former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[Tr?]

Hi worldwiser,

Note there is almost always a free park on Frogley Road (near the junction with Crawthew Grove). Just move the wheelie bins some selfish pr*ck always puts there.

[worldwiser]

Tr?, good tip - cheers. And ed_pete - wow, had a brief look through.. so the basic flaw was that it was only a limited number of streets and it cost a small fortune. Not surprising no-one went for it!

[Sue]

I live a few streets away from Crawthew Grove, off North Cross Road, and I definitely don't want a residents' parking scheme.

If memory serves I was consulted about it at the time, and said the same thing then - as I presume did most other people, otherwise we'd have one.

[James Barber]

Indeed Sue.

[worldwiser]

Thought you were one of the CPZ's most ardent advocates James! All I know is, I've now lived in 3 areas of London during a period where a well thought-out CPZ was introduced and the effects were extremely helpful with very little local upset. The question is how to make sure it is well thought-out. These things are pretty much inevitable: try and name any part of zone 2 left that doesn't have restrictions on every single street during the working day. Within 10 years, we'll have one.

[Sue]

worldwiser Wrote:

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

try and name any part of zone 2 left

> that doesn't have restrictions on every single

> street during the working day.

xxxxx

And it's an absolute nightmare.

[UncleBen]

Dear James Barber and the rest of the lib(con)dems including the 'ex tory' crookshank hilton - please stop posting your propaganda through my letterbox. Its all lies and distortion.

[Sue]

UncleBen Wrote:

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

> Dear James Barber and the rest of the lib(con)dems

> including the 'ex tory' crookshank hilton - please

> stop posting your propaganda through my letterbox.

> Its all lies and distortion.

xxxxxxxx

Unlike the propaganda from other parties :))

And I'm sure James etc will know exactly which letterbox yours is :))

[James Barber]

Hi UncleBen,

I'm not aware of any lies or distortion.

But happy if you PM me to tell me which house we should stop delivering to.

Best wishes, james.

[undergran]

On a completely different topic, do you have any information about the latest car "club"/business which has recently arrived. car2go has parked several Smart cars around East Dulwich - it would seem in places where parking is at a premium already. Unlike Zipcars who use designated places these can be re-parked anywhere, though at present they don't actually appear to be moving at all except when the operatives call once a week when they may be moved from one side of a street to another. Are they paying the Council for carrying on a business in the streets - I thought there were rules about this.

[uncleglen]

Uncleglen here- NEVER to be confused with UncleBen especially on political issues( someone on the EDF gets us confused)

[Sue]

uncleglen Wrote:

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

> Uncleglen here- NEVER to be confused with UncleBen

> especially on political issues( someone on the EDF

> gets us confused)

xxxxxx

There's also a MrBen and yes, I'm totally confused :))

[James Barber]

Hi undergran,

Car2Go appears to be a new car sharing scheme. Using smartcars the idea appears to be they'll always find somewhere to park.

Their website says they;'ll have up to 500 cars covering London and as of today 442 - https://www.car2go.com/en/london/how-does-car2go-work/ with about 10 around Lordship Lane/East Dulwich.

They appear to be concentrated in areas without controlled parking.

As the vehicles are MOT, taxed and insured theyre allowed to park without restrictions.

If the car sharing is successful they should take more cars of off local roads than they provide. Most cars are idle 95%+ of the time. Car sharing is nol profitable if they're used regualrly daytime and evening 7 days a week.

Rules. Without controlled parking, which isnt coming, the only rules are single and double yellow lines.

[Pugwash]

James - Have many of your ED residents been to see you about welfare reforms? Do we know what impact these reforms are having on the ED public?

Southwark CAB are holding a question and answer session on Welfare Reforms on Tuesday 10th September 8 for 8.15 start

at the East Dulwich Community Centre in Darrell Road. It has been organised by the Barry Area Residents' Association and is open to all ED residents to attend.

If you would like to publicise this event ( and attend if you do not have other council business to attend to) please feel free to do so.

Do you have any figures to indicate how the bedroom tax is affecting ED?

[James Barber]

Hi Pugwash,

The Welfare reforms doesn't affect so many residents of East Dulwich. But not much fun for those it does affect. Numerically and proportionally our patch is one of the least affected in SE London.

But I would encourage anyone affected or just interested to pop along to East Dulwich Community Ceintre 10 September for 8pm to hear from Southwark Citizens Advice Bureau.

Isnt it weird how a benefit reduction has been nicknamed a bedroom tax by some.

The reduction in housing benefit for council and housing association tenants who have un used spare bedrooms - where the rent is paid for by the government - is predicted to affect 43 households in East Dulwich.

Equally the government has made it clear such households can rent out one bedroom for ?80pw tax free and this wont affect their benefits. ?80 would cover the benefit reduction several times over. Such households can also downsize and swap homes to one of the right size for their needs.

In tough times it is hard to justify larger subsidies for some households to have more space than they need. While at the same time other families are severely overcrowded in social housing.

[Penguin68]

James

Whilst I actually agree with this alteration to benefits ('bedroom tax') there are some anomalies -

(1) For those in areas where there aren't any available houses or flats to downsize to (it is reasonable for people not to be obliged to move excessive distances).

