Jump to content

Recommended Posts

yep, i got the same problem. the light shines directly into my sons bedroom & also mine...... not happy about it really, but at least i dont need to invest in lighting for the front of my house! im sure it'll be great for the early evenings we'll be having soon enough.........

At least your lights have been completely installed. My road still has a mixture of old and new because someone at LB Southwark thought it sensible to let EDF take its own time about completing the installation, instead of having to comply with a timetable set by the authority.


Have you tried speaking to the Councillor for your ward about the excessive lux level?

we have had these in Nunhead for years, we did ring the council on mass to complain. But they basically told us to %^&* off, and cancelled the regeneration plans. Now they are widening the pathways and creating more problems with the parking around Queens road, we complained. This time they told us that the money comes from europe and it had to be spent and That the residents living alongside these road were merely incidental and that we should all ^&** off. Also if we complained we would be branded as believing we lived in England and barcoded immediately.
  • 4 weeks later...
By any standards the lights are absurdly bright. It's like Guantanamo Bay out there, and as for inside our house, even with blackout curtains the smallest chink floods the room. We should be trying to get rid of light pollution, not encourage it, although I suppose the illumination will help when the new surveillance cameras are installed...

Huggers Wrote:

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

> If you contact Southwark they will come and put

> blinkers on the light outside your house so it no

> longer shines directly in. Theyve done this on

> request to most houses on Nutbrook Street and it's

> much better.


xxxxxxx


Do you know which bit of Southwark to contact?


I've got the same problem :'(

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

    • Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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