Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The landlord has to bring the property up to a certain level (fixtures and fittings) and then it's up to the tenant to install moveable bits and pieces (e.g. Fridges). At least, that's how I have seen it done in the past, I don't know about here, obviously.
  • 2 months later...

Oh dear... :-/


"A bit of a rant about the newly opened Crown and Greyhound in Dulwich village I'm afraid!

Eagerly awaited the opening and was willing it to be good but sadly disappointed after a late Sunday lunch today. Such a great space / refrurb but they need the staff to back it up. If I had to put my finger on the one thing that made this disappointing it wasn't the lack of choice - only beef or lamb left. No starters. First and second wine choice sold out. Had to move tables three times after being told different things re reserved tables and then one minute kitchen had to close as couldn't cope and then next it opened. I could live with all of this as it's only week one but The one thing that bothered me was that not a single person working there cares. Not one bit. Young kids most unable to serve and clearly never waited a table before. A few of these new staff learning is fine but the entire place can't be left to these young guys and girls who floated around and looked confused when asked for e.g. Menu / a small glass / cutlery/ one scoop of vanilla ice-cream for a toddler -all of these requests where met with total bewilderment. When I politely said the beef was stringy, no eye contact as I paid and a mumbled sorry about that. Deputy manager also doesn't seem to care whether people happy or not! Willing it to get better as it's nice to have the pub back in the village."


"We had an incident with a very rude staff member last Saturday. I actually had to email to complain afterwards (wasn't possible at the time for various reasons) I've not received a response, so sadly this resonates with me. It's my local pub so I am really disappointed all round about it. I hear the half moon in Herne Hill has had much better reviews..."

We went to have a drink there on Friday evening.


Had a look at the menu, which included:



Fish and chips ?14.25


Burger ?14.50


Sausage and mash ?14.00



We saw all these meals going past. They looked terrible.


I had one of the very worst meals I've ever had in my life at the pre-refurbished Dog, but at least it wasn't this expensive!


Also, so far as I can see, you would have to go all through the pub to get to the hotel reception, which seems a very odd layout.


Anyway, the drinks were OK (albeit nearly a tenner for two pints, but sadly that seems to be par for the course round here these days) and the place doesn't seem to have changed much, in the front bar anyway, which is good.


ETA: I've just had a look at the reviews on TripAdvisor.


Oh dear, oh dear.

Went to both the Half Moon and here for the first time on Saturday. I would say the half moon had a better selection of beer but was quite pricey. This place had loads of taps off, but as it's just opened I'll give them the benefit of the doubt because it's hard judging how much to get in. I'd rather see them run out than never have a tap off due to selling it quickly. Couldn't say anything about the food as we just had a couple pints, but to me that doesn't matter anyway.

A broader question. Why do I expect that both the Half Moon and Dog will not be an improvement? Am I just a grumpy old man? I'm not overly fond of Fullers, but was not impressed by the HM's quality of beers. Do I have a bias before I go in? Is this a reaction to me not liking the whole gastroisation/boutique hotel stuff or what I see as attracting 'shallow' clinetele or is it just that discerning punters don't bring the money in? Am I just being pompous?! (don't answer that one)


Had lunch in a Fullers pub in Harrow, and the food was just as I expected. It really wasn't worth making a fuss.


I don't dislike all Fullers places, and recognise that their Pie and alehouses in central London can deservedly charge a premium.


On the opposite I used to be snooty about Wetherspoons, but now think that I can get 3 pints for a fiver, and have say a 70% success rate and that is fine. Similarly I don't expect anything from their food so can't be dissappointed. Sam Smiths, lovely lovely boozers but not the finest ale (but so cheap) but even there I am coming around to their beer and bought a meal in the Rising Sun in Smithfields for well under a tenner and was astonished how good it was coming across as home made and properly cooked.


My usual view on pub food, no matter how up market is, is go to a restaurant if you want good food.


Sorry to go off track but am I being objective??

Sue Wrote:

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


>

> ETA: I've just had a look at the reviews on

> TripAdvisor.

>

> Oh dear, oh dear.


The comments are not so bad... it's a bit of a mix/balance. Some love it. Some don't. Looks to me those that have really negative comments on Tripadvisor were already of a such mindset before going, as in didn't have particularly high expectations in the first place.

Give the place a chance. If it is being run by a completely new team it will take time to settle down and understand the local clientele.

It's a shame the food reports are not positive. I do hope this is being passed on to management instead of being b itched about.

https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d2397787-Reviews-The_Crown_and_Greyhound-London_England.html



I agree the reviews are mixed, but the bad ones are very bad.


Obviously only the 2017 reviews are now relevant.


ETA: I don't think it's having high expectations to expect that you will get the food you ordered within a reasonable time.


Nor to expect that the manager will be helpful if there are problems.

Went a few weeks ago and would echo Tarafitness, the staff were useless! Most young (college age)with zero common sense or experience. I appreciate everyone starts somewhere but how dozy this lot were was shocking. 20 minutes and 2 reminders to come and wipe a dirty table and when you do, bring a bone dry paper towel to do so? Should have done it myself. This wasn't a one off, lots of confused looks. Poor customer service, will go elsewhere with a bit of enthusiasm
I know someone working there and word amongst all of the staff is it's being badly managed already. You'd think the executive at M&B would care enough about their brand and be smart on this long awaited flagship site. But no. I fear it's just another "unit shifter" on the Excel spreadsheet.....
I agree, nothing has changed. Try getting a cold glass of white wine (without ice in it). Also, the beer is the usual mass produced factory grimness of a big brewer appearing to be a 'craft' brewer. In the HM they actually have, albeit on keg, two of our local microbreweries, I think Canopy & the London Beer Company last time I was there. Why not in the Dog?

Wimpole Wrote:

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

> I think the HM is a mile better for beer selection

> and food. Not all Fullers kitchens are the same.



The Dog isn't a Fullers pub, is it?


I thought it was M&B, or is that just the hotel part?


The sign they've got outside now is hideous. Well, two signs. One replacing the old pub sign (which still is around, but inside the pub) and the other a generic "Innkeeper's Lodge" sign.


Does anybody know what the middle part of the new pub sign is supposed to be? There's a recognisable crown, and a dog - plus three splodges ......

As I mentioned somewhere on another thread.

We went a week or so ago-had been looking forward to the reopening because I love the interior of the pub and the large outside space in the summer.

The staff were AWFUL!!! as previously mentioned young,clueless,bewildered all stood around behind the bar looking shellshocked and not actually serving.

G&T ordered no lime lemon cucumber OR ice offered-it was served like a G&T on a train (not the orient express I hasten to add) No clue about what Gins were available (I had to ask and wait while the staff member asked another staff member who then bumbled around some more).

Warm Rose wine-just appalling.

Its not cheap to drink in pubs these days so it needs to be a nice experience in order to bother to return.

Didn't eat but glanced at the menu.

uninspiring dated not seasonal and far below the average 'gastropub' more like Wetherspoons or Motorway services Harvester with inflated prices.

Unlike some I had previously had some lovely sunday lunches it this pub in the past.

I have no desire to even try the food here.

I wish management would read this thread and respond-accept its far below par

train their staff

change their menu

rethink pricing

and hire a decent chef

but somehow I doubt that will happen

Sadly

The C&G website has a feedback form which asks you to rate the service including food and drinks, and also atmosphere. You also have a chance to leave comments to tell them about your experience. Could be interesting judging by most comments above.


https://tellus.thecrownandgreyhound.co.uk


Louisa.

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

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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