Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry Steady Eddy, but your two documents didn't support your case.


The Association of British Drivers was unsupported conjecture - a political polemic not a study.


The Police Review contradicted the ABD by explaining that speed humps slowed traffic that in turn limited accidents, and that there was no evidence of undue speeding between humps.


The police also recommended that humps were introduced according to traffic studies rather than politics (something our local council has manifestly done).


The police observed hypothetically that damage could be done to vehicles, but admitted they had no evidence.


The police observed that there were other traffic calming systems but made no statement about comparative effectiveness.


In fact the only complaint was that they always seemed to be late in the consulting process, but at no time suggested they were not consulted nor that their complaints weren't heard or acted upon.


Why would you present these two documents as evidence of your case? You've willfully misinterpreted them.


Is the real case that you don't want any regulation because you believe that your freedom to drive with abandon is more important than the rest of us poor citizens?

The police also recommended that humps were introduced according to traffic studies rather than politics (something our local council has manifestly done).


Hmmm. Maybe, maybe not. They've shown that there is, arguably, a problem. They've proposed speed humps as a solution. I don't believe they've shown that speed humps are necessarily the correct solution. Melbourne Grove a classic case in point.


We have a problem - something must be done - this is something - it must be done. Sadly, that's the way of the world these days...

Sorry but I can't be biffed to lok back over the thread.

Has anyone yet made a humorous remark concerning there not being much of a view from the top of a speed bump?

If they haven't, consider it made.

If they have, I'll take my leave.

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

    • Happy to name agent and do understand that there are procedures to complain. I believe that it starts with a complaint to the estate agent and then you can go to the ombudsman. I am very unhopeful that this will achieve anything as it will be hard to prove what the intention of the agent was.  Also I don't want to name the agent at this stage so as not to open up myself to any legal issues. However it is an agent in the Village whish has many branches across London
    • Naming the agent isn't going to help in this case, this is down to the morals (lack of) of the buyer. I think it's always best, esp in a buyer's market, to keep details such as 'you're keen/ need to sell' to one's self, otherwise you're just giving the buyer leverage to pull a stunt like this...
    • I have tickets for tomorrow.  I'm off to do a rain dance.
    • Please name the agent and the company.  So sorry this happened to you. You could also refuse to pay the commission.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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