Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Booboo2008 Wrote:

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

> Poor JohnL.... He doesn't sound like a lady to me

> :)) By the way, are you a share-holder in the FHT

> ruthb?



No. It's not a good thing to have shares in this 'current ecconomic climate';-) I've never actually put that in a sentence before and I've used it twice so far today ha!!

There has been one incident, at least they know how to deal with situations like this and learn that there needs to be more security/ bouncers.. whatever it takes to make sure that it's a safe environment for cutomers, passers by and residents.



I'm not sre the FHT does know how to deal with situations like this. By apparently turning an OK neighbourhood pub into an effective night club with late night closing and drugs available on Fridays & Saturdays they have created an ambience that encourages problems. Bigger, beefier bouncers aren't, to my mind, the answer. Running the FHT as a pub / gastropub - with occasional gigs seems right and proper - and with a very clear No Drugs policy, why not stick to that?

Marmora Man Wrote:

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

> Running the FHT as

> a pub / gastropub - with occasional gigs seems

> right and proper -


We need a place for gigs around here. Why don't we put it to them? Also gig's only really go on until about 11.30 so that'll please fatty too.

Marmora Man Wrote:

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

> with a very clear No Drugs

> policy, why not stick to that?


Mr Marmora,

Been into any (ie every) pub in SE22 from Thursday onwards and noted the vacant urinals but queue for the cubicle?

I'm with *Bob*.

I thought the issue was noise and guns not drugs. Ectasy def shouldn't be a problem.. I say the more E the better.. loved up people, HAPPY and most often without a weight issue. Now crack.. well that's a diferrent story.. none of that thanks but you shouldn't rule drugs out comnpletely, it can make society a better place.

I was being flippant admittedly maybe not the best way to be on this forum but this whole argumement has become a joke.

Sorry if I offended people. I understand the problems with drugs, I was trying to be a bit ... i duuno, just trying to bring it back on a level before fatfighter got all Les Dawson (bitchy neighbour over the fence) on me again.

There is, of course, a difference between people turning-up with their drugs, taking them and (generally) being happy - and different sets of people turning-up hoping to sell them to people who are turning-up hoping they'll be for sale.


Add to the mix a venue that doesn't quite know what it is, which means a mixed crowd who don't all rub along together (and aren't all there for the same reasons).. and you've got trouble.


I'm talking 'in general' here as I've never been into the FHT (only past it to get flatbread and humous) so can't finger-pointy in any way.

E's are now containing much more PMA which is a hell of a lot more dangerous than MDMA as it raises body temp that much more. The two lads I know that died were snorting the stuff which increases the risk but this is not an uncommon practice because the "come up" is so quick and pretty mind blowing.


Sadly no drugs are safe because of their illegality and the mind set of the a-holes that produce and sell them! :(


I must be getting old, but where there are venues with open drug taking on the premises then I support some measures being taken to address it. It's not 1990 any more sadly!

There's also the massive and devastating impact on the environment through cocain production (pestisides, deforestation etc) as well as cocaine consumption by wealthy (white) europeans detroying entire nations; assisting in increased poverty, mass unemployment and pandemics.



I'm getting old too.. but wiser.

This thread seems to have become a bit bizarre.


Is it really surprising that people who live in a relatively quiet residential area, with a local pub, curry house and a few shops are upset when the pub mutates into a late-night venue complete with late night noise and, at the very least, a perceived threat to their personal safety? Not crazy at all.

I dont live close enough to the FHT to comment on this particular case, but it was always a bit shit & full of thicknecked blokes using fruity language (!)


Drug taking is widespread & not restricted to the clientle of the FHT - its pretty obvious on LL, but not done in open sight - the debris is easy to see in the various bogs


Anyway., as long as this venue contnues ( I assume ) to make money from these nights, there will be precious little that can be done in reality - just make sure you document everything to the soft cops at every opportunity


Failing that, pubs & clubs popularity peak and then decline rapidly - that may change the owners perspective

snorky Wrote:

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

> I dont live close enough to the FHT to comment on

> this particular case, but it was always a bit shit

> & full of thicknecked blokes using fruity language

> (!)

