rodneybewes

landsberger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually, the reality is > > i) they employ as few drivers as possible > (basically as many as they need to run the > service) > ii) they rely on "rest day working" (i.e. > overtime) to cover absences due to holiday or sick > leave > iii) they blame "driver absence" when it is > actually insufficient number of drivers in the > first place > iv) they ALWAYS claim there are lots of drivers in > training. Even Thameslink and Great Northern > customersa have been told that for years > v) the fines for not running the services are > pathetically small compared to the amount they get > paid to run them. They have no incentive to > change > vi) they are using LBG problems to a) cover their > driver absence stories and b) their poor > performance > vii) the government will never take on a group > like Govia. Connex were turfed off the franchise, > not because of poor performance (which was the > story leaked to the press) but because they used > money from the franchise to prop up other parts of > the business outside the UK. This. In spades.

stephen509 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oops egg on face moment. > > It went under a ?300k refurb earlier this year & > is now called the Elm Tree with great food and a > lovely big beer garden. > > Also has great live music by a blues band on > Saturday evenings. > > http://www.innovateidentity.com/news-blog/ > > rodneybewes Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Not exactly a hotel but a friend of mine > suggested > > we go for a pint at the William IV in Elmers > End > > based on this review: > > > http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/comments.shtm > > > l/23675/. > > > > Just as a flavour here is a quick point and > > counterpoint: > > > > "Those Of You That Live In The Beckenham Area, > > avoid this Dump of a Pub as Its full of wrong > urns > > and they are that desperate. Hopefully Its the > > Next one thats gonna be closed Down, they stick > > their signs on the pavement cos they cant drag > you > > In there cos Its always empty, every day and > every > > night... Always the same Pissheads and lowlife > and > > apart from that always empty. Dont Take My word > > for it, Just drive past and Observe... also The > > Beer and Food Is expensive and they think they > can > > con you into Lousy Karaoke and entertainment, > so > > they Lie, the toilets are fuilthy and the bar > > staff are Rude.... Avoid this Pub at all > costs..." > > foxmulder757 - 9 Jan 2014 22:33 > > > > and here is the reply from the landlords: > > > > "To "foxmulder757" well we all know you as > David > > Marks don't we? > > The facts are as follows. > > > > 1. You were barred from the William in August > 2010 > > for threats to burn the pub down and harassment > to > > two members of our staff. > > > > 2. There is currently a court order in place > > preventing you from entering the pub. > > > > 3. To our knowledge, to date, you have an > > injunction and currently four convictions in a > > criminal court for harassment against the > > aforementioned members of staff - Aren't you > due > > to stand trial again in a few weeks at Croydon > > Crown Court? > > > > 4. Aren't you breaking bail conditions for > using > > facebook? I'm sure the police would love to > hear > > about this. Do you really want to go back to > > prison? How was your month in Highdown btw? > > > > 5. Yes, I agree that the pub is in need of > > redecoration but you're not likely to see it > when > > it's done are you. > > > > 6. We are actually the cheapest public house in > > the area with Fosters at ?3.20 a pint and > Premium > > Lager at ?3.70. > > > > 7. Judging by most of the other reviews, they > are > > happy with the pub "Friendly and Welcoming" > seems > > to be the trend. You wouldn't know how friendly > > the pub is though as you can ONLY drive past > > because you're barred remember? > > > > 8. As for the "next pub to be closed", sorry to > > break your bubble, but we are here to stay > > > > As a footnote, enjoy your sad lonely life." > > > > Top notch reviewing but we decided not to go in > > the end. I'll probably give it a go now, although part of me is sad - it sounds like it's lost its old-school authentic charm...

