Jump to content

Recommended Posts

People who pause for a second at the bottom of escalators, just before they step off, causing a ripple effect of stationary people who are trying to walk (on the left of course). This leads to a situation much like on a motorway when you end up crawling along for a while and then speed up again with no apparent reason.

Why this annoys me in particular is that I'm pretty sure these people have no idea of the impact they're having.


Also - the free Sport magazine that gets given out on Friday's isn't given out inside London Bridge. This means I have to get off the train, walk outside the station and then back in to collect mine thus wasting valuable seconds and almost definitely making me late for work.

Brendan Wrote:

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

> Insert link to youtube clip of dinner table scene

> from Beetlejuice here:


Oh, all right then


Does anyone remember those Stone Age days when you couldn't just find any clip or song you wanted and instantly post it to your acquaintance? How DID we cope?

Driving:

1/ Guys who turn right(not with a filter) and do not indicate until you are behind them in the same lane and immobile.

Then the inevitable happens in London that the oncoming traffic prevents them turning for ages with you stuck behind them.:X

2/ People who dawdle to the lights when they finally turn green and then put ona last minute spurt so they get thru' and no-one else does behind them even though THEY caused the traffic to considerably slow down.(6)

3/ Aftertimers! Particularly after a Sporting Event.

Complete and utter bollix. Don't ever listen to these Ass-Clowns. If you haven't stated your opinion BEFORE the event do not bother after the team/player/horse/dog has Won please!:))

People who park across my driveway. I had to get out urgently and some man who lives over the road had parked right across it, it was pouring with rain, he then tried to start up a conversation with me.....I was very tempted just to shout " ******* MOVE" or to get in and hold my hand down on the horn until he got the point. Even more annoying was that there was a space on his side of the road. Grrrrrrrr.

absentminded Wrote:

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

> People who park across my driveway. I had to get

> out urgently and some man across the road had

> parked right across it, it was pouring with rain,

> he then tried to have a conversation with me.....I

> was very tempted just to shout " ******* MOVE" or

> to get in a hold my hand down on the horn until he

> got the point. Even more annoying was that there

> was a space on his side of the road. Grrrrrrrr.




I know this driver - He / She / They do it to me all the time, usually with no idea that they are in the wrong and when you point out their error (either nicely or not so nicely) you get one of three responses


The Good ones move straight away and say sorry

The Bad ones try to argue that they are only popping to the shop / see a friend or going for a 2 hour lunch, but still move it after you repeat the words "NO PARKIGN ACROSS MY DRIVE" half a dozen times

The Ugly ones tell you not to be so 'uppity' (or words to that effect) and walk off


Sadly the law states that they can only be moved on if they are blocking you from getting out of your drive and not into it... however a handy little trick is to always keep a spare car in the garage for such an emergency thus allowing you to call the police and (if you so deem) get them a ticket for parking...


I sometimes wonder who's insurance would pay should my handbrake cable acciently snap resulting in my car rolling out of the drive and into theirs... after all that accident wouldn't have happened if they parked legally now !!! ::o

LuvPeckham Wrote:

> Sadly the law states that they can only be moved

> on if they are blocking you from getting out of

> your drive and not into it... however a handy

> little trick is to always keep a spare car in the

> garage for such an emergency thus allowing you to

> call the police and (if you so deem) get them a

> ticket for parking...

>


Really? Why can they only be moved on if they are blocking you from getting out of your drive and not into it?

There is currently a skip on one side of it too, and people park behind it so that they are ever so slightly over the edge of the drive, which makes it really tricky to get in. I have been tempted to leave pleasant (or menacing) notes on their cars, but haven't had the guts yet.

I don't really know why the law is that way, a couple of nice police officers told me the rules a few years ago when they had to move someone for me. I guess it is something to do with the fact that your exit is blocked but on returning you have the option to park elsewhere should your entrance be blocked.


Notes are a good thing, make sure you don't damage the car (maybe photo it before and after) and I would say polite, pointing out something like "Please do not park across this driveway, access required 24 hours a day, many thanks for your co-operation in future" menacing notes can end up with damage to the car in the drive.

If required, and the police can't contact the driver of the vehicle, they can give them a ticket, which tends to stop them doing it again, but if they are your neighbour then it doesn't make for good relationships.


I would also suggest a sign on your gates or wall saying "Please do not park across this drive, thank you" just to emphasis the point of not parking there.. if all else fails contact the council and get a white line painted across your drive (but that doesn't always work as people sometimes ignore that)


I have in the past contemplated puting a trolly jack under the offending car and twisting it 45 degrees into the road and then calling the police to say it looks abandoned and is parked dangerously, but I think that may get me into more trouble then it is worth. (but such a nice thought)

I say sir, don't you have either, my gawsh this is Dul-wich you know .... simply everyone and their maids have a spare car and Garage... for the days when one's driver has taken the rolls for a wash (damn fool always brings them back wet and it makes for a soggy cheese sandwich)

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

    • 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.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
    • Yes..that may be the case but membership STARTING at £115 a month is still unafforable for many. Council gyms also have a large range of equipment and I had a  PT at Dulwich leisure centre when I was in Full Time employment who was incredible and even kept in contact during lockdown giving me a program I could do at home and checking in weekly at no charge or personal gain for herself. I dont doubt that Fit For may be a good gym (Its been in situ long enough so must be doing something right) However the cost of membership means it is affordable for the few not the many. If I could afford that kind of fee I would rather get a train to Canary Wharf and go to Virgin active where theres a pool and incredible classes and facilities 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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