>

> Drug taking is widespread & not restricted to the

> clientle of the FHT - its pretty obvious on LL,

> but not done in open sight - the debris is easy to

> see in the various bogs

>

> Anyway., as long as this venue contnues ( I assume

> ) to make money from these nights, there will be

> precious little that can be done in reality - just

> make sure you document everything to the soft cops

> at every opportunity

>

> Failing that, pubs & clubs popularity peak and

> then decline rapidly - that may change the owners

> perspective




Thanks for the voice of reason snorky, won't bother replying to the mad rant above, it's too, well, mad. But as you say reporting everything to the powers that be is the best way forward for anyone bothered by it and who thinks it's worthwhile trying to do something about it. See booboo's post above re David Swaby the licencing chap.

Could everyone who is affected by the noise / late night commotion coming from the FHT's so-called club-nights, please contact Southwark Council's noise team 24 hour hotline on 020 7525 5777 or the police before things get even more out of hand. And before I upset someone.... I'm not a party pooper/killjoy, just a local who is keen to get a good night's sleep at the weekend and not have violent / threatening behaviour in close proximity of my home. Many thanks

It's close proximity to our home too but there seems to only be a few people who are acting like the Brixton riots have descended on their doorsteps. Why do you have to make faceless complaints about issues that you feel so strongly about? Just get a group together and arrange a meeting with the pub and let them know your feelings. I'm sure their are some journos amongst you that can present a decent and level argument.

I've realised that fatty aka Les Dawson aka fightfightersforever is clearly no fan of mine so I expect some abuse from her in some form but you know.. water off a ducks back. I just feel you are being a little reactionary and I think involving yourself more in your local pubs ventures would be a worthwhile thing to do. Get the power back in a positive way.

in response to Sean 'Tablets from the mountain' Macgabhann


"ruthb may have inadvertantly got off to a ropey start and as candj says, hopefully that will be sorted "


what a load of cobblers, since when did you decide what's ropey and what's not ? i thought ruthb got off to a great start. If you climbed forest hill and came back down with some tablets from the internet god of blogging which clearly contain a set of commandments then fair enough, if not however then poppycock to you and your "ropey starts". Bait this is not my stone carving friend.

Sean, whom I have never met, was doing no more than express a personal opinion, as do we all - well most of us I think. Again like most of us he did this without descending to personal abuse. But all this is a diversion from the topic of the thread anyway...

Well it would be difficult to meet an internet persona and there is nothing descending or personal about my comments unless he/she/automation/gifted animal does carve stone.


Ruthb pops up and is immediately patronised with the comment "........you told off for what is esentially rude behaviour".


it's bleedin obvious when the EDF circle their wagons. Just take it on the chin and live with it .....ruthb is a local drinks there, dances there and most of the regulars at the FHT would love to meet you so stop typing and stick your head in .... and if any one says "i've been a regular for 10 years and ....blah blah blah...." then i will not post here until the second hand goes round the clock face in one rotation.


any noise tonight ? BRAP BRAP

snorky Wrote:

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


> Does leaving the venue quietly also include the

> popping of caps in asses Jo ?


Only heard about this today and it's very sad to hear that somebody was shot outside of The FHT.


I must reiterate that the shooting had nothing to do with my event, which was on the 6th September and I hope you all appreciate that I stuck to my word regarding noise as we didn't receive any complaints on this forum or otherwise.


In any case, it's onwards and upwards for me as I now have a larger and more suited venue booked for the next three months, so probably my last post on this forum.


Best wishes and good luck with sorting out the problems with The FHT. I would personally recommend a meeting with the owners as they seem like decent enough people to me who are just trying to make a living.

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...