Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I see Dulwich Roads has been back to the site but has not posted or responded to the request to share the content of the tweet they retweeted. Let's see if they do...if I was a betting person I know what my money would be on.....

P.S. Raeburn, you came on here defending Dulwich Roads on the basis they tweeted a "correction". By doing so you validated my very first point that Dulwich Roads needs to engage brain and fact check before sending out incorrect and misleading information - thus agreeing with the subject of this thread.

Edited by Rockets
On 11/10/2024 at 17:10, Rockets said:

Here you go...fill yer boots...it's only a few days old so plenty for you to post!!!

 

Thanks for posting this - very enjoyable commentary. 

It does highlight a very serious problem round here though of cyclists who have no respect for the law or for other people using the footpaths.

Edited by CPR Dave
5 hours ago, CPR Dave said:

It does highlight a very serious problem round here though of cyclists who have no respect for the law or for other people using the footpaths.

Actually, I'm not sure it's quite like that. I think that (many) people who cycle, in general, have normal respect for the law in general, it's just that I don't think they believe that it applies to them; they think of themselves as 'assisted pedestrians' and act - as regards usage of roads and pavements, just as if they were pedestrians. Pedestrians aren't that bothered about traffic lights - if they see their way is clear they cross and enter roads without regard. (Some) cyclists move from road to pavement without worrying - just as a pedestrian might. If you look at their actions, as filmed, they are treating roads and pavements exactly as a pedestrian might, and not as a car (or motorbike rider) would. Pedestrians aren't bothered about signalling their intentions, or about lights or wearing visible clothing, and neither are some cyclists.

Motorists, and riders of heavy motor bikes have all had to demonstrate (and thus learn) road and traffic awareness - cyclists haven't. All they've been trained in, if at all, and by their parents, is being pedestrians.

Which is why they act like pedestrians (some of them at least). It's just they are on bikes and travelling much faster than pedestrians. And just like a pedestrian caught behind slow moving pedestrians they will push their way through, move from one path to another willy nilly.

That, I think, is the problem.

  • Like 1

So there are 3 threads complaining about cyclists, three complaining about LTNs, four if you include pedestrianisation/Dulwich square, two complaining about enforcement/driving penalties,  one complaining about a possible CPZ and if you go back a little further complaints about the ULEZ extension.  And this one where there is a complaint against an X feed about dangerous road users. Many of these are interchangable such as this thread now complaining about cycling.  An alien from another planet may surmise that the citizens of SE London are very car centric.  Fortunately there are many of us who consider the measures above that encourage less driving and more active travel, with all the benefits that this brings, are a good thing.

Edited by malumbu
Forgot ULEZ!
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1

Malumbu, correction - this thread is about dangerous and concerning misinformation being circulated by Dulwich Roads.

P.S. it's probably a good time to remind you that you have posted in all of those said threads on numerous occasions and have been a major contributor....just saying....

Edited by Rockets
17 hours ago, malumbu said:

So there are 3 threads complaining about cyclists, three complaining about LTNs, four if you include pedestrianisation/Dulwich square, two complaining about enforcement/driving penalties,  one complaining about a possible CPZ and if you go back a little further complaints about the ULEZ extension.  And this one where there is a complaint against an X feed about dangerous road users. Many of these are interchangable such as this thread now complaining about cycling.  An alien from another planet may surmise that the citizens of SE London are very car centric.  Fortunately there are many of us who consider the measures above that encourage less driving and more active travel, with all the benefits that this brings, are a good thing.

So what, it's a discussion board.....................................

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

    • Are there any other executors? Is the solicitor a soke practioner or part of a firm? Are you and your fellow beneficiaries behaving well?  You will want to take proper  legal advice (which this is not) but you can have an executor removed by the court if they are refusing to communicate with you. I would just do that. Tell him you are doing it, tell him you have reported him to the Law Society (if you have) and tell him you will be challenging his fees with the legal services ombudsman. This all sounds outrageous to me and this solicitor doesn't sound fit to practice. Three years sounds far too long for a low value estate comprising mostly of a house. He should have sold that or rented it out whilst he was waiting to administer the estate.    Sounds like he has cost you all a lot of money.  
    • Would wholeheartedly recommend Aria. Quality work, very responsive, lovely guy as well. 
    • A positive update from Southwark Council - “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.“  
    • A solicitor is acting as the executor for our late Aunt's will.  He only communicates by letter which is greatly lengthening the process.  The vast majority of legal people deal by modern means - the Electronic Communications Act that allows for much, if not all of these means is now 25 years old.   Any views and advice out there? In fuller detail: The value of the estate is not high.  There are a number of beneficiaries including one in the US.  It has taken almost three years and there is no end in sight.  The estate (house) is now damp, mouldy and wall paper falling off the wall. The solicitor is hostile, has threatened beneficiaries the police (which would just waste the police's time), and will not engage constructively. He only communicates by letter.  These are poorly written, curt or even hostile, in a language from the middle of last century, he clearly is typing these himself probably on a type writer.  Of course with every letter he makes more money. We've taken the first steps to complain either through the ombudsman and/or the SRA.  We have taken legal advice a couple of times, which of course isn't cheap, and were told that his behaviour is shocking and we'd be in our right to have him removed through the courts. But.... we just want him to get on with executing the will, primarily selling the house. However he refuses to use any other form of communication but letter.  So writing to the beneficiary in the 'States can take a month to get a reply. And even in this country a week or more. Having worked with lawyers in the past I am aware that email, tele and video conferencing and even text and WhatApp are appropriate means for communication.  There could be an immediate response to his questions.   Help!        
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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