Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, sorry - first time posting, not sure if this is the right subforum for this.


Has anyone encountered a complete lunatic roaming East Dulwich Road the past few nights, roaring obscenities at people, trying to start fights/back people against walls, smashing his fists on parked cars and standing in the middle of the road trying to stop traffic and get into people's moving cars?


He's about 6 foot tall, black, wearing dark clothes and a white hat with earflaps. I saw him this morning at 6am when I was waiting for the bus and he roared "GOOD MORNING YOU C**T" at me, then strided across the road towards me shouting obscenities. He then tried to attack the newsagent who was collecting his morning milk delivery.


I've phoned the police because the guy seems to be mentally unstable and I'm concerned he's going to hurt someone or himself.


I wouldn't recommend approaching him if you see him about!

He's very stocky/fat. Carries an extremely small rucksack over his shoulder as well. I haven't seen him attack anyone yet but he's trying very hard to scare people and/or provoke them into a fight. I really recommend avoiding him if you see him coming.

Thanks for your post and alerting us to this person!


Seems like the police get to know these people but how are we supposed to know?


Same thing happened to my Mum and sister in Morrisons at Camberwell last week. Not saying it was the same person but the whole store was on high alert and it was a frightening situation for a lot of people and this person was very frightening.


The police escorted this person outside Morrisons without any restraint and then just let him go on his way.

He's just been arrested and taken away in a police van outside my house (shops on corner of east dulwich rd/gowlett road) at 6:20am this morning, so hopefully he'll get the mental health care he seems to need. I feel quite sorry for the guy but he's pretty scary when he's in full shouting/threatening mode!

I saw a few weeks ago that someone was sleeping rough in that area, slumped against an apartment building's porch. More recently a very end-of-tether, thin lad was running round ED asking householders for casual work, saying the temporary homeless shelters were hell.


As soon as it gets this cold, our common-law duty of care is to see that vulnerable adults get to shelter.


Negotiation is iffy with someone who's probably brain-damaged or severely intoxicated; summon police, rather than risk getting attacked personally;

and

anyone reasonable enough to listen to you, might welcome help to contact an organisation called Emmaus. Their hostel over in W. Norwood does operate a 'dry' policy [no alcohol/other intoxicants].

I agree that we as a society we have a responsibility to protect the vulnerable. I would also like to highlight how the emergency services can also be under-equipped and poorly trained to deal with vulnerable and volatile people.


Sean Rigg was a young man with episodic but severe mental health issues. He lived in housing for people with mental health issues and the police were aware of him and his condition.


Even given these precautions he ended up dead in the back of a police van outside Brixton police station. The police attended in reponse to calls from the public worried about his erratic and violent behaviour in the street - very similar to the behaviour described by the OP.


Sean died after being put in a prone position and restrained by several large police officers sitting on him for several minutes. The officers then colluded and lied to the IPCC and the inquiry, including denying the existence of CCTV footage and lying about when and how often they checked on Sean as he lay in the van.


The officers were branded liars in the inquiry and were named and shamed in the Independent - they all still have their jobs.


The inquiry also branded the IPCC investigation a complete whitewash.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/sean-rigg-investigation-ipcc-announces-independent-review-of-its-own-investigation-into-the-death-of-a-mentally-ill-man-in-police-custody-8050023.html


I would really not want to be a young black man with mental health problems in police custody. Sean is not the only person to die in these circumstances.


http://seanriggjusticeandchange.com/Press-Releases.html

fl0wer Wrote:

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

> As soon as it gets this cold, our common-law duty

> of care is to see that vulnerable adults get to

> shelter.

>


It's been a while since I studied tort but I'd be a bit careful about stating people owe a "common law duty of care" in this context. A duty of care may arise should you attempt to help (you may even be owed one yourself in that circumstance), but I don't recall there being a positive, legal obligation to help such that failure to do so would result in you being vulnerable to an action. It was the "drowning child" analogy back in the day.


There may be a moral duty (or responsibility, as reeko puts it) but I'm not certain there is a legal obligation.


Not saying people shouldn't feel compelled to help; I hope they would do so out of care and compassion for am another human being. It's just I'd be careful telling people they have a legal obligation to do something where there isn't one.


Sorry, that was off topic...


On topic - I'm glad no harm done to folks beyond being shouted out and that this person is hopefully receiving the help he needs.


Didn't know about Emmaus before so it's good to be made aware of their existence and work.

