Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A month ago I was hit by a car on my bike at the junction of Nunhead lane and Peckham rye (Nunhead side). I was waiting at the red light leaving Peckham and heading straight up the rye, there were cars coming in the opposite direction towards Peckham and some waiting to turn right across my path towards Nunhead. As the lights turned green I moved off forward ahead of the traffic behind me, one of the cars opposite waiting to turn right decided to get in ahead of my traffic and accelerated fast hitting me straight on. My bike was destroyed luckily I was fine. The driver said he couldn't see me.


The thing that made me write today is the exact same thing just happened to me going in the opposite direction luckily I was just missed clearly the driver didn't see me. At the moment it seems like there is nothing I can do to cross this junction safely on a bike (except walking through on the green man) without putting myself at risk.


I'm not sure how this junction could be improved maybe by having a right turn light (though the road doesn't seem wide enough heading towards Peckham).


If anyone has any advice about who I could speak to or write to I would be grateful. I have a crime reference no. for the first incident as the police turned up promptly and it was obvious what had happened.


Thanks for taking the time to read.


Lilaclou

The Southwark branch of the LCC has been campaigning for segregated tracks down that side of the Rye and on into Rye Lane to hook with Burgess Park and the various quiet routes down there. That would solve your problem but it has met predictably stiff opposition.


I'm sure your support would be appreciated: http://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/

Just writing to second David's suggestion about getting in touch with Southwark Cyclists.

In fact the AGM is tonight and Cllr Darren Merrill will be there (Chair of the council's Joint Cycle Steering Group)so it would be a good chance to discuss the junction with other local people who cycle through it and think about how to make improvements http://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/events/southwark-cyclists-monthly-meeting-and-agm/

Yes JohnL I'd like to think I could see a cyclist when turning right too. The reality seems to be that some people just don't seem to be able to and it is terribly frightening or worse when this happens. To me it seems like it might cause more traffic having some sort of extra lighting system but I can't think of any other way. Just telling people that bikes exist doesn't seem to work.


Davidk thank you for this info it looks really interesting I will get in touch. I'm imagining it would be something similar to the improvements to the roundabout at the corner of Battersea park and Battersea bridge if you are aware of it.

Davidk I think a dedicated cycle track along the rye would be great though it does seem a shame that bikes and cars can't seem to share the same space without endangerment and we have to sacrifice more road space to segregate them, which probably means car drivers are going to get to their destinations slower.


I have written to Southwark cycling and Darren Merrill with my concerns thank you for adding your voice.

It was intensely boring.... but one snippet of info that might be of interest to the OP. The Council is soon to start consulting on plans for Peckham Rye East. Which I took to mean basically the route that we've talked about, from Nunhead, down the Rye and on into Burgess Park.


I'm told it's currently a blank piece of paper so plenty of scope to get cycling and walking considerations up the agenda. Watch this space.

Massive wide road at the northern end there, scope for them to do something great.


Are they just looking at the Nunhead Lane to Rye Lane bit, or right up to the LCN at Stuart Road?


Main problem there is the road surface, the nearside is bumpy as hell so you have to cycle far from the kerb, and always get some impatient person in (usually) a white van who wants to zoom up or down the hill at 35mph.

Not sure wulfhound. It was pitched as "Peckham Rye East". But there aren't any more details at this point. It would make sense that it would include some kind of route connection to Rye Lane and Burgess Park.


Plans for unpicking the Bellenden Rd gyratory are pretty advanced so that could all link up quite nicely.


Doesn't change the fact that the Quietways are bollocks and SE Londoners have been shafted over CS5 but that's for another thread :D

@Lilaclou

If you must use this junction could you not start off a second or two before they turn green - assuming you know the phasing of the lights?

You could be in for a long wait until the junction is improved and even longer for drivers to start driving properly.

Hi

I had responses from Darren (councillor), Simon (Southwark council, team leader transport policy) and Andy (Southwark cyclists co-ordinator). There has been money approved from Tfl for the Quietway83 (I didn't know about this so found the proposal online). They suggested that they will be going forward either after new year or middle of next year.


