Jump to content

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, fishboy said:

 

And hopefully everyone can see this for what it really is - an attempt to win over the local community and set a precedent for four festival days, so that they have a stronger argument when they put in an application for six days again next year. 

We can all be cynical but I hope you or others will pop over to the free festival and share your views.  I'd go but I am away.  It looks great.  (Note I don't know why some had to post their disgust on the events page - I expect many locals will go to the free event and some to the Gala itself).

 

  • Agree 2

Yep Monday is family festival but I think it would be churlish to avoid this on principle and if you are free at least check it out.  I was simply responding to a comment that there were not free festivals.  I've no strong feelings about Gala, and whilst I could hear it, it stopped around 11 and I've experienced worse.  Volunteering at Glastonbury and at Shambala and that bloody drum and base going on till 4 in the morning.  I'm aware Gala affects others far more but conflating this with LTNs and with Lambeth council was strange.

But that's the point isn't it Mal, if you go to Glastonbury you are with a hundred thousand other people in the wilds of the country and you cannot complain about noise disruption - you can be selective about where you camp of course. 

The Glasto organisers and local council go out of their way to keep the locals onside - friends of mine used to live in a village some miles from Worthy Farm and would be offered free tickets.

But there are a lot of people in Dulwich and Herne Hill and Brixton who have huge amounts of disruption thrust upon them because this is, after all, a densely populated urban area and not deepest Somerset. 

Councils want to monetise our public spaces as much as they can but this is often in conflict with the needs and wants of their constituents who live nearby. What is happening in Brockwell is a warning as Southwark will want to try and monetise Peckham Rye to the same extent if they can.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Agree 2

A lot of shouting outside on Rye Lane now and pointless me topping up weekend supplies at Tesco as it will have been cleaned out.

 

I hate this weekend

Maybe someone could design streets so they don't transmit sounds - I hear every conversation on street level from the 4th floor never mind the shouts and screams,

And why do taxis beep there horns at the festival goers.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Glasto?  Who calls it Glasto?  You certainly aren't an old hippy.  It's been coined by radio DJs and toffs - Glyndo anyone?  Henlo?? Hollando???  Yes this is an irrelevant post.

I can assure you I am neither a DJ or toff but have always referred to it as Glasto...do you have an issue with that? In fact I was doing Glasto long before the toffs started going but haven't done it in a while because the last one I went to felt all a bit Coachella (which is by far the worst "festival" I have ever had the pleasure of attending).

The point remains that festivals have no place in densely populated urban areas and I do worry that the monetisation of our public spaces means we can expect more and more in future and our councils ignoring the input of local residents and they go chasing the filthy lucre!

  • Agree 2
1 minute ago, Rockets said:

Other local constituents are likely to be less keen on having an increase in noise pollution. Must be a change in wind direction but Brockwell sounds even louder today on the village side of Lordship Lane. 

 

 

It’s horrendous. I feel so anxious from the constant bass. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

https://chng.it/YXCH5XXVMY

We live near and it’s absolute hell.

The noise of the people coming and going from Peckham is the worse. They are so loud and obnoxious. This is my 5th year of this nonsense. People vomiting in my front garden, urinating in my neighbour’s gardens, throwing food into my garden. Screaming waking up my children while waiting for their Ubers. The people that organise this festival are 100% obnoxious. They told us there would be security along our road (there wasn’t). I asked them to put up my family in a hotel but they wouldn’t. It’s actually a human rights infraction for all of us this badly affected. Over the years I have spent so much money trying to be away this weekend but none of us should have to. The data also shows that most people coming are not local residents - so of 3000 tickets sold, hardly any to residents; it’s easy to argue that it disadvantages us residents way more than any conceivable benefit. My elderly neighbours are besides themselves.

Every year the setup and striking of the festival blocks off the park during half term, plus the antisocial behaviour and loud noises mean actual children that live here are prevented from using the park and playgrounds.

The police initially rejected the license last year… then suddenly changed their mind with no apparent reason… seems legit.

Also the GALA team lie and make false statements in their advertising about consulting with us (they don’t they just tell us what is going to happen then are extremely obstinate and rude). My neighbour runs Friends of Peckham Rye and has been totally distressed by all the damage done to recent planting initiatives funded by the local community. GALA do not repair this, GALA pay off Southwark and then Southwark refuse to confirm what they are paid, or how much (if anything) is spent to repair the park.

 

This needs to be stopped once and for all!!

 

Petition asking Southwark to stop providing the license to GALA once and for all. 
 

