we can probably write off for the rest of the year which again frees up a significant chunk of travel in and around central London (less applicable in ED).


However, we can also assume that social distancing is going to be a thing for a while. There's a related and interesting read here about viral transmission in different circumstances (in/outdoors, pblic transport etc):

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them


So public transport can potentially operate at about 15-20% of current levels at best. You could put on more buses but that leads to issues up in central London when they all converge plus there's not a massive amount of spare capacity and drivers just sitting there waiting to go. Train and tube capacity is even more difficult to increase. There's the school coach issue I mentioned ^^ as well which is a bit of an unknown at the moment.


Working off all of that, we can probably assume a drop of about 25% in people actually needing to travel from pre-Covid levels (change in working patterns, remote working, only in the office one day a week for example). But that still doesn't balance with the 80% cut in public transport capacity.


So... if you put all of those journeys into private cars, they won't fit on the roads. Gridlock, pollution and Rupert's point of "the hard-working people trying their best" is no good if the hard working people are all stuck in traffic along with critical delivery vehicles, emergency services and the public transport that is still running.


Years and years of largely pointless Government campaigns aimed at "sharing the road" and "giving cyclists space" have amounted to nothing, the ONLY things that increase the number of people cycling are segregated lanes and reducing traffic. You can see it now (not just in ED). Cycling, when there's vastly reduced traffic on the roads is really nice. Great way for families to get around together, fantastic for keeping distance from others, cheap, easily accessible. But they won't ride if/when, traffic is back at pre-Covid levels. They didn't before, why would they now? Traffic scares people off the roads and we end up in the Catch-22 of the roads being dangerous because of the traffic so I won't cycle, I'll drive. And there's more traffic so it's more dangerous to cycle so more people drive...


And certainly undertaking road change schemes before a ?new normal? develops and is acknowledged would be at best a waste of money, and at worst an attack on residents. ?Bicycle or use public transport? cannot now be the Council?s go-to solution, nor is locking cars out of areas any longer acceptable.


This is 100% wrong. You don't wait until the whole house is ablaze before calling the fire brigade. Similarly, you don't wait until the streets are solid with traffic to then go "hmm, best do something about that". The change has happened - people need to move around reasonably efficiently and in a well-spaced manner. By enabling the ones who can walk / cycle / scooter to do so safely, you free up space on public transport and on the roads for the people who need it.

There?s news today That local councils will be able to fast track the closure of roads near schools at certain times of the day to avoid congestion and reduce pollution. If you are interested in reducing traffic levels near to your house then you could contact the headteacher of the school and your local council to let your thoughts be known.


https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/may/09/uk-councils-to-enforce-temporary-road-closures-for-safer-school-runs

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...