Rockets

Yes it is highly likely it was caused by a road vehicle you but the presumption that it was careless or dangerous driving is exactly that - and a presumption lots of people seem happy to apply to any accident without ever bothering to check what actually happened. I remember when Dulwich Roads posted about an accident and suggested speeding/careless driving was the likely cause when it absolutely was not. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story and all that!

Ha ha....coming from the very person who suggested accident was not the right word to use....#where'sthefacepalmemoji! Aha! Clearly not...but they're all having a good guess on what they would love it to be - aka doing a Dulwich Roads! They live in a world where the driver is always, always, always the guilty party!

How you get to this conclusion is beyond belief....but oh so typical...

Ha ha.... So, should we no longer say I cut myself by accident....it was, after all, avoidable if one was paying more attention... Or...I accidentally dropped the mug on the floor...again avoidable if one was paying more attention Perhaps A&E also needs to be renamed to Avoidable Incidents and Emergency..... BTW is the "police accident" sign still used and in the Highway Code...perhaps you can lobby them to change that too...what do you suggest they use "police crash" - no as that suggests the police have crashed...maybe "Police incident invariably caused by a careless or speeding driver"...nah too large for a single sign..... Meanwhile, still no-one actually knows what caused the accident we are talking about do they..........? It's all gone so Dulwich Roads.... Good grief......

DKHB - accident also means a non-deliberate act - no-one goes out to deliberately crash a car - well the majority don't anyway. The fact you say: "too many still do not hold drivers accountable for their actions" also leans in to the suggestion that all accidents are the fault of drivers - again a presumption that really suggests blinkeredness. Yes, there are accidents caused by careless driving but there are also accidents that are, well, just accidents. Not every accident is the result of careless driving - despite how many would like them to be.

But still no-one knows what actually happened do they.... Of course, there is dangerous and careless driving but by presuming every accident is caused by this is blinkered in the extreme - but there seem to be a lot of people who suffer from extreme blinkeredness when it comes to such things...

Oh dear...I think the council and the local councillors really need to start answering some questions on what and why they spent so much on that square. And if these stones were shipped from India how on earth that tallies with a square designed to promote active travel and help manage the global warming crisis? It seems the vanity project may be an environmental disaster...what a waste of tax payers money. Another council, ahem, oversight perhaps? If this is all true the question we should be asking is can we trust the council to spend our money wisely?

According to police figures on reported crime these types of crime have been steadily increasing over a long period of time (on the figures I looked at for the Dulwich Village ward), it's one of the reasons that reported crimes are at their highest for 3 years. I suspect similar trends will have been seen in other wards too.

I am sorry, if you are two thieves who attack and injure a child to rob them of their phone then you are scrotes. That's not being reactionary, that's being polite...

But, a bit like a Dulwich Roads "report", you're guessing/hoping aren't you because you don't know and haven't established what actually happened.

Unfortunately, these types of attacks are increasing - it's been happening for a while now. Groups of thieves are targeting kids (and adults) in the area for their phones - it's organised groups of thieves working the area all, in the main, dressed identically, wearing balaclavas and masks and riding identical bikes.

Ok, so we're guessing/presuming it was careless or dangerous driving - its all gone a bit Dulwich Roads hasn't it? There are a many different reasons why things like that happen and often careless, dangerous driving or excess speed has nothing to do with it but it seems all too easy to jump to conclusions without ever bothering to establish the facts - again, all very Dulwich Roads. Not every accident is due to bad driving. As much as it could have been careless or dangerous driving it could also have been caused by a driver having to take evasive action to avoid a pedestrian walking into the road whilst staring at their phone - you just don't know.

But does anyone know what actually happened - that it indeed was careless or dangerous driving or are we all going a bit Dulwich Roads and presuming it was as a matter of default?

I saw the most amazingly stupid piece of cycling this afternoon at that junction. A middle-aged man and his son were cycling towards DV along Turney and, instead of waiting for the lights to turn green for cyclists, the dad tried to dash across the traffic on DV. But the teenage boy didn't realise his dad was about to try and play chicken with the traffic and so didn't go - his dad then grabbed him and kind of towed him through the traffic on DV and was narrowly missed by a Mercedes people carrier as they tried to weave their way through. They finally got to the other side and the nearly mowed down a load of pedestrians who were crossing under the green pedestrian light at the entrance to Dulwich Square. The dad did apologise to the pedestrians but his actions were so stupid and I am not sure what he was trying to achieve other than maybe save a minute or two.

Does anyone actually know what caused the damage? Was it dangerous or careless driving?

Does anyone know what caused the damage? Was it dangerous or careless driving?

Let's see how much of a fight is put up to not increase fares.... BBC News - Government wants London Tube and bus fare increase https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93qnpvdwj0o

Mal, to be fair Will has been trying to address that for years as it has been part of his strategic goals and it is clear whatever he has been doing hasn't been working - cycling still has a massive diversity problem and that ultimately rest with him (which is probably why he is "weighing up" diversity targets as the buck ultimately stops with him and Turkeys don't vote for Christmas!) Just take a look at the LCC's leadership team - it's very much reflective of the problem cycling faces.....https://lcc.org.uk/team/

https://amp.theguardian.com/news/2024/oct/31/cycling-clampdowns-city-councils-danger Interesting article as councils try to wrestle with the problem of bad cycling and the risks to pedestrians and balancing that with the need to promote active travel.

And I think therein lies one of the challenges - it appears (part of) Lordship Lane (and one presumes the part is the high street part) only gets it's first collection of the autumn on November 11th which may explain why, last year for example, there was such a problem with leaves as so many have fallen by then. Perhaps the council should prioritise high footfall streets as a matter of urgency.

I sense, because of the budget challenges the council are facing, that they have reduced the amount of street cleaning. It seemed last year that, Lordship Lane, for example, they wanted to let the majority of leaves fall before clearing them.

They seem to be popping up everywhere again.

Court Lane and surrounding streets are always good - in fact, many are already putting their decorations up now.

Mal, what are you going on about? The point I was making is that, like Boris, regional mayors often use their roles to springboard to bigger jobs. If you spend the whole time picking fights (ostensibly on behalf of your constituents) with the government of the day (who happen to be your political opponent) and then the moment the government changes to your own party and you stop fighting (on behalf of your constituents) then you look like a bit of a hypocrite and clearly you were only fighting because it suited the party agenda. The TFL funding issue looks like a prime example of this and, to be honest, the last thing Labour HQ need right now is a regional mayor kicking off and fighting on behalf of what is right for their area.

FM do you have the link to the session?