Not exactly a hotel but a friend of mine suggested we go for a pint at the William IV in Elmers End based on this review: http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/comments.shtml/23675/. Just as a flavour here is a quick point and counterpoint: "Those Of You That Live In The Beckenham Area, avoid this Dump of a Pub as Its full of wrong urns and they are that desperate. Hopefully Its the Next one thats gonna be closed Down, they stick their signs on the pavement cos they cant drag you In there cos Its always empty, every day and every night... Always the same Pissheads and lowlife and apart from that always empty. Dont Take My word for it, Just drive past and Observe... also The Beer and Food Is expensive and they think they can con you into Lousy Karaoke and entertainment, so they Lie, the toilets are fuilthy and the bar staff are Rude.... Avoid this Pub at all costs..." foxmulder757 - 9 Jan 2014 22:33 and here is the reply from the landlords: "To "foxmulder757" well we all know you as David Marks don't we? The facts are as follows. 1. You were barred from the William in August 2010 for threats to burn the pub down and harassment to two members of our staff. 2. There is currently a court order in place preventing you from entering the pub. 3. To our knowledge, to date, you have an injunction and currently four convictions in a criminal court for harassment against the aforementioned members of staff - Aren't you due to stand trial again in a few weeks at Croydon Crown Court? 4. Aren't you breaking bail conditions for using facebook? I'm sure the police would love to hear about this. Do you really want to go back to prison? How was your month in Highdown btw? 5. Yes, I agree that the pub is in need of redecoration but you're not likely to see it when it's done are you. 6. We are actually the cheapest public house in the area with Fosters at ?3.20 a pint and Premium Lager at ?3.70. 7. Judging by most of the other reviews, they are happy with the pub "Friendly and Welcoming" seems to be the trend. You wouldn't know how friendly the pub is though as you can ONLY drive past because you're barred remember? 8. As for the "next pub to be closed", sorry to break your bubble, but we are here to stay As a footnote, enjoy your sad lonely life." Top notch reviewing but we decided not to go in the end.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The policy seems especially surprising when funds > are appropriated from the greener cleaner safer > project whilst there are parts of Southwark that > are dirty, polluted and unsafe. > > I would think residents in some parts of Southwark > where there is near squalor must be appalled that > the council can find money to reduce car use in > streets of privately owned houses costing a > million pounds or more. Is a pro-walking, running and cycling policy really that surprising? Your second point makes more sense but I don't see it as being linked to the first one. I presume you are talking about the Melbourne Grove debate but that's very much a local issue. By the way, I don't necessarily see the benefit in closing off Melbourne Grove.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fair point about the congestion charge "stick". > Although making driving a pain in the ass for the > sake of it just seems absurd to me. > > Clearly there is money to improve the transport > infrastucture, the crossrail project is a huge > undertaking and they're already talking about a > North/South Crossrail 2. This is exactly the kind > of thing that will make getting around London > easier for everyone. I don't think it's for the sake of it. It's to cut the number of vehicles down which has to be a laudable aim. I don't really see another way. Do you see one? I'd be interested in alternative views on that. Cross-rail is exorbitantly expensive. Through the roof expensive. And it's only designed to help increase capacity in line with the projected increase of numbers of people crossing London. You would have to multiply that a lot of times to start eating into the poor transport infrastructure in London generally. We'll be paying for things like Crossrail and the high speed link to Birmingham and the North for decades. They won't be doing many of those, that's for sure.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would agree, but I advocate the carrot instead > of the stick. i.e. proper cycle infrastructure, > increasing public transport frequency/capacity > (and no, bloody buses don't count). That's the problem with the current policy, the alternatives are awful. I think you need both. The congestion charge is an example of the stick, and it works well. I remember what central London was like before that. I genuinely think that improving public transport in London in the short and medium term sticks on one big problem - cash. The cost to improve the infrastructure now is so enormous that no-one can contemplate it. We can already see how the price of travel is outstripping inflation whilst delivering a worse service. I am surprised at the shock that policy is aimed at penalising vehicle transport in London. Surely we need to be discouraging vehicle use as much as possible. Making it smoother just increases the amount of traffic on the road. It's a zero sum game.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > But then, in his vocabulary, ED drivers are rats. Rubbish, rat-run is an accepted term to describe short cuts through residential districts that people use to avoid traffic on main streets elsewhere. You know full well he doesn't think ED drivers are vermin. Quite frankly I don't know why he turns up to this forum at all with some of the bollocks thrown at him.

JDR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I remember when you had the two sides to the pub. > One was for anyone, the other adult only. Think > pubs from my neck of the woods ( Lancashire) still > do! > I have three children and can't think of anything > less pleasurable than taking them to a pub. For > them, me and everyone else... I know what you mean. Kids were always outside in the garden. I'm a traditionalist in that I think pubs are for adults and restaurants for families. Would you take your kids into one of those legal cannabis caf?s in Amsterdam? I think not. An earlier poster did mention though that pubs are more and more touted as family friendly as they all now realise there is more premium to be made feeding people. Can't blame parents for taking the kids into pubs when the pubs want them in more than the drinkers. Is there a normal pub left in East Dulwich? By normal I mean one that is focussed on drinking and/or sports? I don't think so.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've just remembered - Rodney Bewes was the one in > the "Likely Lads" who WASN'T funny. His namesake > similarly isn't funny but he thinks he's some kind > of insulting Frankie Boyle comedian. > > There seems little point in carrying on this > debate so this is my last comment on this thread. > However, reading the comments of people like > rodney bewes (and not just rodney bewes), I'm > getting a better idea as why Cameron and his chums > won the election - the Thatcher culture of > "there's no such thing as society" and "sod you, > I'm all right Jack" reigns supreme today in this > country. There's insults and there's insults. And then there's calling someone a tory, the worst of them all. Entirely below the belt Tring. I won't reply in kind, I'll just wait for the highlights of your further tales of terror from Lordship Lane in the penny dreadfuls - Man Almost Rubbed Against By Cat (But Not) - Walker Almost Slips On Piece Of Litter (But Doesn't) etc...

