Jump to content

Recommended Posts

snoopy17 Wrote:

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

> I thought you couldn't use the freedom pass at

> peak times anyway?


Travel free any time on bus, tram, Tube, DLR, London Overground and TfL Rail.


Travel free after 9:30 weekdays, and any time on weekends and public holidays on most National Rail Services in London.


DulwichFox

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Khan has always claimed credit for the 'Freedom

> Pass' Even if HE did not bring it in originally.

>

> But now.. All of a Sudden, The Freedom Pass has

> Nothing to do with Him.. Out of His control.

>

> Hypocrite ..

>

> Need to get him out. Has too much Power.


So your issue is that you just don't like Khan. Now answer the question I asked. How would any Mayor resolve the cost for a huge drop in passengers? Others have pointed out to you that government ordered concessions to stop (so they do not have to bail out Tfl too). It would help if you actually read replies to you and acknowledge the facts over your determination to have a go at Khan.

seenbeen Wrote:

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


> There are enough passengers on TFL to fund the

> service if many people did not evade fares. Also

> the free travel for kids has encouraged them to

> hop on for 1 or 2 stops and their parents to

> choose schools miles away.....does nothing to

> combat obesity or cut down air pollution.

> TFL fund the 60+ pass


How about you provide the data that proves that instead of making stuff up because you want it to be true.


Tfl were operating with a ?968 million deficit last year and an overall debt of ?11.7 billion. That just got a whole lot worse because of this pandemic. Some details here. Declining passenger numbers combined with increased running costs have been the trend for some years.


https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2019/03/21/tfl-outlines-its-budget-for-2020-focusing-on-more-cost-cutting/

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Khan has always claimed credit for the 'Freedom

> > Pass' Even if HE did not bring it in originally.

>

> >

> > But now.. All of a Sudden, The Freedom Pass

> has

> > Nothing to do with Him.. Out of His control.

> >

> > Hypocrite ..

> >

> > Need to get him out. Has too much Power.

>

> So your issue is that you just don't like Khan.

> Now answer the question I asked. How would any

> Mayor resolve the cost for a huge drop in

> passengers? Others have pointed out to you that

> government ordered concessions to stop (so they do

> not have to bail out Tfl too). It would help if

> you actually read replies to you and acknowledge

> the facts over your determination to have a go at

> Khan.


I used to use my Freedom Pass mainly to travel to Sth Bermondsey Once fortnight (Millwall)


The train was running anyway. It made no difference to TFL if I was on the Train or not.

Unless the extra weight of me was using more electricity.


How would any Mayor resolve the cost for a huge drop in passengers ??


I do not know. I am not a politician and I am not the The Mayor of London.

That is their problem. Under normal conditions where the Economy depends on full employment,

Inner London Transport should be FREE.


Privatisation greed has destroyed a lot of out transport systems.

Deregulation of transport systems is another debate and one on which we would probably agree on a lot of things. Changes to concessionary travel is something government demanded in return for the ?1.6bn bailout they have just given to Tfl. Ultimately it will be tax payers who pay for that. The point here though is that it is the government who have forced this change, not the Mayor. Would a Labour government have made the same demands? Probably not.


Life is going to get a bit more costly for all of us and sadly we have a government with a track record of making the poorest pay most. We shall see what happens.

On LBC this morning it was confirmed by the Gov that the Gov did not force Khan to raise the congestion charge nor extend the times. This was told to the Guardian and they reported it to the public.


It was left to him to decide what was best.


Just who do you believe.

The restriction is at peak times, for obvious reasons in the current circumstances.


We are lucky to have a freedom pass at all, and I am very grateful for mine.


Dulwich Fox, why do you need to do your shopping between 8 and 9? There are many other hours in the day.


Also, many supermarkets and local shops will deliver to your door!


Alternatively, we have a great What's App group in our road, plus other local help groups. To the best of my knowledge you aren't yet on it? A note with contact numbers to be a part of it was put through everybody's door, as far as I know, when all this horrible time started.


I'm sure there are many neighbours and others who would be only too happy to help you get your shopping!


ETA: And unfortunately you do seem to have a real hatred of Sadiq Khan.


Do you think Boris Johnson, for example, did a better job as mayor?

Probably like me 8~9 is for elderly and disabled customers.


Also if you are anywhere you have to be be on a bus before the rush hour or you cannot use the pass. Many pensioners like me only have a freedom pass so in essence I am being locked down unable to go anywhere as using busses in the rush hour period will be expensive. My day suddenly becomes very much shorter or a great deal longer if I have to wait for the rush hour to end.


How many pensioners actually take public transport in the rush hours. Also what happens if you have an hospital appt in the afternoon and are delayed for whatever reason.


The freedom pass should remain as it is as elderly people do not abuse it.


The more Mr Khan thinks the worst it gets as he does not think things through to a sensible conclusion.


