Rockets

Gemma, whilst your caring nature has to be commended I fear making a point of highlighting this gentleman's plight to his boss will have a negative effect. I am sure his boss is fully aware of the situation and highlighting it to him will probably only result in the guy in the shop being sacked. Also, for a multitude of reasons, I would probably edit any reference in your post to where this shop in question is.

njc97 - merely pointing out the way that everyone now wants to use fines as a way of generating revenue. Was sarcastic to the guy after he had threatened to arrest me (which the head of park's police later told me was not following procedure and would have been illegal itself). Also, the bigger worry is the damage these parkies, sorry "police officers" do to the reputation of the police in general. I have never had any reason for the police to stop me for anything before and this jumped-up, glorified metermaid (park's police get six weeks training yet carry handcuffs, wear the same uniforms as the police - most police want rid of them as they are council police not police) was the most abnoxious person I have ever come across. The power had obviously gone straight to his pretend police hat!!! ;-)

I got stopped by some over-officious, jumped up, wannabe policeman in Battersea Park (they have their own very contorversial Parks Police) some months ago for cycling on Carriage Drive. This plastic policeman threatened to arrest me as I could not identify myself with photo id, so I offered him my wrists to cuff me and he lost interest then. He then took my details, phoned my pregnant partner to identify me (and ignored my request to treat the call sensitively as most folks who receive a call from "police" to identify a cyclist are receiving bad news) and then said I would be fined anything from one pound to a million pounds (I am not joking he really said that). Took his number, wished him a good day catching violent criminals and went about my way. Wrote a letter to the head park keeper, sorry I meant park's police, and he went into great detail explaining what a manace to society cyclists are and how the fabric of society will crumble if cyclists use Carriage Drive in Battersea Park. Nice little to and fro going, someone even added the CEO of Wandsworth Council to the thread, but suddenly parkie, sorry I mean park's police, lost the will to fight after I pointed out the complete lack of no cycling signs on some entrances to Carriage Drive. I then got a lovely letter telling me how the solicitor of Wandsworth Council had decided not to send me to court and fine me but that I had been a very, very naughty boy and should not do it again. I know this is very different to being caught cycling on pavements but I think councils now see cyclists as another way to generate revenues. A policeman friend of mine quite nicely pointed out to me that if a parkie, sorry park's police, tries to stop me again and he is not wearing a high visibility jacket I don't have to stop and can quite legitimately run him over (apparently it is something to do with PACE)!!!

Could it have been part of the card fraud clampdown going on at the moment?

Sounds like by doing what they did the Somerfield staff will probably end up on the receiving end of an assault charge and probably lose their jobs and the shoplifter will end up with handsome out-of-court settlement so he will probably not have to shoplift for a while. Now, if only he had been resisting then they could have slapped him about a bit and taught him a lesson the courts would never do.......

I was in the petrol station on East Dulwich Road and their chip and pin machine has gone to be replaced by a note saying they have been withdrawn. I suspect everyone is having a good poke around the machines just to make sure none of their staff have fitted something illegal into them. Kind of makes you laugh that the whole industry, despite all of the millions invested in security has potentially been undone by staff who use the machines in store - so I ask the question, does that make the store potentially liable for the loses rather than the banks? Just a thought.

Did I hear correctly somewhere that the banks insure themselves against the fraud and thus are not too keen to deal with the problem as they are the insurers and the insured. It seems to be such a huge problem that all the banks seem incapable of countering. It was not that long ago that I got a card reader from Barclays that I had to use everytime i logged onto internet banking which all seems a little pointless when no-one ever needs to get online and abuse my account they just ask a friendly petrol station attendant to take a webcam pic of both sides of my card and then use it in some country far far away and will never have their collar felt! And the irony is that now the card is blocked I cannot go online to check to make sure no-one has been buying things in that country far far away!

It does amaze me that we all seem to know about the dodgyness of some of the employees in our local stores/petrol stations etc yet no one seems to be able to do anything about them.

I just found out from Barclays that my card has been done and they found out when the city of london police raided a house and found my details on a laptop along with thousands of others. I do hope the owners of said laptop enjoy their time being detained at her majesty's pleasure as I am now unable to withdraw any money or use my card and I go on holiday tomorrow!!!

I had problems with freeview when using indoor aerials, could only get two channels and even then the quality was awful but as soon as we got an external one put up the reception for both was fine. Aerial engineer who came said the indoor aerials don't work so I took one of them back to Currys and the spotty sales boy said exactly the same thing that they get loads returned and the only way to get good coverage is to use an external.

Went through there last week (albeit with hand luggage only) and it all went very smoothly, although make sure you don't wander around the shops too long to get to some flights takes about 15 minutes of small trains, hundred of escalators and a lot of walking!!!

