Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On Forest Hill road there is one set of lights at the junction with Wood vale ( gas works), they've been there about two weeks. Today another company started digging up the road with another set of lights ~300m away on the junction with honor oak rise.


I asked the new guys if their lights were co-ordinated with the ligths down the road - they're not.


So there are cars "trapped" between the lights, people running the lights due to frustration and a general mess.


Does anyone know who licenses road works or approves what works should go on at the same time?


Particularly concerned as my wife is due to give birth any minute and together these roadworks have added ~20 mins onto our journey!! eek!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/8461-who-schedules-road-works/
Share on other sites

I was at a rather boring business dinner a few weeks ago where Boris was key note speaker. Other than congratulating London mothers and Gu puddings as being the most productive sectors in the capital he announved that control of road works was to be taken from the utilities.


At the moment the gas/electricity companies have carte blanche to dig where and when they like, a right dating back to when they were publically owned and so providing a public service.


The idea is to coordinate road works and to charge the utilities rent for the space that they are working in, thus reducing disruption and ensuring that the amount of time spent on any given job is reduced as they will be charged by the day.

Sandperson Wrote:

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

> And presumably meaning they rush the jobs even

> more leaving the road surfaces in an even more

> shocking state than they are already.



Well, at least somebody is trying to find a solution to the problem. "Shocking" road surfaces? No. A bit lumpy at times, but not shocking. There are many other things that should be classed as "shocking", not our roads. Honestly.

OMG Boris keeping to another of his manifesto promises?

I'm scared - I'm really scared - I never voted for him but he keeps doing the right thing!

But indeed yes there are quite a lot of similar things around London (I ride my motorcycle around London quite a bit) where there are two or three road works with traffic lights not connected, in one street. So thanks for letting us know he intends to do something about that!

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

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

> Sandperson Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > And presumably meaning they rush the jobs even

> > more leaving the road surfaces in an even more

> > shocking state than they are already.

>

>

> Well, at least somebody is trying to find a

> solution to the problem. "Shocking" road surfaces?

> No. A bit lumpy at times, but not shocking. There

> are many other things that should be classed as

> "shocking", not our roads. Honestly.


I am sorry Michael you are wrong. I ride a bike (I'm sure that makes me unpopular) every day to work and the state of some of the roads in East Dulwich, Peckham and Nunhead are shocking and in some cases dangerous, not just 'a bit lumpy'.


I ride on skinny tyres now but even when I used to ride in on a mountian bike there were certain stretches of road where I would have to turn the suspension on. I have seen at least two people being taken off their bikes by potholes in the area. I would call that shocking. Honestly.

These has been legislation out there since 1991 (New roads and street works act 1991) to coordinate all road works and it does work sometimes. Anyone proposing to dig a hole in the road has to apply for an opening notice from the Highway Authority and these can be refused, however what you find is that statutory undertakers (gas, water, electric etc) will apply saying their works is an ?emergency? so the HA can?t refuse an opening notice.


What Boris is going on about is charging for each opening notice where the SU will provide a length of time the road will be dug up. If I was working for the gas company and I thought the work would take 1 month, I?d apply for 2 months just in case to avoid the possible fines.


Same old same old!

I live quite close to these temporary traffic lights (grrrr) and last night saw some guy at approx 6.45pm get out of his car whilst holding all the traffic behind him that just got through the green lights to have a right old barney with another guy because he got over taken.


There is little or no signage to guide drivers that that they should be following the road to the left, but because of the how far down the road has been dug up it seems a close cut to make this manouver last minute. People are using the oncoming traffic lane - there are two and not single file (there is a right hand turn)


I hope that make sence but if the council used their nod a bit better i.e. using proper cables to hold up their sigage and clearly marked arrows I hope I dont have to see a fisty cuff on my door step.

Hiya Newbie,

It's not the council that are digging up the road or putting up the signs. The road works near Wood vale are a contractor of british gas. The one near Honor oak rise is a contractor of BT.


I contacted the council about the Honor oak rise lights and today they were gone. If your concerned over the signs maybe drop them a line on

Environment Services


[email protected]

020 7525 2000


and see what they can do

I requested an explanation from Council officers about what went wrong with these road works and the Council?s Roads team have now given me an update.


Southern Gas Networks were initially replacing gas mains on Forest Hill Road. SGN discussed these works with the Council prior to commencing, though they appear to have commenced the works without first having submitted the required street works notice. This is an offence and the Council are currently looking at enforcement options which may include fines being issued to the company or prosecution.


BT were then also scheduled to start works on the road. They suggested at an early meeting with the council that they?d need temporary traffic lights and when they submitted their street works notice, it stated they?d only need signs and guards (no traffic lights). Obviously they then turned up and set up the traffic lights.


Both companies failed to comply with the procedures in place - the Council are apparently now arranging a meeting between SGN, BT and themselves to see what steps need to be taken to ensure it does not happen again, and to notify them of what enforcement will be applied, so at least these companies will face a penalty for causing traffic chaos.


Credit to iamyamyam ? as soon as he reported it to the council, action was taken to shift the lights.


Cheers

Laurie



www.laurieeggleston.org

www.twitter.com/Laurie1984

Dear Laurie,

Many thanks for following up on this -it's great news. I was just impressed that the council sorted out the traffic lights issue straight away. I'm glad Southwark are standing up to the big utility companies on our behalf, let's hope they follow the correct procedures in future.


Thanks again for raising this with the council and seeing it through

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...