Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"Quite clearly therefore you agree that the area desperately needs this service"


That's just rubbish R&A, and poor technique. It seems a bit like sounding clever is more important than honesty.


If you go back over this and threads passim, my main complaint is that we actually don't know whether the area needs this service more than than any other area needs their service.


There are fixed budgets here, and the rail authorities need to provide a reasonable service to all.


Instead of facts and clear explanation we've had highly polarised arguments based on self-indulgence. This change in scheduling has been represented as service cutting by faceless administrators with a grudge against Southwark residents. I've questioned the motivation behind such an unreasonable approach.


I propose that if we're a little more grown-up about it, we'll find that everyone is working hard to find the best-fit solution that takes into account everyone's needs.


That means less agitation, and more open-minded investigation. That may not suit the needs of local politicians as election day approaches, but it is more likely to create better solutions.

I was trying to address your point regarding house prices and i'm sorry if i don't have good technique. I'm not a lawyer or a trained debater, i'm a member of the public trying to stick up for a local campaign.


As Boris heads up transport surely it's his job (alongside the transport minister etc) to weigh up the pros and cons for various different areas of greater london. All we can do is put our area's case forward. There's nothing stopping other areas doing the same thing.


I think your point is valid IF we were discussing new services for the area. The facts are the SLL is an established service that is being removed. It's like being forced to reapply for your current job.


I suggested we take this discussion off this thread as we're going round in circles and i feel it's getting personal. Happy for you to PM me or you could start a thread in the lounge...


No wonder Eileen starts a new thread each time .....

Huguenot Wrote:

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


> I propose that if we're a little more grown-up

> about it, we'll find that everyone is working hard

> to find the best-fit solution that takes into

> account everyone's needs.


I applaud your trusting attitude Huge not. Daddy knows best.

I am not sure that your attitude is completely grown up either.

;-)


I won't take it offline either - that's just a way to stifle dissent.


I'm clearly not entirely growed-up. This one just rankles.


It's entirely possible that the rail authorities don't have a case. It's also possible that they do have a case, and don't have a s*it hot PR machine. TJMP and Eileen do have a s*it hot PR machine, and it panders to the lowest possible taste.


That makes bad solutions.


Because locals are conflicted on this one, I'm carrying the candle.


I don't like Eileen creating a new thread on this one every time because it's hiding intelligence and debate, it deletes the moderate views. Do you know what, she'll probably create a new thread next time she has some news?


Tessa's on the right political horse in that sense. But respect zero.


Is it worth being in charge if you don't make good decisions?

Well, I'll light a candle for those who do quite like getting different threads when there's news on what's happening.


Otherwise, you end up with an old thread constantly reappearing on the front page. While some people would read all the way through before hitting reply, there are quite a few who don't. They read the first posts and then start replying with questions/answers to things that have long since gone by the wayside. As the thread grows - as it would with an issue that's been running and will run for some time - it gets more and more unlikely that people will go back and reread the full thread. The new news gets buried at the bottom and harder to find and comment on.


I suspect that there's a difference in what Eileen intends her threads to do and what you expect them to do. Does she see them as more of an information posting rather than something to invite and encourage discussion? Perhaps we need a 'community notices' section that 'information only' posts could get slotted into?


I do see your point Huguenot about it being possible that there is more than one community that needs a train service and that someone needs to make the overall decision. But I don't think it's unreasonable that a community shouts about its need - the squeaky wheel gets the oil after all. And there's nothing to stop any other community (or its elected representatives) doing the same. Perhaps we need greater transparency from those making the decision on why they've chosen it (i.e. explaining that greater need and why it outweighs the local one).


I am slightly biased in that I do catch a train to/from Victoria most weekdays and evenings so I'm very grateful to Eileen and co for campaigning and keeping us up to date. And no, it's not about house prices for me - it's about the increased time and hassle of interchanging at Clapham Junction (the UK's 2nd worst station) for commuters at peak (from Wandsworth Road/Clapham High St who don't have the option of the fast trains) and for patients at Kings trying to negotiate the stairs between platforms there.

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Huguenot,

Earlier post you suggested rail budgets are fixed.

The subsidy may be but the revenue is not.

At many points on the South London Line the ticket offices are rarely open, no barriers and very rare enforcement - Denmark Hill, South Bermondsey immediately come to mind.

Oyster Pay As You Go starting in early January should help. I suspect the SLL has many more passengers than recorded. Network Rail states underused service yet quite often when I've travelled on it, it feels crowded.

Similar problem to the bendy or 'free' buses.


I'm hopeful that the Oyster PAYG might throw up some surprising passenger usage figures that ensure SLL isn't wrongly dumped.

Gimme Wrote:

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

> If you go for the Victoria to Dartford option, any

> chance of asking for it to start running a bit

> earlier?

> It is one of the best ways to get to Canary Wharf

> / Docklands (changing at Lewisham) but the first

> train is 8.31 from Denmark Hill which makes

> getting in early difficult.


Eileen, you are amazing!!! There is now a Dartford train at 7.52am and 8.19am from Denmark Hill. How did you do it?

Gimme Wrote:

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

> Gimme Wrote:

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

> -----

> > If you go for the Victoria to Dartford option,

> any

> > chance of asking for it to start running a bit

> > earlier?

> > It is one of the best ways to get to Canary

> Wharf

> > / Docklands (changing at Lewisham) but the

> first

> > train is 8.31 from Denmark Hill which makes

> > getting in early difficult.

>

> Eileen, you are amazing!!! There is now a Dartford

> train at 7.52am and 8.19am from Denmark Hill. How

> did you do it?



God knows...

  • 2 months later...

Boris Johnson is deciding this month whether to axe the South London Line. The link below lets you send him a letter to ask him to reconsider and only takes about 1 minute to do. If it is something you care about I think it would be 1 minute well spent.


http://www.facebook.com/l/f1266;www.southlondonpress.co.uk/tn/mayorletter.cfm

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...