Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 years back an automatic speed reading sign was installed there: happy face when a driver went speed limit and a sad face when above the limit. Then one day when it had only been there a short while I saw some men in neon vests scale the sign and do something. It never worked again. I've since decided that the men I saw were car vigilantes "liberating" drivers from restrictions on their rights

Among all the detecting activities, gold detecting is the most interesting one. It can not only relax both our mind and body, but also give us a big fortune if we are lucky enough. Next time when you feel bored, you can pick up a gold detector and have a try.


http://www.detectorall.com/categories/Gold-Metal-Detectors/

op do you know exactly where this happened? The island on ll at this junction does make it safer to cross the main road but I always worry about people crossing the top of upland road as you can't see well as a pedestrian and cars turn in fast.


My friends ten yo daughter has started to use this crossing so info on exactly what happened will help

No need For that post DJKQ. Driver drove too fast as mother and child crossed the road , there was others crossing too so the child was holding the mother's hand but was behind her as there wasn't enough room to walk side by side . The lady driver in her BMW hit the girl hard enough to make her fall to the floor, if she had drove at a sensible speed that wouldn't have happened , thank God it wasn't more serious . Police and ambulance were called to the scene of accident .


I cross that island daily . Drivers still whizz by at a speed , really handy when you are stuck at the middle part of the island which is tiny and a buggy hoping that none of the cars will hit you or at least one driver will stop .

Mynamehere , I had wondered what happened to that automatic reading sign as its been there for years serving no purpose whatsoever.

Really hope they do something there as we always worry when we hear brakes screeching as you just don't want lives being taken needlessly just because people are in a hurry to get somewhere .

It's not a proper crossing , that is there isn't lights to make the drivers stop , it's not a zebra crossing or a pelican crossing . Just a crossing with a island , but its not useful as driver speed down upland to turn onto lordship lane, and then the buses whizz down the bus lane , so many accidents over the years along there .

I tend to wait on the pavement for cars to stop as with an island there I assume they will but most don't . So when that road is clear we cross , then usually a bus or car comes whizzing down so you end up on the island in the middle of the road hoping the cars/buses will either stop and let you cross the other half of the road or you try and angle yourself and the buggy on the island so that you don't get hit by cars/buses on either side .


It's a stupid pointless thing to put there as it doesn't work but people run across that part of the road due to the bus stops and to head to Goodrich school

Or Dulwich park .


It really would benefit from a zebra crossing or pelican .

And just slightly further up you have frien road to cross but you can't see a thing because all the buses stops there for their breaks and as buses are huge you can't see if a car is coming so another accident hot spot and a leap of faith crossing that road too !

For the sake of 2 minutes of your life, why not use either the crossing at Overhill Road or the library? If you cross there, as many of us do, you are doing so at an intersection of 4 roads and a semi blind bend in the Lane at that point.


Barely a week goes past without me seeing someone dart across the road here to get the bus and nearly get pinged by the traffic (although I'm not saying that this was the case here). The same goes for the stop opposite Hebert Road, which has a crossing and lollipop personnel too!


Having zebra crossings every 100 metres isn't the solution. Common sense just might be.

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote:

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

> And don't forget the overhill road to cross !



....which is one way only.


Given your last 3 posts, what exactly are you expecting? A tunnel from your front door to wherever it is you are going? Seriously, and I don't mean this to sound rude, take some responsibility. Roads have to be crossed. You CAN get from any Point A to any Point B in Dulwich using the crossings already provided. Yes, it will take 5, maybe even 10 minutes longer but if you are that concerned about crossing roads then stop stressing yourself and use what is already available.


Yes, some drivers do drive too fast but the majority don't, especially at the time of day when the school run is going on. Most people can cross roads safely, but some seemingly can't, as per my earlier post! And sadly, accidents do happen. Teaching children how to cross roads safely and making them aware of the dangers served us 70's babies well enough. Perhaps if we moved away from the mollycoddling nature of society these days and made kids aware that some things are dangerous and bad things happen, then they can learn to stay safe and their parents might just stop stressing themselves into an early grave.

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote:

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

> No need For that post DJKQ. Driver drove too fast as mother and child crossed the road , there was

> others crossing too so the child was holding the mother's hand but was behind her as there wasn't

> enough room to walk side by side . The lady driver in her BMW hit the girl hard enough to make her

> fall to the floor, if she had drove at a sensible speed that wouldn't have happened , thank God it

> wasn't more serious . Police and ambulance were called to the scene of accident .


What do you consider 'too fast'. Surely if the car was travelling at a stupid speed then the child would be rather seriously injured.

If pedestrians are in the road drivers should proceed at 5mph or less or stop IMHO.


This is a pedestrian refuge island - and is a type of crossing - there should be

other measures as well as just the island - dropped kerbs, measures to slow traffic.

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

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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