We received this idea this morning and I have to say I am not impressed. I live on one of the roads that already has speed humps and they are proposing more along the road. This will not slow anyone down - there is plenty of research to suggest that speed humps cause more accidents as people accelerate more between them, not to mention the additional environmental damage caused by them. What annoys me about this is that the council opens their letter by saying that "the urban speed limit of 30mph is PERCEIVED to be broken by many drivers". Why don't they go out and find out whether it is or isn't instead of suggesting the roads are filled with speeding maniacs. Yes, there are people who will speed round the roads but they will do that whatever measures are in place. From my experience the worst offenders are the buses - especially the P13 bus as they shoot along Underhill Road. I would like to know where these 113 collisions in three years took place as I suspect many happen on the road junctions in the area where line of sight is obscured by parked cars or worse (I am thinking of the removal truck that makes one of the junctions along the Lordship Lane end of Goodrich a nightmare to negotiate). How many of those collisions were caused by parents ignoring parking restrictions to drop kids off at school? How many were caused by people trying to drive down the middle of the road to avoid the incessant bouncing of the cars along speed humps? Without this level of detail it appears the council is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Traffic management is no longer about trying to slow people down - look at the experiments underway on Kensington High Street and other places where luddite traffic calming measures are being removed to be replaced with sloping pavements, no barriers etc. Whilst these measures may not work in ED it shows that sometimes more creative thinking is required than just sticking lumps in the road. We have plenty of lumps in the road and this looks like an admission by the council that the current traffic calming measures are not working so they will throw more of the same.

I suspect the arrival procedures (known as STARs) have been changed and I bet it is because the new holding areas for Stansted and Luton are pushing planes further south on their approach to Heathrow. Why does the cynic in me also suspect the changes may also have something to do with the third runway plans. A bit like Red Ken changing the phasing of the lights in London before the congestion charge came in! Either that of a government minister has complained to BAA about the noise above their house in Chelsea and has got it changed!!!

???? - yes I had to use commercial airlines because my Learjet is in the garage being converted back to 4-star leaded!

I think they may have started routing the planes on a more southernly pattern going in Heathrow. I came in from the West on a flight and our approach took us to the north of london, turning over the Dartford bridge and then round over Crystal Palace rather than straight down the river as they used to go. Are the folks hearing more aircraft noise living more towards the Forest Hill end of ED? I live up that way and today every plane was coming in over our house rather than just a few as it used to be. They changed the holding patterns for Stansted and Luton a few weeks back and I wonder if that is forcing planes further south over London.

Loads of cabbies have said to me that they never used to get fares to ED and now go there all the time so the revolution is happening. Is it true they have to take you if it is within six miles of central london?

Profitable sledge-hammer to crush wrong nuts me thinks! According to the guy at DVLA I spoke to they do not send reminders anymore - it's your responsibility to do tax discs it. Funny how that stopped at the same time they started clamping people!!! Interesting that despite the extra vigilence on the wild, dangerous streets of East Dulwich you still get pestered by unlicensed cabs in the wee hours of the night in central London!!! ;-) Two more cars done on my street - lucky buggers - two weeks of not getting round to something is an expensive business nowadays and if you don't pay the fine in three days they lift your car and crush it - MOT and insurance or not!! It's funny how many of these dangerous untaxed drivers seem to drive the smarter cars in the neighborhood! Apparently they note down the date of expiry of cars on the street and return to the area if it is going to profitable! You have been warned!!

They do that every month - I got done some months ago and was on a business trip abroad and they were so inflexible. I pointed out to them that what they should be doing is doing something about the hundreds of unlicensed, untaxed, uninsured mini-cabs that tout around central london at night rather than clamping folks who forget to renew their tax disc!! A 200 quid release fee and a further 82 pound fine is a nice little earner for them and an expensive lesson for me! ;-)

My suggestion would be that our dear friends at Southwark council would not be as lenient as Ruislip and give an hour for free. In fact, I have never seen a first hour for free parking zone south of the river. Guaranteed the people who advocate CPZs now are the ones who would be complaining about over-zealous metermaids enforcing the parking regulations, clamping cars and towing away. The fights I have seen in Iceland car park over the clamping of cars parked in bays designated for non-Iceland use is amazing. Leave the lane as it is, it is a perfectly functioning commercial ecosystem and the inconvenience of not always being able to park outside your house or your preferred shop is not too much of an issue. And the parking issue will not go away if you introduce CPZs. I am with NorthernMonkey on this one - CPZs are cash cows for councils - look how many now have night metermaid patrols and enforcement.

Cos the council will see the good shoppers on the lane as a nice cash cow and charge about 2.50 an hour for parking and that will encourage a lot of folks to park in Sainsbury's and shop there instead, thus killing off a thriving local shopping community on the lane. I used to live on Chesterfield Grove and the parking was bad there but only really at lunchtimes and Saturdays, which suggests the issues are those folks popping to the shops during lunch hours etc. 2.50 an hour would deter them. Oh and the Bushell's cars which I think should be banned as a matter of course!!! ;-)

Any form of controlled parking would kill the lane as we know it - unfortunately we all have to live with the inconvenience and that is a small price to pay for the good stuff happening along it.

Is the crossing out due to the filming - seem to think it was not working at the weekend?

Well he has a steady stream of punters - every morning when I run past there on the way to Dulwich Park there seems to be two more white vans full of men, women and children turning up there. Always wondered whether it was housing asylum seekers and now thanks to the forum I know!!!

We caught come collateral egg damage as one of the little thuglets pelted the house next door but had all the accuracy of Lampard playing for England. Later in the evening some more knocked at our door and pointed out said egg and, as I went to get some sweets for them, one of the treaters said "we know who did that, it was..." but was gagged by her bigger sister! We only had two knocks at the door all evening and I reckon the eggy mess on the floor outside detered all but the most hardened treaters.

Pedestrianising LL could be the death of it as we know and love it. Whilst us folks lucky enough to live within walking distance are able to amble down to our favourite eatery/coffee shop/bar/purveyor of fine baby buggies (delete as applicable) LL thrives off passing trade. The easy parking on the Lane itself ensures folks use our local shops instead of the Sainsbury's. Northcross would work much better and I would be all for it.