I do think you have to ask the question "Would you buy a secondhand car from this person with confidence.

richard tudor Wrote:

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

> Probably like me 8~9 is for elderly and disabled

> customers.



There are ways of getting your shopping which do not involve going physically to the shops yourself.


Local people have been really helpful in offering to do shopping for those who need assistance, plus supermarkets offer deliveries.


>

> Also if you are anywhere you have to be be on a

> bus before the rush hour or you cannot use the

> pass. Many pensioners like me only have a freedom

> pass so in essence I am being locked down unable

> to go anywhere as using busses in the rush hour

> period will be expensive. My day suddenly becomes

> very much shorter or a great deal longer if I have

> to wait for the rush hour to end.



As I understand it, the restriction on use is only between 8 and 9 am.


Would you rather be crammed into a bus with no social distancing because people who have to get to work are joined by older people who don't have to get to work?




>

> How many pensioners actually take public transport

> in the rush hours.



Also what happens if you have

> an hospital appt in the afternoon and are delayed

> for whatever reason.



Most hospital appointments have been cancelled, as I understand it.




>

> The freedom pass should remain as it is as elderly

> people do not abuse it.



I don't think anybody is suggesting that elderly people abuse it?


And it has always been the case that you can't use it on trains before a certain time in the morning.



>

> The more Mr Khan thinks the worst it gets as he

> does not think things through to a sensible

> conclusion.

>

> I do think you have to ask the question "Would you

> buy a secondhand car from this person with

> confidence.



I would happily buy a second hand car from Sadik Khan :)


ETA: I am also a pensioner. I can't use public transport anyway at the moment, but even if I could I would avoid it under the present circumstances, let alone in the rush hour!


ETA: I have just seen on a local Facebook thread that if you incur travel expenses for hospital appointments you may be able to claim them back.


PALS at the relevant hospital can advise.


The thread particularly related to someone having to be driven there by car as not able to use public transport for obvious reasons, and thereby incurring congestion charges each time.


Obviously that is rather more than a bus fare, but it's possible that the same applies.

Sue Wrote:

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

> The restriction is at peak times, for obvious

> reasons in the current circumstances.

>

> We are lucky to have a freedom pass at all, and I

> am very grateful for mine.

>

Dulwich Fox, why do you need to do your shopping between 8 and 9? There are many other hours in the day.

>

> Also, many supermarkets and local shops will

> deliver to your door!

>

> Alternatively, we have a great What's App group in

> our road, plus other local help groups. To the

> best of my knowledge you aren't yet on it? A note

> with contact numbers to be a part of it was put

> through everybody's door, as far as I know, when

> all this horrible time started.

>

> I'm sure there are many neighbours and others who

> would be only too happy to help you get your

> shopping!

>

> ETA: And unfortunately you do seem to have a real

> hatred of Sadiq Khan.

>

> Do you think Boris Johnson, for example, did a

> better job as mayor?


I don't do MY shopping between 08.00 - 09.00am I am still sleeping at that time.

Those are the opening hours Sainsbury's have allocated to Elderly Folk to give them a chance

to shop without having to queue outside


I do not mind much having to queue.


I don't Hate Sadiq Khan. I just dislike his Polices. I do not Hate anyone.


I was not Just thinking about myself when I started this Post. I was thinking about other people.

Its something I've done All my life. Something I got from my Late Mother.


Foxy

I only discovered yesterday from a neighbour who was emailed about the changes that I will no longer be able to use my freedom pass to get into work as its suspended during peak travel.

This is so unfair-It assumes that us over 60's dont have commitments to get into work at a certain time and can just sit on our butts and leave home when we want.

With the retirement age going up every year plenty of us over 60's HAVE to work and at roughly ?8 a day to get into work 5 days a week this makes a big dent out of my weekly salary

its deeply unfair.

edcam Wrote:

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

> None of this was his idea. It's this bloody awful

> government.


So If it's nothing to do with Khan why is he there. ??


If he does not have the Power to overturn Government decisions , why do we need him ??


Livingstone got so much stick.. Boris got so much stick.

Why do so many people support Sadiq Khan. He cannot do a thing wrong.


What did we do before we created a Mayor of London ??


Not to be confused with the Lord Mayor of London..


The Lord Mayor of the City of London, William Russell

Elected annually, the Lord Mayor of the City of London is an international ambassador for the UK's financial and professional services sector.

The London Mayors Office is a bit like a devolved government. So it has a limited range to set local policy, some of which regards how it spends the funding that comes from central government, and other monies it receives from taxpayers.


Do we need it?


Well the idea is to have a layer between local authorities and central government, in the same was as we used to have regional and metropolitan elected bodies. For me it makes sense in a city with 8 million residents to have an elected office that oversees the infrastructure and policies that pull all that together. That is what the London Assembly is also for. To hold the Mayor and his advisers to account. And just as we elect the Mayor, we also elect the Assembly Members.

edcam Wrote:

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

> None of this was his idea. It's this bloody awful

> government.


