Jump to content

Where's good to eat locally?!


Recommended Posts

There are loads of threads on here. Il Giardino I've not been to recently but was busy when I've been past. Gowlett for pizza, Begging Bowl for Thai, Montpelier for decent grub ditto the great exhibition. More expensive but lovely are Camberwell favourites angels and Gypsies and the crooked well.... Or Brixton Village for huge variety.

We tried the new Peckham Refreshment rooms at the weekend too. Google menu and prices as I didn't pay so didn't really pay attention but didn't stand out as expensive

JDR Wrote:

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

Montpelier for decent grub


xxxxxxx


You must have had a better experience than us.


It's a nice place for a pint, but we had a truly terrible Sunday roast there, for which disaster we had to wait around an hour.


Never eating there again!


And yes, we did tell the chef what we thought of it. Well I did :))


Sadly we were so starving by the time it arrived that we ate it anyway ....

Peckhamrye Wrote:

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

> We had lovely food at the Montpelier but we

> weren't there on a Sunday.


xxxxx


Maybe they have a different chef on a Sunday?


Normally I'd give a place a second chance, but our meal was so extremely bad that I'm not risking it .....

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Discussions

    • Yes and I heard the other day that there is a higher conviction rate with trials heard by only a judge, vs juries, which makes sense when you think about it.  Also - call me cynical - I can't help but think that this justice reform story was thrown out to overshadow the Reeves / OBR / Budget story.  But I do agree with scrapping juries for fraud cases. 
    • judges are, by definition, a much narrower strata of society. The temptation to "rattle through" numbers, regardless of right, wrong or justice is fundamentally changed If we trust judges that much, why have we ever bothered with juries in the first place? (that's a rhetorical question btw - there is no sane answer which goes along the lines of "good point, judges only FTW"
    • Ah yes, of course, I'd forgotten that the cases will be heard by judges and not Mags. But how does losing juries mean less work for barristers, though? Surely all the other problems (no courtrooms, loos, witnesses etc etc) that stop cases going to trial, or slow trials down - will still exist? Then they'll still be billing the same? 
    • It's not magistrates that are needed, it's judges and they will rattle through these cases whether the loos are working or not. Barristers get a brief fee and a day rate. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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