(2) For those whose 'additional' bedroom masks a social need - i.e. for those couples who may have to sleep separately for medical needs - but whose (used) bedroom is treated as 'spare'.

Where individual anomolies could be addressed, then it doesn't seem unreasonable where housing is being subsidised for only the 'right' amount to be subsidised - and where there is alternative local accommodation - particularly where there are needy families who are living in substandard (over-crowded) accommodation locally - for people to right-size their subsidised accommodation.

Nobody likes disruption - or having to move - but there is a need to balance competing needs where subsidised housing is concerned - and those who are in subsidised private housing already have had to live within these constraints.

[James Barber]

Hi P68,

I agree with all your points.

Southwark Council has seen some smart housing officers matching tenants who are over crowded and under occupied - one great three way swap in the same block. Another realised a resident should be receiving pension and helped them organise it. The trouble with big national policies is making them work sensibly at the micro level.

[Pugwash]

Working in the social care sector, I have considerable contact with the various housing offices and have come across situations where according to tenancy agreement - only one tenant living in the property say over the age of 65. Since pensioners are not affected (yet) by the 'bedroom tax' many have 3 bedrooms as family have all grown up. What you usually find is a number of relatives living in the other rooms. fair enough they have a roof over their head and hopefully contribute towards the running costs of utilities. In many cases the Housing Offices are not aware of these additional adults, some who are in work.

The debate is that the official tenant is receiving full HB, if there are other 'official' sub tenants ( for the want of a better word) HB is reduced by a small amount depending the sub tenants income. IE Fred aged 70 gets full HB for his flat at ?110 per week, if his relatives are known to be living there, his HB may be reduced to ?90 pw as the relative would be assessed on their income to make up the ?30 difference. If HB do not know about the 'unofficial' sub tenants, they continue to give full HB of ?110 pw - the other household members may be earning far in excess of ?110 pw but do not contribute towards rental costs.

It is a controversial situation - should councils recover some of the money paid out by HB if there are more people living in the property than officially permitted. Or given the housing shortages and waiting lists, should the 'unofficial tenants' continue with the status quo as far cheaper for the council in the long run.

From what I have heard Housing Officers are being surprised by the numbers of 'hidden tenants'. One HO informed me some time ago that he had an elderly gentleman living with his wife in a 2 bed flat in Peckham. Following complaints/concerns raised by neighbours as to possible over crowding, they visited the property and found that the old couple were renting out the spare room and lounge to 6 adults and charging them around ?60 each in rent. The old couple were receiving full HB yet getting ?360 pw from their 'tenants'

I agree that there are insufficient properties for people to downsize into, if I were a tenant I would not be happy swopping my 4 bed property for a one/two bed in an area I had no affinity with. To make this scheme workable new properties need to be built/developed in all areas of the borough.

If you consider the empty properties in the borough which have been empty for over a year, there should be some way of getting the registered owners to sell up. There are instances where properties do lay empty for some time awaiting probate etc.

[edhistory]

See Appendix B - Non-dependent Deductions:-

www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a2-2013-revised.pdf

which should be read before coming to a judgment based on Pugwash's contribution.

John K

[Pugwash]

The scenario quoted took place before the Welfare Reforms of this year took effect.

[James Barber]

Please beware a company that is causing me concern operationg locally - Utility Bill Saver.

If you are approached by them please let me know.

I dont;t think I can say more than that.

[Alex K]

A quick heads-up -- our James has a letter published in the current number of PRIVATE EYE. Hurrah James! Good on you for the cogency of the rebuttal presented. And no, I'm not being snarky, I truly did and do enjoy seeing the ghosts laid that their team attempted to raise.

[James Barber]

Thanks Alex K,

Good on them for publishing it. But I was especially annoyed that they printed something I knew to be wrong and they hadn't even had the nous to contact me before writing such rubbish.

[JADED]

Hello Mr Barber

I am depressed that the residents of a parrallel street seem to have carte blanche to "hide" their stinky bins in ours...

Many residents in Landells Road have found a new way of making their homes prettier - by stashing their bins in the tiny cul-de-sac behind their properties - Plough Lane.

This is a tiny road that never receives any council attention at all ? pot holes go unfilled and street sweepers seem immune to its charms - although they often meet smoke, drink and even sleep here...

A year ago or so a resident of Landells Road found a way of making his trimmed bush at the front of his property look more impressive by moving his bins into the street behind. Since then his neighbours have been impressed enough to follow suit. Now, our tiny street, which doesn't even boast a pavement for half its length, is now host to those bins deemed too unsightly for the house-proud Landells residents.

I attempted to reason with the instigator of this dump-fest but was told in no-uncertain terms that he had council backing and that the residents of Plough Lane would just have to live with it. Can this be true?

Is it fair that a big street can use a much smaller street as its litter tray?

[James Barber]

Hi JADED,

25 August I was told by council officers that they will review Plough Lane around all the issues you've highlighted.

I'd be amazed if a council officer was directing Landells Road resident to use Plough Lane as suggested. Do you have a name you can email or PM of who it is alleged has suggested this?