Jump to content

Recommended Posts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2509221/Burglars-target-homes-marked-stickers-scouts-check-streets-easy-targets.html#comments


I know, I know it's in The Mail so it must be true... BUT... I found one of these stickers on our letterbox yesterday evening, anyone else had one? Can anyone else link to a burglary or know if there's a legit company behind them?

Hmmm. In this digital age, are they going to SMS/email addresses to each other (maybe in coded form for protection from later investigations) or are the going to play hunt the tiny sticker all around the neighbourhood?


As for the chalk marks, anyone would think the Mail had run out of stories and had started recycling them. Four years would normally be a same time, had the internet not been invented.


http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/03/burglars-code-chalk-marks-wall

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10456785/Thieves-using-fake-locksmith-stickers-to-mark-houses.html


It's in the telegraph too....


There was a sticker on my mums house in Peckham. I naively thought what I great marketing idea. It's exactly where you want the locksmiths number in an emergency. Needless to say the sticker has been removed from her front door.

I saw this on BBC news - and followed the link to Wandsworth Council site


http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/news/article/12081/burglars_using_front_door_stickers_to_identify_easy_targets


so it is worth checking - we have had a couple random people knock on the door the last couple of weeks during the day, when luckily we have been home, so now keeping a watch for any new signs outside. It does say on the Wandsworth site to remove and destroy but I think it would also be a good idea to notify Community Safety Team or 101, esp if they are trying to track intelligence.


Keep safe everyone

story update from wandsworth council website - does this mean they're collared.


STORY UPDATE MONDAY - Since the alarm was first raised at the end of last week, police have received lots of new intelligence about these stickers and are now following up a number of new leads to catch those who are responsible. There is no need to report any further sightings to police. If you find a sticker on your door, the latest advice is to simply remove it and dispose of it.


http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/news/article/12081/burglars_using_front_door_stickers_to_identify_easy_targets

I had one. Of these on my intercom system. I first noticed it a few months ago but didn't get round to investigating it, although I was suspicious. Then, yesterday, the Evening Standard had an article about this very subject.


This prompted me to call 101. I've reported it but there's no exactly a great deal they can do. Useful information I suppose.

Is this not supposed to be a community sharing website were we all look out for each other or is it that you need to be a bell end all your life and take the piss out of others x we can tell who the bullies were at school cos there still doing it x they could have stickered 100 properties and what burglar can do that many x you twunts x

It is indeed a community sharing website - and when people share stuff like 'people dressed as clowns in ED abducting children in broad daylight' (as has been 'shared' in the past) then people will take the piss. Not a big surprise, really.


But, if you are right (and that's BIG if), look at it this way - a professional burglar has told you your home security is crap. Think of those stickers as being a bit of free consulting from an expert. Do something about it.

Think of those stickers as being a bit of free consulting from an expert. Do something about it.


I believe that the police still offer a service where they not only tell you that you are vulnerable, but suggest also exactly where, and what you might do about it. They might be your first port of call on finding such a sticker.


I can't quite work out the 'modus operandi' which works here - surely there can't be free lance 'pro bono' burglary target searchers doing this out of the goodness (well badness) of their hearts? And if it is a burglar casing the joint, what sort of sieve like memory does he/ she have that he/ she needs to sticker a gaff to remember it?


Unless - they sticker places to see if people bother to do anything about it - stickers left untouched suggest a poor security sense, and hence an opportunity?


This seems of a party with the old 'tramps chalk signs' we used to hear about - which may have existed but not to the extent believed by many.

This is all about creating an internal market in burglary services provision.


The previous vertically integrated model, where "cradle to grave" local teams fulfiled all aspects of the breaking and entering supply chain - target identification, resources planning, active burglary engagement, post-intrusion dispersal of goods - was proving too inefficient.


The market consisted of small teams operating as effective local monopolies, often duplicating efforts whilst ignoring national standards of best burglary practice. This led to an overall lowering of standards, inefficiencies in supply (the so-called postcode lottery) and a complete lack of internal accountability.


The path currently being followed is to ensure each commissioning element of the chain can buy-in resources from a choice of autonomous specialist providers. Hence, the consumer has a choice of fences to buy stolen goods from, the fence has a choice at market rate of active engagement specialists, the active engagement specialists have clear goals and objectives set by their commission teams, and can in turn commission services from resources suppliers, as well as community-focussed target identification teams.


This Choice Pathway For Quality is producing real results in a performance-related environment that empowers all stakeholders with greater choice and potential rewards.

If the stickers were genuine they would be stuck on every door, not selective doors.


would be better to use flyers especially if advertising a new business in the area.


But having said that not that cost effective. People do not need the services of a locksmith

like they might need the local Pizza/Curry delivery service.


People requiring the services of a locksmith would simply go on line or use Yellow Pages.


DulwichFox

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...