I mean I am sure they will listen to us just like they did about the LTNs…

 

https://chng.it/YXCH5XXVMY

Edited by ms_wilson
  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
  • Agree 4

It’s 3 AM - Anyone know when this horrendous noise is going to stop?! We’re on the Sainsbury’s Local end of Landells and am quite frankly sympathising with all of you nearer Peckham Rye. My ears are ringing! How is this ok?! 
Edit: According to the website it should have finished by 22:30. What is going on and how is this acceptable (and not more people are complaining about the crippling sound levels we’re being subjected to?) - shocking.. 

Edited by F.R.
48 minutes ago, DuncanW said:

GALA did finish promptly at 10:30 last night, so it was likely something else you were hearing.

Sound does seem to travel in surprising ways but FWIW, we are a lot closer than you to GALA and could barely hear it this year, although it’s seemed a lot louder other times.

It wasn't particularly disturbing me, but I could hear the bass through triple glazing last night. I'm just off North Cross Road.

Can't remember what time I stopped hearing it.

I put on white noise if I'm disturbed by external noise, on phone or on Alexa. I just turn it up to whatever volume is needed to not hear the other noise, or at least to not be disturbed by it.

I am not affected by the noise but sympathise with those who are; it can be deeply distressing, residents should not have to leave their homes for four days in order to cope.

I am even more concerned about the impact on the nesting birds directly adjacent to and feet away from the heart of the event and its speakers, bearing the full brunt of that bass. The very same nesting birds that prompted Gala to put up barriers with notices bossily directing park users and dog walkers to be aware of nesting birds...the irony clearly lost on them.

My wider concern is of event creep, both in terms of the event footprint encroaching on more and more park and being in situ for more weeks and months in the park.

  • Agree 5
7 hours ago, F.R. said:

It’s 3 AM - Anyone know when this horrendous noise is going to stop?! We’re on the Sainsbury’s Local end of Landells and am quite frankly sympathising with all of you nearer Peckham Rye. My ears are ringing! How is this ok?! 
Edit: According to the website it should have finished by 22:30. What is going on and how is this acceptable (and not more people are complaining about the crippling sound levels we’re being subjected to?) - shocking.. 

I am also at the Sainsbury’s end of Landells and I think it was coming from a property on Barry Road (at 12am I went for a walk to see if it was for some strange reason coming from the plough - it of course wasn’t). So it could have been a house or the church. If it’s a one off that’s fine - but it went on very late and very loud. 

11 hours ago, ms_wilson said:

https://chng.it/YXCH5XXVMY

We live near and it’s absolute hell.

The noise of the people coming and going from Peckham is the worse. They are so loud and obnoxious. This is my 5th year of this nonsense. People vomiting in my front garden, urinating in my neighbour’s gardens, throwing food into my garden. Screaming waking up my children while waiting for their Ubers. The people that organise this festival are 100% obnoxious. They told us there would be security along our road (there wasn’t). I asked them to put up my family in a hotel but they wouldn’t. It’s actually a human rights infraction for all of us this badly affected. Over the years I have spent so much money trying to be away this weekend but none of us should have to. The data also shows that most people coming are not local residents - so of 3000 tickets sold, hardly any to residents; it’s easy to argue that it disadvantages us residents way more than any conceivable benefit. My elderly neighbours are besides themselves.

Every year the setup and striking of the festival blocks off the park during half term, plus the antisocial behaviour and loud noises mean actual children that live here are prevented from using the park and playgrounds.

The police initially rejected the license last year… then suddenly changed their mind with no apparent reason… seems legit.

Also the GALA team lie and make false statements in their advertising about consulting with us (they don’t they just tell us what is going to happen then are extremely obstinate and rude). My neighbour runs Friends of Peckham Rye and has been totally distressed by all the damage done to recent planting initiatives funded by the local community. GALA do not repair this, GALA pay off Southwark and then Southwark refuse to confirm what they are paid, or how much (if anything) is spent to repair the park.

 

This needs to be stopped once and for all!!

 

Petition asking Southwark to stop providing the license to GALA once and for all. 
 

I mean I am sure they will listen to us just like they did about the LTNs…

 

https://chng.it/YXCH5XXVMY

Have you changed the wording of your petition from Sunday, because it reads differently, sentences removed and new one's added????

Edited by jazzer
1 hour ago, sandyman said:

Can anyone shed any light on what Southwark Council spends the money it makes from events like Gala on? 

None of it is spent in the area local to Peckham Rye Park. This is something the council need to be pressed on. The 'Community Day' has started their sound checks and it's clear that is also going to be a day of loud music. So concerns about event creep are valid I think. As today is a seperate event, using the infrastructure, we will wait and see if the same noise abatement processes are in place. For those who say it's only a few days etc. Try living next door to blasting noise for 12 hours a day for three (now four) days and see how good your mental state is at the end of that. Yes there are balances to be struck but the distress of many local residents and those concerend about the damage to the park (and wildlife in it) are valid and real.

  • Agree 1

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...