trizza

Yep no reception near the Herne (again...)

Bob I think you have a problem ...

Bob - serious responses only please - a turd cannot be good for cats.

Thanks this is really helpful . We have discussed with our friends. They were a bit defensive but said they thought there were loads of rodent birds like owls which their cats could kill so were essentially comfortable with the "food position". They also plan to leave the toilet seat open so the cats have a source of water. It all sounds ok to us.

Thanks for the input. I guess cats are predators who can find their own cat food if need be. I don't think our friends' cats have starved intentionally.

Just out with friends who say they leave their cat for up to 3 days . Unclear what the position is re food and water. Do you think this is a problem?

?!? Seriously - lead free petrol. This sounds like complete nonsense james!

Yes, if you have ?20K of possessions and ?10k of insurance then you are under insured. It's likely your contents insurance will contain an "average clause". Essentially, this will provide for the reduction of any claim settlement in proportion to the amount of underinsurance. So, in that example, you could potentially only get 50% of the value of the items insured up to the ?10k limit. A nasty surprise if you ever have to claim. It's really important to make sure you have the right level of cover.

I think this whole process has been really badly managed by Southwark. I live on St Aidan's and received the letter iro the junction on Tuesday evening - after the works had started! IMO Southwark doesn't really care about complying with any formalities when doing these works - they just make a decision and plow on. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this junction.

Unless it's structural or likely to have a significant impact on your neighbours I would not bother. Southwark will just end up charging you for a licence for alterations. This will take time and you never know what petty points they will raise. Some on here are likely to say this is risky because it's in breach of the terms of the lease and could have an impact when you sell etc. etc. Technically they are right. However, having sat on the management board of a company that owned the freehold of a large block in Southwark I can tell you that we did not have the slightest interest in investigating people who may have had work done without permission unless it was going to impact the rest of the block - an example being one person who installed a mezzanine floor in their flat which was installed into a load bearing wall. I would be surprised if Southwark adopted a different approach in practice - althought they would never admit to it.

I think Katrusja raises a number of fair points. I would love the extension but cannot really see how a double decker would navigate around the junction at the top of Forest Hill Road.

The extension would be great but the fact you can get the Overground from Peckham Rye now impacts the argument that the extension to Honor Oak is required to access that line.

This really is a non issue. As previously stated, main routes won't be impacted as Southwark don't have the power to impose a 20mph limit on them. Many residential roads are 20mph anyway. For those that do speed, the likelihood of any substantive enforcement action in 20 mph zones (or 30 mph zones for that matter) can be realistically assessed at around nil in any event.

Here is the unhelpful response I received from Vodafone Customer Services, suffice to say i'll be leaving. O2, Three and T-Mobile seem ok near Peckham Rye park: "Thank you for contacting Vodafone customer services. I am sorry to learn that you are unable to access our services for sometime as there is a Network fault in the signal site in your area. We aim to provide you with the services at all times, but owing to the nature of mobile telecommunications, it is impossible to provide a fault free service. The quality and coverage of the services depends partly on your mobile phone, partly on the Vodafone network and partly on other telecommunications networks to which the Vodafone network is connected. The services might be adversely affected by too many people trying to use the network at the same time, physical features such as buildings and under passes and by atmospheric conditions or other causes of interference and may fail or require maintenance without notice. Our engineers are trying to resolve this issue as soon as possible. I'll not be able to give you an exact timescale as to when the issue will be rectified. We appreciate your patience and understanding in this matter"

It does not matter. Most documents can be emailed over. There are really only two documents where you will need to send the original in the post (contract and transfer deed). The searches are applied for by post to the local council or, if urgent, you can pay a local agent to do a personal search or get search insurance - it all depends on what you want and what your mortgage company will agree to. You may find some firms have more experience of dealing with particular locales. For example, I guess a firm around ED might have experience of dealing with the Dulwich Estate so can give you guidance on that. You may also prefer the convenience of having a local firm and being able to drop documents off. I would be to stay clear of the large conveyancing factories. Our sellers used one (recommended by agent) and it was a nightmare. They lost the transfer deed twice (sent by special delivery) and ended up having to drive up to the midlands to hand deliver it!

Ortlieb all the way...excellent quality

I can see why if you live on those roads you would want them blocked off. By the same token, many residential roads in ED are used as as shortcuts or "rat runs". I don't think that this, in itself is a reason to block them off unless there is some other significant factor that makes them unsuitable for that amount of traffic (e.g. width of road).

henryb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree the enforcement of these limits is > appalling. If the police don?t have the resources > can?t the enforcement be allowed by private > companies or Traffic Wardens like it is for > parking? > > Its seems ridiculous parking restrictions are > tightly enforced yet speeders, who are endangering > others, are ignored. You really want to sub-contract the enforcement of criminal law to private companies? That's completely nuts. Some people will always speed. Absent installing average speed cameras everywhere (which is not realistic), the best approach seems to be traffic calming / cameras in key areas.

Another recommendation for Des - completely transformed our hallway and landing and put my efforts at painting to shame!

Definately check the property insurance premiums as well. They can be very high after subsidence and you are often locked in with the insurer who paid out on the subsidence loss as no other insurer will cover subsidence moving forward.

hippo come and pick them up

Longboy. Just staggered you think a 15hr party in a residential area heavily populated by young families is acceptable. Not sure many people would be that keen on approaching the "bouncer" on the door to ask them to turn the noise down.

Something a little odd has happened to this place anyway. I really like it but my other half went in on the weekend (saturday) not so long ago and there was a full blown disco on - couldn't hear themselves talk so left (although I am not sure if this is a one off). It's one thing having extended opening hours in a neighbourhood boozer but another thing if they are competing with places on Lorship Lane to become Adventure Bar mark 2.

There is/was a consultation about the road. Am sure there was a thread. As far as I can recall it mainly suggested more crossing points for pedestrians and some flower pots on railings further up the hill... Didn't a car also recently crash into the St Aidan's Road sign further down as well ... Southwark's response to the crash/es will probably be a) speed cameras; or more likely b) speed humps (lots of them). I hope the driver is ok.

It's possible, but unlikely I had to look at this issue before at work and had to engage a guy who undertakes searches of the public records office... However, that was a v old cottage in Mortlake with grounds, not a ED victorian house/flat. The bigger question is whether the church would bother claiming. Further, given the charge is usually calcuated by reference to the size of land, it's unlikely to be significant for an ED terrace...(as compared with say a country manor house with acres of land). I'm not aware of the church trying to recover for chancel repairs in any inner london authority like Southwark. That sort of story would be all over the papers. So, although your solicitor should advise you, i doubt you would be under any real liability risk. You can take out insurance for this (and the solicitor may well get a fee for referring you...). However, don't find out whether you have a liability first as this could impact on the cover! For what it's worth, I have some knowledge of these things and chancel repair liability was not something I considered at all when I bought a house here and I certainly did not think about buying insurance. The law is changing in October 2013 so that chancel repair liability will not be enforceable on registered land (i.e. bulk of residential properties) unless it is noted on property's registered title i.e. title deeds.