Heart108

@ Vote Them Out" IF you are too scared to identify yourselves by name - then you have zero credibility and no right to be taken seriously. At least those Labour Councillors you criticise are clear what they stand for and can be contacted by name. If you want to participate in a grownup political debate and lobby voters with pamphlets and a website then say who you are. You tactics are straight out of the Facebook/Vote Leave/Trump playbook - anonymous negative vitriol.

boomshake22 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks, it's worth doing the research, please feel > free to pass the letter on, yes the pcn says to > reply in writing on the pcn but the website states > you can submit online, much easier, again > misleading info on the pcn. > > Whatever convinced them to cancel my pcn,is > detailed in the letter, so it's an error on their > part that they are obviously not admitting, and as > far as I can tell not correcting. The Council do not have to give any reason for cancelling a PCN - cancellation from their side is 'discretionary'. It is therefore probably not worth going back to them after you have paid a fine and saying 'yes but someone else said ...' The only successful approach is to make a polite representation - as legally sound as possible - at the right time on your own behalf. The reason they make such a fortune is because most people are not experience, dogged, or informed enough to make representations in exactly the right way to get the PCN cancelled. This is all part of the approach set out by those in charge of generating income for the Council, combined with their legal team which will know very clearly what they can and cant get away with at the highest level. ie if someone were to take the legal process to the very end. That is where a judge would rule in favour of Boom - whose expert letter would have won the case, so it is a simple decision for Southwark to cancel such a powerful articulate representation with that kind of legal weight. Fairness and reasonableness has got nothing to do with it - look over at the thread of the Dulwich Forum on this and lots of people careworkers, parents not familiar with the area trying to drive their kids to the Herne Hill velodrome... all have been caught by the system. The press ought to be involved and challenge the Council to justify their rule making, and NAME who is responsible for conceiving and running this revenue generating scheme. Boom's letter has the imprimature of a barrister level specialised traffic legal expert - expertise like this is available for free on ( google Pepipoo Fightback forum) where the are a bunch of very very experience traffic solicitors peer reviewing and comparing each other's advice.

Judging by the lack of response to this question perhaps it is a sign that the Forum Admin would prefer not to encourage loads of traffic/questions etc because I have spent some time hunting around to see who to email and cannot find the answer I am researching how to start a community forum for musicians ( not based in East Dulwich! ) and would very much appreciate being able to contact someone experience of running this forum, if someone is willing to PM me, thanks.

@Bic Basher + tash b - thank you! .. this is the kind of helpful info I was looking for - let's see what else comes up

After years of using Virgin and paying nearly ?60 for "Phone ( I never use, Tivo + Fast Broadband" Package) I have got sick of the extortionate price and am looking at a letter just come through the door from BT "Superfast Fibre Broadband Unlimited" for ?29.99 a month including line rental. Since we have reluctantly not wanted to change our little used but still necessary BT landline (BT phone rental charge monthly is outrageously high)- are there any bright independent consumer opinions on this?

Who has blocked the flow of the River Peck in Peckham Park? And for what purpose? It' been silted for ages. Dogs can no longer play and drink by the fallen tree next to the childrens' playground.

Heart108 Wrote: > And they are > replacing the short characterful granite pillars > that were there for decades For the record - I was wrong on the above: they have kept those granite pillars. I would appreciate a word from James Barber here... who was involved earlier in this thread a few years ago. Or any other Southwark officials with knowledge of what the costs of the Piermont Green work is and who commissioned it?

kford Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think it's good. Just waiting for Lyndhurst Way > to be done, so I don't get any more punctures on > my bike. Are you aware of the difference between useful and necessary resurfacing a busy road like Lyndhurst Way - compared with a luxury resurfacing job, replacing a perfectly serviceable hundred yard access road that is used by only 3 households And surrounded by grass on each side where kids play football etc ? This is literally a private driveway/ footpath that was used every day with no complaint. And they are replacing the short characterful granite pillars that were there for decades with dull boring characterless expensive blocks of big standard road lining.

Here we go again - end of the financial year and Southwark are obliged it seems to waste money on completely unnecessary and wasteful road expenditure ' in order to maintain the budgets'.. I defy any Southwark officials with knowledge of this to defend the nonsensically expensive work that is being carried out on the Piermont Green 'road' that serves 3/4 households ( see attached photo): 1 - Surprise surprise this work is being done at the end of the financial year 2 - Who authorised this expenditure? 3 - How much is the budget? I once spoke to a team making speed bumps in Friern Rd and back then it was ?4k per hump. I hate to think what the repair to Piermont Green must cost. 4 - Can anyone suggest what this money could have been spent on? 5 - Does anyone have knowledge of the deal or obligation that exists between Southwark and the contractors? 6 - I would like to know on what grounds this repair is being carried out/ This should all be public knowledge. I am personally outraged at the waste of money.

