Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't like to speculate, Sue. Not my thing. Teddy Boy is your man on the ground for that sort of first-hand detail.

It's six points for driving without insurance and six points for using a phone, so that's an automatic ban of at least six months.

They're going to be practically uninsurable for a considerable period after that.

So, nobody's hurt, a clearly crap driver is off the road for some time and the good burghers of SE22 get a lovely, shiny new post - probably paid for by the driver.

Every cloud, and that.

If only Franklins wasn't changing hands, Lordship Lane would be almost perfect.

 

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Strange they've still not moved it

When a car is left damaged by the road-side it may be that the insurer is tasked with recovering the vehicle to assess it and (possibly) take it for repair. Only if it is in a dangerous position will the police recover it - which saves money for the tax-payer.  You may also have some recovery options with e.g. the AA (other organisations are available). Were the car to have been stolen or abandoned then it will take some time to sort this out, and again unless the vehicle is in a dangerous position the police won't be rushing to deal with that. Not sure who the 'they' are in this case.

33 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

 

When a car is left damaged by the road-side it may be that the insurer is tasked with recovering the vehicle to assess it and (possibly) take it for repair. Only if it is in a dangerous position will the police recover it - which saves money for the tax-payer.  You may also have some recovery options with e.g. the AA (other organisations are available). Were the car to have been stolen or abandoned then it will take some time to sort this out, and again unless the vehicle is in a dangerous position the police won't be rushing to deal with that. Not sure who the 'they' are in this case.

Seems a pretty dangerous position to me - apart from getting in the way of pedestrians trying to cross the road large vehicles heading south have to edge into the oncoming traffic lane to get past. I've got a normal-sized car and had to squeeze through a gap the other day.

 

Edited by Eats Dulwich
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
1 hour ago, David Peckham said:

nobody's hurt, a clearly crap driver is off the road for some time and the good burghers of SE22 get a lovely, shiny new post - probably paid for by the driver.

 

I will buy you a frothy coffee from anywhere you like on Lordship Lane if that happens. Most of these costs never get recovered from the drivers that caused them.

54 minutes ago, Eats Dulwich said:

Seems a pretty dangerous position to me

The photo shows a car that's been left on the zigzags protecting the crossing. Pedestrians crossing East to West and drivers heading South won't see each other until the pedestrians are in the road. That is a dangerous position to leave a car in. (I don't know if it's stil there, obviously).

  • Agree 1

Never understood why there are not more speed cameras on Lordship Lane and the surrounding area - not sure what happened here exactly, but given the damage to the front of the vehicle as a result of the impact of the traffic light, it seems very unlikely that this person was driving slowly.

  • Agree 1

Police are responsible for speed cameras, often these only go up after a serious incident or two.

If speeding was decriminalised and went to local authorities to enforce then our roads would be safer as there would be far less speeding.  

https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/enforcement-20mph-zones-local-roads

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

    • Police are responsible for speed cameras, often these only go up after a serious incident or two. If speeding was decriminalised and went to local authorities to enforce then our roads would be safer as there would be far less speeding.   https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/enforcement-20mph-zones-local-roads
    • Never understood why there are not more speed cameras on Lordship Lane and the surrounding area - not sure what happened here exactly, but given the damage to the front of the vehicle as a result of the impact of the traffic light, it seems very unlikely that this person was driving slowly.
    • I am always really surprised by the glowing reviews of Franklins. Not sure whether it was once very good, and so it is just somewhere that is now remembered as that and thought of fondly by those who have known it since its opening all those years ago? As someone who has lived in the area for a few years now, and having tried it a few times (mostly as a result of the positive reviews), I have always been pretty disappointed. The food has always been average for the price point, and last time we visited we waited about 40 minutes to place an order. Hopefully whoever buys it can make improvements - it would be great to have a reliable pub on the lane that serves good food (similar to the Kerfield or Camberwell Arms, etc.)!
    • I will buy you a frothy coffee from anywhere you like on Lordship Lane if that happens. Most of these costs never get recovered from the drivers that caused them. The photo shows a car that's been left on the zigzags protecting the crossing. Pedestrians crossing East to West and drivers heading South won't see each other until the pedestrians are in the road. That is a dangerous position to leave a car in. (I don't know if it's stil there, obviously).
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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