Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Very odd event this morning. I arranged with the council refuse service to pick up some bulky rubbish this morning ( actually 2 terminally broken mobility scooters), and as requested put them out in the front garden last night.


My elderly neighbour told me that this morning about 7.30am, she saw a white lorry outside our house, looking much like the one that the council use for such pick-ups, and two men wearing reflective jackets got out, and one started taking photographs of our house.


The scooters were actually picked up by the council this afternoon, and when I spoke to someone from the environment dept on the phone they said there was no record of them having been round in the morning. I've reported it to the police. I wondered if these guys were "casing the joint". Has anyone else seen anything like this?


We also by the way got 3 separate rings on the doorbell from guys with vans wanting to know if I'd like them to take our "scrap" away.


Ruth

hmmm strange . I had some furniture on my doorstep a few weeks ago that I was going to put on EDF. as i left my house there were 2 guys in reflective jackets getting ready to carry it away - they said " we've come for the furniture is that right?" not 100% I thought, but save me the hassle. Disappeared in a white van.
I hope for your sake,Ruthmct, they weren't casing your place. With regard to people removing things before the council get there, I tend to leave an item out for a few days, if it doesn't go I then call the council - saves resources!
There where these guys acting really suspicious outsie my gaff the othher day. Unloading planks, turning round hitting each other with the planks, accidentally ducking and missing them, the odd custard pie. They then jumped into a pretty ramshackle old looking car, whose wheels fell off when the one with the spinning button hole tried to start it

ruthmct Wrote:

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

> My elderly neighbour told me that this morning

> about 7.30am, she saw a white lorry outside our

> house, looking much like the one that the council

> use for such pick-ups, and two men wearing

> reflective jackets got out, and one started taking

> photographs of our house.


This is only a possibility but the council workmen might have been moonlighting. They turned up early to see whether the 'scooters' were worth selling to a third party (hence the photographs) but either decided they weren't worth the trouble or couldn't find a buyer during the course of the day? The other three callers might have been scrap dealers contacted by the council workers, who were trying to cut them out of the deal?

We also by the way got 3 separate rings on the doorbell from guys with vans wanting to know if I'd like them to take our "scrap" away.



They have a value to the scrapmen for the batteries and possibly the motors, I would have told them to help themselves if you had wanted to be rid of them, maybe if they come back ask how much they will give you for them you might get a fiver or so, but the council will give you nothing.

I dont think anyone is casing the joint the council man who took the photo was probably sending that to the scrapmen so they new which door to knock in the road.

Tell them you want a tenner for them or the council can have them, you might get a bottle of drinkable wine out of it for negotiating.

We also had someone knock on the door this week. The first being a young boy of approx 15 asking if we wanted our hedge cut (roughly 9.45 in the morning) and yesterday a man in his 30`s at lunch time asking if the bits we have stacked in the garden were scrap, He was told to help himself but he didn`t take a thing.
I think the photographs are normal council procedures as I've noticed them doing this when they've picked stuff up from us in the past. I assumed they wanted to cover themselves in case it's alleged they took away something they weren't supposed to.

Hi,

Various Council departments and utility services do take photo's of properties and I believe you should challenge them for their identification. Also taking photo's are private investigator's and Bailiffs to prove that they have attended the address. The photo is sent with the report to the bank or finance house so that they may take a decision whether to pursue the debt further or place a charge on the property.


The simple advice is always take a description of the person, vehicle and importantly the vehicle registration mark, this will help either the police or council to identify the department and the reason for the photo.


And finally..... Burglers do not take photo's as the camera has probably been stolen and they have already sold it.


Kind regards,

Libra Carr.

Hi,


Just a note that if the person taking the photo is a burgler, he may have a crowbar or other implement to hand, this would then bring your own safety into question and becomes confrontational.


We have a good Police force and we have a council that have direct access to the DVLA give them your information and do not get involved, let them make the enquiry via the registered keeper.


Kind regards,

Libra Carr.

I don't really think that prospective burglars are going to turn up in a van, wearing reflective jackets and drawing a lot of attention to themselves! Why on earth would they take pictures? Unless you're living in a mansion with a sophisticated alarm system that needs getting past.

Bit of paranoia here I would say.

As someone pointed out, pictures are taken of rubbish left out in case any prosecution is required for dumping. Perhaps that is the case here, council departments not talking to each other - wouldn't be unheard of.

Steady Eddy Wrote:

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

> It is not a crime to take photos that must be

> realised, but when you look at the circumstances

> as a whole, in this case, then this has to be

> questioned what the actual purpose was. It is also

> the right of the owner to have a say in who takes

> photos of their property, therefore it works both

> ways of the freedom to have a say and how someone

> feels.

>

> I am a non-professional photographer that does it

> as a hobby and love some of the building

> architecture, so I would point out, as my personal

> opinion that in this case it does not show to be

> for arcitectual art purposes.


That may be so but a few weeks ago on a thread about someone taking pictures of peoples' children many on here took a very different line..."don't be so precious about your sprogs", being the main one, where are they now when it's property?

Scene:


Burglars driving down the road, stopped by cops


Cop 1: hello my lad, can I ask where you are going?

Stripy Shirt 1: just collecting scrap guv?nor!

Cop 2: Mind if I look in the cab?

Stripy Shirt 2: (starting to sweat on upper lip) Err, no, what for?

Cop 2: What's this digital camera for then?

Stripy Shirt 2: Ain't mine!

Cop 2: Is it yours? (Points accusingly at Stripy Shirt 1)

Stripy Shirt 1: Yes it's mine.

Cop 2: Mind if I look at the smudges?

Stripy Shirt 1: If you must.

Cop 2: why so many pictures of houses on Underhill Road?

Stripy Shirt 1: (slight stammer) er, I?m, a student of Victorian vernacular architecture ... and it's for my MA

Cop 1: C'mon lads, you're nicked!

Stripy Shirt 2: What for?!

Cop 1: Going equipped to steal.


Think that?s how it works, would stand corrected by any legal out there

Eccentric

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

    • 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.
    • 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 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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