Jump to content

St Anthony's Catholic Primary School - (traffic congestion caused by a stupid parent)


Recommended Posts

I'm getting more pissed off with selfish, dangerous car drivers as I get older. They cause death and injury in the thousands every year but are left to carry on making our cities dangerous to live in. People get up in arms over the deaths caused by drugs, guns, knives etc but because the weapon of choice of the majority of killers is something so many people have become dependent on, ie a car, nothing is done to restrict their freedom to maim and kill. Makes me sick.

Fliss Wrote:

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

> SeanMacgavhann is often the voice of reason on

> this forum, it seems to me. Following on from

> what Sean said about no driver parents having

> posted - as a parent newly dropping off and

> picking up (by bus or on foot, depending on the

> weather and what time it is) from the school in

> question (I don't know the school that well yet,

> or the other parents) thay all seem to arrive on

> foot, or else I see one or two I recognise on the

> bus..... I haven't seen many cars outside the

> school.



It isn't very noticable coming to the school from Barry Road end - the parents park on Friern/congestion is at the Friern/Etherow junction.

When I had a son at primary school I never dropped him off by car.

But my guess is that some of the people dropping off by car are doing so because they are going on to work.

And madly juggling lots of things and too busy to read this thread and respond.

I cycle to Hammersmith every day to work and am totally pissed off with the number of dangerous drivers on the roads who think that it's more important that they get to their job 5 minutes early at the risk of a cyclist like me not making it at all.


I don't care if you have to juggle kids and work, so do we all, but I don't endanger peoples lives whilst doing it.

Quids. You seem to picking a fight with the childless when it is as many parents I see on here saying much the same


I know people from the top of friern rd who drop the kids off there. On any case I'm not telling anyone how far they can and can't drive. But the thread is about the problem of people blocking that rd up whic delays other people (some with kids some not) from getting to work on time. They can't park around the corner no??

No I am not Sean, that's ridiculous 85% of my life to date has been childless but as someone memorably said on here - I do wish i was half the parent that i was was when i didn't have kids. I'm responding to a specific post that tickled me and sticking up for Fuschia. Inspite of what you might think i'm not in favour of anti-social behavviour on the road by anyone and kids are no excuse.

Fair enough. I'm not trying to start a fight just read your post as lacking context when I first read it


I've moved away from that road anyway but it still bugs me. Still, sun is shining

Bellerophon: There is no targeting of Catholics in my posts. I have as much comtepmt for Sikhism, Islam, Judaism or any other religion that rejects logical and scientific reason in favour of blind faith in outdated fairy stories. Please do not feel victimmised. You are ALL numbskulls.


Elly74: you said in your post that you walk your kids to school. What therefore is your beef with me? I praise your attitude, if all parents walked with their kids to school as you do, then the world would be a better place.


Keef: If the truth offends you then I am an offensive person.

Less pollution

Less congestion

Thinner kids

More feeling of community as people walked to school together

Less irate local residents

Lower carbon emissions


I'm sure there are other social benefits too that I cant think of.

Silverfox - you aren't one for spotting the blindingly obvious are you...

eater81 Wrote:

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

> So believing in talking snakes, angels, miracles,

> that the world was created in 6 days flat, that

> the theory of evolution is invalid etc etc is the

> mark of an intelligent human being?



Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Quick reply about the "why are children coming for some distance to ED schools when they are all oversubscribed" comment. Children are at primary school for 7 years, and a school that is not very popular, may take children from areas with even worse schools, only to find a few years later, that it is oversubscribed but that the siblings of children who came years ago have a right to a place. Ivydale has had its ups & downs - the children who got places there in say, 2002 (when my second son started), even though they lived north of Queens Road, have moved on, but their younger siblings are still attending. I seem to remember that one government or other made a big thing about parental choice...

OK, so the "siblings policy" is the reason for the congestion. So, a parent has a child in ED and moves out, or is forced into sending their kids to a school many miles away at some point because there is no availablity in their local shcool, has more children and for years to come will be driving to or catching the bus to ED? This saves them the obvious inconvenience of having to travel to multiple schools while the children's schooling intersects, but potentially pushes another eldest / only child into a situation in which they are unable to find a place in a school withing walking distance and then have to be driven to a school further away. I guess whether this is right or not is almost impossible to establish. Does the benefit to the parents of siblings exceed the disruption caused to others? As stated, I suspect that this is utterly unanswerable.


But, in response east-of-rye, I think that we are all agreed that irrespective of government rhetoric, choice is illusory, or at least the domain of the local authority rather than the individual.


I guess that it is time to head to Tunbridge Wells. Perhaps eater81 can give me a lift.

Eater81 why don't you start a thread about religion in the lounge?


Funny thing is I agree with your post about talking snakes etc. but this is a thread about parking! Talking about civil liberties and allocation of school places may be relevant but debating whether or not God exists belongs somewhere else methinks.


Especially as school-run parents creating problems seems to affect schools of all kinds - irrespective of parents' beliefs and income bracket.

Fraud.

This could very well be the issue.


& on that subject, I didn't get into The Charter School 5 years ago, when I only lived down the road. My best friend did & she lived is Camberwell. She had given a relatives address & my mum had to make an appeal...


One can easily fake an address & because of this, I know some kids are not getting into the schools closer to them.


As for the idiot parents who do live in the area & drive to school, this makes me very angry because I can name a long list of people who do this.


Schools should make a point of this...



dancet Wrote:

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

> "Or, is the allocation of school places in East

> Dulwich subject to significant fraud?

>

> If the latter is the case, and I have no evidence

> of it, can the council not do something to ensure

> that places are allocated to people who live in

> the area? "

>

> Fraud? don't get me started!!! They come from

> miles away using fake addresses (look at earlier

> threads on cheats). One mum drives an hour every

> day to get to the Charter (he uses a Dulwich

> address). That is one reason why so many of them

> are in cars.

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...