Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sorry but thats no excuse you should still be watching to see if your dog is having a poo wherever you and they are in the park and should clear up after them .Also I have seen three men with beer cans and their dogs in this area one evening so its not just the wandering dog being the problem.

Muley Wrote:

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

> BUT NO BLOODY KIDS

>

>

> Awlright Lenk?



A 'kid free' area of the park would be fantastic.


That cafe would be a whole lot nicer if kids were banned, they sold booze, you could smoke in there, and they had a jukebox full of thrash metal and Czechoslovakian jazz.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote:

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

> That's because dogs can't read. If humans don't

> shut the gates, what do you expect?



This is not always the case. I've seen people going this area to exercise their dogs. On one occasion I said to the dog owner that this was meant to be a dog free area but they took no notice saying he could go in with the dog.


I have no problem with dogs, just those certain dirty owners what don't clean up the mess.

All park users dislike rubbish. Dog turds should be picked up by the owners, just as drinking straws, crisp packets etc should be picked up after consumption of food/drink- I've seen a proliferation of these recently.


There is also a problem with broken glass. I've had to report this to park wardens three times now. Twice loads of broken glass has appeared near the dog free area under discussion. The glass was scattered around in the grass and could have caused damage to a child or a dog.


There are also a number of deep holes in the same area into which tins have been sunken (not sure why but they are like holes you'd get on a golf course)any dog running at full pelt could catch its paw and end up with a broken leg.

lenk Wrote:

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

> Muley Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > BUT NO BLOODY KIDS

> >

> >

> > Awlright Lenk?

>

>

> A 'kid free' area of the park would be fantastic.

>

>

> That cafe would be a whole lot nicer if kids were

> banned, they sold booze, you could smoke in there,

> and they had a jukebox full of thrash metal and

> Czechoslovakian jazz.



Now Lenk, you know what we said about sharing- it's not nice to be selfish, is it? You weren't being clever, and no-one else is laughing are they? No.

Now, any more silly behaviour like that and it's the naughty step for you, young man, and I mean it.

reetpetite Wrote:

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

> Me too I love dogs and know many responsible

> owners ,just cant stand people who blatently

> ignore the no dogs sign especially when they know

> these areas are used by children.


The whole park is used by children, not just that area. In my opinion, the fences are far too low to stop dogs going in. They should have made them higher. The signs saying no dogs are actually not enforceable, they are merely put there in the hope that you keep dogs out. Like polite notice signs.

Lenk, you're on fire! That cafe would be fantastic as you describe it! I'm with you on that one, just because I'm one of those mothers with the toddler and ridiculous buggy shoving my way through the cafe doesn't mean I don't know it's much more fun your way. Maybe after 6?

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

    • Link to petition if anyone would like to object: Londis Off-License Petition https://chng.it/9X4DwTDRdW
    • He did mention it's share of freehold, I’d be very cautious with that. It can turn into a nightmare if relationships with neighbours break down. My brother had a share of freehold in a flat in West Hampstead, and when he needed to sell, the neighbour refused to sign the transfer of the freehold. What followed was over two years of legal battles, spiralling costs and constant stress. He lost several potential buyers, and the whole sale fell through just as he got a job offer in another city. It was a complete disaster. The neighbour was stubborn and uncooperative, doing everything they could to delay the process. It ended in legal deadlock, and there was very little anyone could do without their cooperation. At that point, the TA6 form becomes the least of your worries; it’s the TR1 form that matters. Without the other freeholder’s signature on that, you’re stuck. After seeing what my brother went through, I’d never touch a share of freehold again. When things go wrong, they can go really wrong. If you have a share of freehold, you need a respectful and reasonable relationship with the others involved; otherwise, it can be costly, stressful and exhausting. Sounds like these neighbours can’t be reasoned with. There’s really no coming back from something like this unless they genuinely apologise and replace the trees and plants they ruined. One small consolation is that people who behave like this are usually miserable behind closed doors. If they were truly happy, they’d just get on with their lives instead of trying to make other people’s lives difficult. And the irony is, they’re being incredibly short-sighted. This kind of behaviour almost always backfires.  
    • I had some time with him recently at the local neighbourhood forum and actually was pretty impressed by him, I think he's come a long way.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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