It's sensible- if older people who are not working are on the bus they will clog up the buses and workers will not be able to get on. Also older people should not be travelling at peak times because they may get the virus and clog up the NHS.

This very good Government quite rightly follow the science.

Don't forget Khan cut the number of tube trains and buses at the start of the lockdown and shut many stations thereby forcing essential workers on to less buses and trains and creating more overcrowding- that was stupid imo

From Sadiq Khan?s Facebook page.


The Government has issued a statement on the TfL funding deal which, in keeping with the highly political way they conducted these negotiations, is at best misleading. I want to set the record straight:


1. TfL?s finances were in much better shape immediately before Covid-19 than the mess I inherited from the Prime Minister when he left City Hall. Over the past four years we have reduced TfL?s operating deficit by 71 per cent on a like-for-like basis and increased cash reserves by 16 per cent. Like-for-like operating costs have fallen each year, which had never happened before. And as well as slashing the deficit, this efficiency has funded the freezing of TfL fares for four years.


The only reason TfL is now in financial difficulties, just like every transport operator, is because our fares income has fallen by 90 per cent during lockdown. The significant efficiencies delivered during my Mayoralty have in fact reduced the amount of government support required in these unprecedented circumstances.


2. The Government insisted as part of the deal that TfL immediately bring back the congestion charge and ULEZ and urgently bring forward proposals to widen the scope and levels of these charges. This will help stop our roads becoming unusably congested - but it was a Government red line.


3. The Government also insisted that Londoners? fares must go up above inflation next year, that TfL must suspend free travel for Freedom Pass and 60 plus card holders during peak times, and for under 18s all the time. After lobbying from TfL over the weekend the Government has now finally agreed that this will not apply to disabled Freedom Pass holders.


4. As the Government?s statement sets out, they have agreed similar finance packages for every other transport authority in the UK - but have not insisted on punishing their citizens in return in the same ways they have Londoners.


The Government has made ordinary Londoners pay a very high price for the consequences of doing the right thing on Covid-19. I am very happy for the Government to publish the full funding deal - which clearly demonstrates this to be true.

"Freedom passes" should never be allowed during peak times, as it means there is less space for passengers who pay through the nose for it. Freedom passes would mean far more delays in summer too, with people fainting etc.


Currently all buses are free anyway so im not sure what the fuss is all about.


TFL cant currently afford many more hand outs. Many folk entitled to Freedom passes probably live in and own a ?1 million house, lock and stock (especially round here). Im not sure it should be beyond their means to fork out for a taxi, rather than see London grind to a halt when TFL goes bankrupt.

PnB Wrote:

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

> "Freedom passes" should never be allowed during

> peak times, as it means there is less space for

> passengers who pay through the nose for it.

> Freedom passes would mean far more delays in

> summer too, with people fainting etc.

>

> Currently all buses are free anyway so im not sure

> what the fuss is all about.

>

> TFL cant currently afford many more hand outs.

> Many folk entitled to Freedom passes probably live

> in and own a ?1 million house, lock and stock

> (especially round here). Im not sure it should be

> beyond their means to fork out for a taxi, rather

> than see London grind to a halt when TFL goes

> bankrupt.


Every village has its idiot, but you?re excelling at it today.

I would only use my Freedom Pass to attend early hospital appointments - I have 2 coming up in August. Since the driver does not take cash, I object to getting an Oyster card for visits I may only make about 6/7 times a year.


When does free travel for the under 18s start?

PnB Wrote:

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

> "Freedom passes" should never be allowed during

> peak times, as it means there is less space for

> passengers who pay through the nose for it.

> Freedom passes would mean far more delays in

> summer too, with people fainting etc.

>

> Currently all buses are free anyway so im not sure

> what the fuss is all about.

>

> TFL cant currently afford many more hand outs.

> Many folk entitled to Freedom passes probably live

> in and own a ?1 million house, lock and stock

> (especially round here). Im not sure it should be

> beyond their means to fork out for a taxi, rather

> than see London grind to a halt when TFL goes

> bankrupt.



Yes I own a house in East Dulwich, not quite a Million Pounds But I worked for 40+ years to enable me to pay for it.

I mostly travelled to work everyday From 16 - 56 by Public Transport, and paid through the nose for the privilege.


Also paying for Public Transport in the evenings and Weekends.


Yes before the Virus, there were many people at the Bus Stop During Rush Hour. . and standing room only.

The Bus used to empty out at East Dulwich and Denmark Hill Stations.


I think I have earned my Freedom Pass that I use 2 -3 times a week.

The Buses and occasional trains are empty when I use them.


The only time I used my Pass in Rush Hour was for early Hospital Appointments.


DulwichFox

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...