I have just heard the following on good authority: In October last year a local person spent 3 days in hospital and had hand surgery after being bitten by a Malamute husky dog called 'Marlow' that is regular at Peckham Park. Since then the police had assured the person this dog would be muzzled and on a lead when it is out in Peckham Park, however the same person just encountered the owner 2 mornings running with the dog roaming free and unmuzzled. And the owner when challenged by the person who shouted abuse. Everyone should be very wary of this animal, who is transitioning from pup to full grown male and has the body power and jaws of a wolf. * * * Today I heard in the park from another dog owner that a husky was wandering around lost in the park close to the traffic and a teenage boy had tried to help find the owner. I've no idea if these two huskys are connected but certainly be on the lookout.

I heard a rumour that the Council is planning to install CCTV in Peckham Park by way of checking on dog owners and fining them if their dog is not on a leash etc? Is this just nonsense? What are the facts?

Today I was with my dog at the very spot that the pipe comes out of Peck Riverbank. Lo and behold a van Drives up with 'Drainage' emblazoned on the size. Contractors working on the site it seems? I asked them specifically about the pipe: they said it was absolutely nothing to worry about and that it was There to drain off excess water from the soil underneath the buildings and the surrounding area, Designed to improve the drainage of the land and make subsidence less likely

@gsweet87 - thanks! good tip

We have been using Virgin Media Broadband for more than a decade. Although it is getting better and better and more reliable ( SE22 near Peckham Rye) the service is vastly overpriced - I am sure they could provide it much cheaper. We have a package consisting of obligatory phone line with Virgin Number ( used to be for FAX but now never used and when it is connected we constantly got spam calls so just unplugged it). TiVo medium package ( which is very useful to be able to record programmes etc) and 100Gig broadband package which is mostly very reliable. I have kept a computer file since 2010 noting down every transaction, every outage and every problem - it also details the times when I get sick of paying so much money and threaten to move to another provider and they give me a little present of ?10 or ?25 pounds off my bill, and enough to keep me sweet and not actually take the risk of moving the whole lot over to another provider. Because I am self employed and rely utterly on a fast reliable broad band connection I dare not change, especially as we have the cable coming into the home. I have also found that when we have had a problem, Virgin Media have been outstanding at sorting it out and coming round, installing a new modem or whatever is needed to improve the system. The cost is between ?52 - ?56 per month. * * * I throw all this into the ring just to see how others feel about Virgin Media .. and one final thing though, which might be useful for people to know: when your broadband is down, and none of the modems in the home work, it is usually because they are repairing some major thing in the area. The problem is that they dont tell you .. and then your broadband is sticky or non functional and you dont know when it is going to back on. The technical number is 0800 052 0431 They will tell you if there is a problem .. but unless you ring you dont know. The other thing you wont be told unless you ring, is that once the technical problem is over, you need to switch off your modem and switch it back on again. But how would you know to do that unless someone had told you in the first place that the problem was fixed ? This means that you could be thinking it was out for days and in fact it had been fixed but you didnt know. So this means to be sure - when you have an outage, check with them by phone and once it is done try switching on and switching off. They often dont tell you that is what you need to do although it is on every recorded sound message

I went in to Boulangerie Jade today and bought something and wasnt aware in the slightest of any problem or any change. Not until I got onto EDF that I learnt about the change of management. I wish the new owners all the best - it is a wonderful facility to have locally and I hope it thrives.

How much did these cost? Who paid for them?

Resurrect Peckham Lido! I swam in it regularly right up to the legendary storm of October 1987 - which caused surrounding trees to fall into the pool. It suffered irreparable damage and never re-opened. You don't need parking. Everyone used to walk there anyway and there are still enough trees to form a protective leafy and woody barrier from the surrounding traffic which has not noticeably increased that much since then - unless I am completely mistaken.

Bill was an absolutely wonderful person and an asset to the community - he repaired many electrical items of ours for next to nothing, helped dispose of a TV we no longer needed and went to an elderly friend of ours house to help her set up her TV and DVD recorder. We still have in a our kitchen an inexpensive but very good music system he sold us with radio, CD, iPhone holder. I was very sad when he was obliged to leave his shop in Forest Hill because they wanted to put up the rent or something like that.. and am even sadder to read hear he has passed away. Those kind of souls are rarer and rarer these days and I send my warm condolences his close friends and family.

