Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just had to go down Rye Lane and then up Lordship Lane.

Saw two sets of two Community Wardens doing their thing up both Lanes.

Now stop whinging about what you think they should be doing on HERE, where they can't defend themselves whilst they're out there,

and get out and see them and talk to them and tell them what you would like to see them doing.

Phone numbers are around somewhere including Southwark's website, where you can contact them and tell them and/or their managers where the trouble spots are.


Just doing my best here!

Oh they remembered did they?


Look out for these two guys: one is old, one young. The older one is grey with a small moustache.


Brilliant - finished my complaint letter today, complete with photo evidence of no ashtray on the bin they mentioned...

great thread seanmlow!


back to the original point - ?75 nicker is way too much.


I'm amazed by the levels of piety by some posters on this forum - these are truly Jello Biafra's 'suede denim secret police'. Presumably they never ever break the law - breach copyright on the photocopier, tape or bootleg music, tax-dodge, cross the road in the wrong place in the clean-streeted USA, cycle the wrong way up 1-way streets en route to quiet Sunday morning shifts, or breach any of the many other silly little nitpicking cash-raising regulations that spoil life. ;-)

I believe I posted much the same thing just today Oglandia when I said "we are all criminals"


The difference here is that most of us are able to hold our hands up if caught - ?75 for the fine is a lot, but as I've asked several times - what would anyone do instead to curb litter?


It's a direct question but people seem happier to resort to petty insult-calling - although "Jello Biafra's 'suede denim secret police'." has something of wit about it, it's still a diversionary thing

It is along the same lines of nearly ALL FPNs i.e. ?75 "on the spot fine" & if paid within 10 days it reduces to ?50. I unfortunately got a TfL FPN for being in the box junction by Peckham bus depot.... similar thing ?120 fine but if paid within 10 days it reduced to ?60. So there is your discrepency in the amount sorted.


As for patrolling in pairs, the Community Wardens are on the streets between the hours of 9am - 10pm, 5 days per week & for safety, the wide extent of the role & for evidence & backup purpose MUST patrol in pairs.

Community Wardens work very closely with local schools, businesses, residents & the Police. I know for a fact that in Bermondsey they provide high vis patrols EVERY day when the schools kick out & sometimes with limited staff covering 3 main high schools over a large area it is not as easy as it seems & takes more than a dimwitted not very bright individual to provide reassurance patrols at & around the schools, not to mention all the MANY other things they do which do incidentally include, FPNs for ALL littering & dog fouling NOT just cigarette butts, reporting environmental issues such as faulty lighting, broken pavements, overgrown trees etc....


gerry Wrote:

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

> Sean

>

> Just saw this thread now, and yes, I agree, its

> not nice being fined for something so trivial when

> school kids and adults are mugged every day in

> East Dulwich and nothing happens to prevent

> that!!! The council just wants to make money,

> forget about protecting young people and adults

> trying to walk home from school or get off a bus.

> There's my rant in defense of you.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> I believe I posted much the same thing just today

> Oglandia when I said "we are all criminals"

>

> The difference here is that most of us are able to

> hold our hands up if caught - ?75 for the fine is

> a lot, but as I've asked several times - what

> would anyone do instead to curb litter?

>

> It's a direct question but people seem happier to

> resort to petty insult-calling - although "Jello

> Biafra's 'suede denim secret police'." has

> something of wit about it, it's still a

> diversionary thing



too much to do in 'meat space' to really get onto this on your scale SeanMcG (are you offline often enough to even see the litter?) but the answer is there if you want to see it - the originator of the topic accepts that a fine is ok but understandably bitches the amount. so how about a warning / escalation (i.e.lower fine) approach for those prepared to listen and not abuse the red anorakers?


10 quid? it has an equal evidence base (zero) to 75 quid and is fairer

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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