Jump to content

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Glemham said:

Have no recollection of any mention of RPZs by the Dulwich Village Councillors, Margy Newens and Richard Leeming. This is very definitely their patch.

Again if you are a stranger to the area how are you supposed to know that you can’t park there at certain times. How would you know where to go for a permit?

Are RPZs the future? I do like the irony that it’s to minimalise the need for too many signs and street furniture, when not a million yards away at the junction there’s a plethora of signs and cycle racks …………

If this is the new way forward there can be no doubt what the council's intentions are and how they are putting shameless revenue-generation ahead of fairness. Shame on them if this is now their approach - and they have the gall to refer to themselves as socialists.

14 hours ago, malumbu said:

Do people have a problem with RPZs.  I doubt if this affects any of us.  

Glad Townley was mentioned.  Several entitled selfish motorists on double yellows today, with homemade signs placed on the windscreens IMG_20250115_152356465.thumb.jpg.17783f3ca741995ee66d63696cf44e31.jpg

As the car is parked outside the NHS clinic at the end of Townley Road, could the car belong to a member of staff or a patient? Perhaps the clinic has negotiated with Southwark for permits for staff who need a car to do their work. 

On 16/01/2025 at 12:50, Glemham said:

Until next Monday the tickets are warnings, fining in earnest starts on Monday. If you don’t know the area, have been driving sensibly and not looking up at signs that require you to get out of  your vehicle to read them and park in Calton during the proscribed hours, would you have a valid reason to appeal?
Please could someone/anyone from the Council explain the rationale behind this system?

I hope these are only warnings as this car now has five. 

IMG_5406.jpg

No, the truly shocking campaign/harnessing of social media, has been through an LCC campaigner of the year who also happens to be Chair of the Dulwich Society Transport Sub Committee. That committee seems to have been hijacked by LCC supporters with local Labour Councillors in attendance, to get things, like Dulwich Square 'done'.

I would not be surprised if at least one of that sub committee has been posting here on these threads.

Perhaps you count yourself among them;

But the Dulwich Society Transport sub-committee Chair was allegedly not that open or transparent, as when they were named in this forum I believe admin was asked to remove their name.

No problem with that, of course, but it rather shows that some are not as open and transparent as you would have us think.

Edited by first mate
44 minutes ago, malumbu said:

Members can boot them out if they don't like it 

Maybe take this chat to the thread in relation to this but it looks like members of Dulwich Society tried exactly that...that's when it all went a bit pear-shaped...

On 16/01/2025 at 18:03, malumbu said:

Do people have a problem with RPZs.  I doubt if this affects any of us.  

Glad Townley was mentioned.  Several entitled selfish motorists on double yellows today, with homemade signs placed on the windscreens IMG_20250115_152356465.thumb.jpg.17783f3ca741995ee66d63696cf44e31.jpg

Do you have a car ?

14 hours ago, Rockets said:

Did Calton finally go live today and has anyone seen any additional signage going up?

I would be interested in this too. Haven’t personally been down there since it went live. Has the signage changed?

Edited by Earl Aelfheah

The car with five tickets doesn't have any more yet so maybe the wardens haven't been down this week or maybe they are showing a rare glimmer of sympathy for someone who presumably isn't aware of the new restrictions.

Can someone explain in simple terms what the point of making Calton permit parking was? It's not really a street where commuters parked to go to the station, it's not a street where parents dropped off their children for school - and if they did I expect they'd still do that quickly and hope not to get caught. I've walked down there today and there are hardly any cars parked on the street - most of the residents have drives so the council surely won't make much from the sale of permits. The only people it seems to be hitting are people that work on those houses or nearby - in the village or the schools. Who will mostly just park on the next streets along which don't require permits.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Yesterday I counted 11 cars with tickets on, three of which had multiple tickets, which common sense would indicate is because the signage is inadequate as has been previously mentioned.  There is one sign at the Townley Rd end and one at the junction of Woodwarde road and Calton avenue but if you miss one of those signs as you turn into Calton Ave then there is no other indication that this is a street with restricted parking.

My understanding is that inadequate signage is a reason for appeal of a parking ticket so I hope everyone appeals their recent tickets and wins their appeal even if they have to take it to tribunal.  

So come on Southwark...sort the signage out otherwise we might think that this is about revenue from PCNs rather than parking control.

I presume the controls are to stop staff of Alleyns and JAGS parking as well as parents parking to drop off school children and people working in Dulwich Village 🤷

 

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...