Erm - I did not mention anything about 'all coppers' and I did not mention the word murder either, I was deliberately careful to make sure everything in the post was factual - based on findings from an official inquiry, and I included links to one of the articles in the Independent, where you can find details of the inquiry findings for yourself should you care to look. I think you may need to revisit your definition of rant

Have to admit, I'm pretty ashamed of my initial reaction at the time, which was essentially "Someone take this man away from where I live!". He clearly has mental health issues and being locked up in a cell is the last thing he needs.


Hopefully the police have recognised that he's mentally ill and are referring him to the appropriate help.

The way I understand it,

when something frightful is happening nearby to a mad-looking person -

instinctively we say "Don't get involved" to ourselves,

and the reaction normally to rough sleepers is to let them get their own difficulties sorted out by their own choice of help, to preserve their dignity etc


but some who are genuinely vulnerable because of mental dysfunction, in the cold weather seem like more of a collective responsibility.

I think we forget though (or don't realise/ know) just how hard it is for someone at the lowest end of our society to get back up. I've just finished reading a book called 'A Streetcat Named Bob' and the most striking thing to me from it (and it's a true story) is just how even the homeless are fighting amongst themselves to survive.


We do expect the state to take care of all these tihngs, and mental health issues can be included in that but the state alone is not enough. My view is that we do have a socially collective responsibility to look after those within our local communities who need help. Most of us have far more than we need and most of us are where we are by nothing more than an accident of birth. Ostracisation of anyone from a community because they are poor or suffer from mental health issues is only going to damage them further.

What is wrong with some people?? How hard is it to imagine the difficulties faced if you were hungry, homeless, tired, depressed, penniless, unwell, had nowhere to go, nowhere to SLEEP. Completely empty of basic resources


fl0wer...what you wrote made me want to weep..."I saw a few weeks ago that someone was sleeping rough in that area, slumped against an apartment building's porch. More recently a very end-of-tether, thin lad was running round ED asking householders for casual work, saying the temporary homeless shelters were hell."


DJKillaQueen you are right. Most of us are where we are by nothing more than an accident at birth.


Get real, people and stop feeling entitled, start feeling grateful and share some of that luck you had...there is plenty to go round.

pkpickles has already said in her first post how this person tried to attack the local newsagents yesterday morning and then somebody else saw him near the local school at 9am.


He may well be homeless etc. but surely somebody has to keep a check on him, including the police?

Which is fair. He sounds as though he has a mental health issue or may even be suffering form some kind of breakdown. But why does it have to come to him running around scaring and threatening people before anyone intervenes to help? Something in our society was already going very wrong for this guy.
In the 1980s, hubby and I provided some unofficial respite care to a young man in his 20s, ex soldier, whose parents rang a thriving business in North Cross Road.'M' had been injured from a gunshot wound whilst serving in NI, and had recovered, a career soldier, he was heartbroken when some years later he was diagnosed with MS. It was thought to have been partly connected to injuries sustained in NI. His wife could not cope with the illness and took herself and their young son away from married quarters. 'M' returned to live with his parents, deeply affected by his illness, the loss of his job (was in the Blues and Royals)and his marraige breakup. A very attractive man, but women were looking at the wheelchair and not the man. He began acting very strangely, hugging women, attempting to kiss them, and behaving in a very sexual way. parents were at their wits end and tried to seek help from Maudsley who refused them. One day 'M' tried to grope a librarian at Dulwich Library and the Police were called. Having known this young man for a long time, the local police with the agreement of his parents, arrested 'M' and he was taken to Brixton pending trial. When the case came to Court. the magistrate ordered that 'M' be placed in the hospital wing at Brixton and Maudsley Psychiatric staff were ordered to assess him with in x days, and then admitt him to hospital. Without the help of the Police, who recognised that this young man had mental health problems (later recognised as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) who had tried to seek help for him via Maudsley themselves, who took the dramatic step of arresting him.'m' would have been like so many others, living on the streets. After a long inpatient spell,he was placed into a care hime in the Midlands.
Not being able to sleep rough for days on end due to the bitter cold can drive anyone insane. At the coldest time of year where can you get warmth, a bed and hot meals ? Many people choose to get themselves arrested out of desperation. Sad but true. This is why the police just let individuals on their way, it is seen as a release of a burden. On another note, whilst shopping the other day I noticed that a certain store has tripled security. Maybe a mobile soup kitchen in their carpark would be more beneficial using the food nobody wants to buy or can't now steal.

It must be wonderful to be so righteous.

Personally, if anyone, clearly deranged, started shouting abuse at me, as a female pensioner I would be extremely glad to see a policeman, because I very much doubt that anyone else would come to my help. My sympathies for the other person would come some way behind my fright. Obviously I am the only person in ED who feels like this.

Lynnee

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...