I wrote back to them asking for clarification on times and whether this meant actual work or decision-making.


I also suggested an idea I'll paste what I wrote below


In my opinion this route would benefit from a 2-way cycle way running the whole length starting at the top from the Stuart side road. I don?t think much sacrifice needs to be made to pavement or road space. Most of this section is flats or houses with drives so there is not a lot of parked cars. The east side (currently lightly used for parking) could be dedicated to the cycle route and the west side to parking. I say east side so that it could run to the Nunhead junction, have a cycle traffic light that runs in time with the pedestrian light following over the last section to join up with rye lane (without needing to go round the roundabout one-way system).

Beulah unfortunately with my pedal powered accleration taking off a second or two before the light turns green means the driver turning right who gets in before the traffic would hit me dead on.


I just go by the green man now.

wulfhound Wrote:

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

> Massive wide road at the northern end there, scope

> for them to do something great.

>

> Are they just looking at the Nunhead Lane to Rye

> Lane bit, or right up to the LCN at Stuart Road?

>

> Main problem there is the road surface, the

> nearside is bumpy as hell so you have to cycle far

> from the kerb, and always get some impatient

> person in (usually) a white van who wants to zoom

> up or down the hill at 35mph.


I'll second this re: road surface. Always having to either stay pulled out (safer) or in and out around bumps :(

Dangerous either way... Just ploughing on over the bumps - scary!


HP

"Simon (Southwark cyclists co-ordinator" - actually Andy (Southwark cyclists co-ordinator) I believe from here....


http://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/southwark-cyclists-tfl-road-works-ride-26th-october-2015/


Looks like v good work there


And why was the AGM "It was intensely boring...." DavidK? Mind you AGM's often are!


And hear Southwark have TFL money for this scheme now

Yes apologies Nunhead man my mistake I'll edit it.


My request for timescales were referred onto Chris Durban (Cycle Programme Manager). I received an email from him this afternoon I've put in an excerpt below. I also just want to add in my opinion this route down Peckham rye is a highway as it funnels a lot cycle traffic from Nunhead onto the Burgess park route. I may be a little confused as there seems to be lots of definitions quietways, super highways, highways, cycle routes I'm not sure how each are decided on.



"In the New Year a Route Ride will be undertaken and the current Level of Service determined, based on this a set of measures will be proposed that are required. This initial assessment usually takes 12 weeks and is concluded by the agreement of a set of measures and funding required to achieve this. We will then proceed to an outline design and consult locally on this.


There is every likelihood that the Level of Service assessment will come up with proposals similar to those that you have recommended. Current routes being designed involve the removal of parking and creation of dedicated lanes for cyclists so there is nothing that you have proposed that would immediately be ruled out. Southwark Cyclists will also be consulted on the proposals once an outline design has been agreed. I will keep your recommendations on file so that they can be referred to during the scoping phase of the route"

nunhead_man - Just boring in the way that 2 hour meetings about traffic planning tend to be... And not being entirely serious. They are a lovely bunch and we even got free beer and pizza!


Lilaclou - Thank for the info, that tallies with what we talked about on Wednesday. I'll try to keep an eye on it through Southwark Cyclists and report back here. Once it gets to consultation stage it's important that we throw as much weight behind it as possible. Segregated tracks down Peckham Rye East would be transformational but will be fiercely resisted.

Hi David


:-) no probs re the freebies


And we will need to work hard on this one



davidk Wrote:

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

> nunhead_man - Just boring in the way that 2 hour

> meetings about traffic planning tend to be... And

> not being entirely serious. They are a lovely

> bunch and we even got free beer and pizza!

>

> Lilaclou - Thank for the info, that tallies with

> what we talked about on Wednesday. I'll try to

> keep an eye on it through Southwark Cyclists and

> report back here. Once it gets to consultation

> stage it's important that we throw as much weight

> behind it as possible. Segregated tracks down

> Peckham Rye East would be transformational but

> will be fiercely resisted.

  • 1 month later...

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...