James Barber Wrote on 12th December 2016: ------------------------------------------------------- > It isn't illegal. We don't have the mechanisms to > differentiate parking between vans which block > sight lines and other vehicles. The good news > dramatically were crashes at this junction than > the past. Other junctions now need to be addressed > before we return to this unless the vans continue > - in which case double yellow lines is them out > likely result there. You do not have to be a traffic expert to conclude just looking at the junction that if there is one place that absolutely cried out for yellow lines it was this junction. Clearly nothing has been done about it since December 2015 .. and I hope the accident there tonight was not caused by obscured site lines.

I have just passed the aftermath of a collision between a P13 bus and a motorcyclist on Barry Rd - the bike and rider were on the ground with emergency services attending. The bus was stationary advanced across Barry Rd heading in the direction of Lordship Lane. The bike and rider were just in front of where it had stopped. I have no idea of the cause of the accident but it is on the very junction which I recently posted about ( see elsewhere on forum) One possible scenario is that the bike rider was coming down Barry Rd towards Peckham Rye .. that the bus driver's view of the traffic to his left was obscured by white vans? That said - when I passed the same junction an hour and half earlier the two white vans normally regularly parked in that vicinity were not near the junction? Conclusion for increasing future level of safety: erase the white diagonal lines and paint some yellow lines in Barry Rd at that junction.

Thanks James for this explanation - are you personally in favour of the blanket yellow line policy or advising against it? I am just curious to know ( i.e. this is not a hostile or challenging question :) I find the 'gm99' phrase 'end of year underspend' extremely useful summing up what I have described at more length in several posts. Would be interesting to know the real policy motives behind this. * * * Also - literally a few moments ago I just drove past the intersection between Barry and Underhill Rd where there has been a nasty looking collision between P13 bus and a motorcyclist. Without prejudging the issue I wonder if this has to do with the bus not being able to see clearly enough up Barry Rd Am going to post about this separately James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Lazero, Heart108, > The cost would be recovered in issuing tickets to > drivers who park on the proposed double yellow > lines. > > The council is currently working up plans for > emissions based controlled parking one fees. I > fear that removing around 2,500 car parking spaces > via these double yellow lines - and some should be > removed perhaps 2-3 metres at each junction to > make it possible to cross the road - is designed > to put sufficient parking pressures for people to > change their mind about controlled parking. > East Dulwich has made it's decision about this a > few years ago. > > Such double yellow lines has been recently > justified by Village ward councillors being > applied to thE North Dulwich Triangle area due to > the controlled parking zone being introduced.

Thanks for posting about the proposed yellow lines - I would not have known about it otherwise. Also good that there is a delay in making a decision: 1 - I can't see the purpose of making a blanket policy to paint yellow lines. Why incur the expense painting all junctions? Surely there could be a decision for expert traffic engineers with input from local residents paying attention to the junctions that really matter. 2 - What does it cost to paint 10k of lines? Where are the examples in other boroughs that this is worth doing? Is there a hidden agenda? ( i.e. that the Council 'need' to spend money/use up a bit of budget so that the spending grant each year is maintained? I have yet to find a logic for the expensive resurfacing of local roads that did not need it .. ( like sections of Upland Road a few years ago) which must have cost a fortune and was quite unnecessary. 3 - Better to have a team that goes out and does rapid/emergency yellow line painting where it is quite clear there is dangerous parking ( see my reply to the thread about Dangerous Parking on Barry Rd/Underhill Rd Junction) which is still continuing as we speak despite being mentioned on the forum last December.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It isn't illegal. We don't have the mechanisms to > differentiate parking between vans which block > sight lines and other vehicles. The good news > dramatically were crashes at this junction than > the past. Other junctions now need to be addressed > before we return to this unless the vans continue > - in which case double yellow lines is them out > likely result there. The white vans have continued to park on the corner - I have many times both on bicycle and car found it dangerous to cross Barry Rd from Underhill Rd in the direction of Lordship Lane. The same tall white vans are a problem. If there was ever a case for double yellow lines round the junction this is one of them.. I am amazed there hasn't been an accident yet. Would be great if you could bring this up at a meeting - especially in the context of the move to paint yellow lines all over the place. Better to zero in on trouble spots than a blanket policy

Will St Aidan's Road be open by then? Or will St Aidan's Rd continued to be blocked during this work?