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rodney Bewes, you are even wittier than your > "Likely Lads" namesake. No, I didn't have my leg > amputated and my world didn't collapse. But you've > missed the point. My main complaint is that the > mother didn't apologise for what had happened; > when my kids were young 25 years ago I would have > been most apologetic if something similar had > happened. If you think that the mother's attitude > was fine, then your moral values are different > from mine. It sounds like the classic grumpy old man story, shouting at 6 year old kids who've dared to come near him. Then you swore at the mum of the 6 year old kid who didn't touch you. I certainly hope our moral values are different. That's the trouble with our generations - we have no respect.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So it's OK for a man in his mid 60s with a bad leg > to have to jump out of the way to avoid being hit > by a scooter when the kid's mother clearly doesn't > give a damn? Clearly your values are different > from mine. Not what you said though was it? Are you sure you didn't have to have it amputated?

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > having a child on a scooter whizzing between the > tables irritating you is OK is it? > > > On the subject of these scooters, I was about to > cross at the Plough lights the other day when a > kid of about six nearly crashed into me. The yummy > mummy mother didn't even apologise. I said "These > bloody cycles ought to be banned!" to which she > replied in best Violet Elizabeth Bott tones "Ooh, > you're such a rude man!" > > The sense of entitlement of some of these people > is amazing. She clearly thinks that people of > retirement age such as me should jump out of the > way so that her little darlings can speed ad lib > along what is a pavement meant for pedestrians. No > attempt to keep her kids under control. The kid didn't hit you though? Just checking...

worldwiser Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Next year I'm just going to build a home office in > the garden. Just have to accept that no-one is > showing any sign of wanting to improve transport > round here. Half an hour to E&C is when things are > good! Wasting good people's lives. I don't think it's possible any more. There are just too many people and too much traffic. The aim is not to fit all this extra traffic into London, it's to make it so painful (or expensive) to drive that fewer people take to cars. Which is acceptable if they improved public transport. But they can't - it's so hugely expensive to upgrade infrastructure properly or to acquire new land to build extra lines and stations that the whole system is stuffed. Better cycle infrastructure would improve the situation in zones 1-4 but there are plenty who either can't or won't use it to get in or out. Barring a zombie apocalypse to reduce population the only real way to relieve pressure is to start changing working hours (where vast portions of the population don't do the 8.30 to 5.30 run) or to develop out of town hubs like Croydon and make them attractive to businesses as an alternative to the centre. Meanwhile the run into town becomes more hellish year on year...

If those Devon and Cornwall country roads had the traffic throughput of Bellenden Road they'd down tear the hedges and make it a dual-carriageway!

I've never met a cabbie who liked Johnson. Mind you I met very few who like Ken either.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This thread is a no brainer. > > If they are doing illegal things report them to > the police > If they are making excessive noise report to > Environmental Health > If they aren't doing either, speak to your local > coucillor about what can or can't be done. Thanks for the best laugh of the day with that one! No brainer indeed.

ed_pete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've been commuting for years and I fold my shirts > in a similar way to this (though fasten every > other button) > http://www.realsimple.com/beauty-fashion/clothing- > care/fold-dress-shirt > I then put the folded shirt in a thickish carrier > bag and pop this in my pannier. I'm sure Ortlieb > are great but I've been using cheap ones from > Decathlon for ages. It does seem a faff at first > but the freedom not to be bound to train departure > times and the currently awful platform 15 at > London Bridge will make it all worth while. It > also depends on what facilities you have at work > to store stuff and what showering facilities there > are. Same sort of thing but I pop the shirt into one of those A4 rigid plastic document wallets you can get from Rymans to keep it neatly folded.

I would second Ovo.

There's a whole bit on here about private and public parking fines and how to appeal them. Good luck. http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/

Maybe it's a target! :D That stretch has been 20 for a while actually, hasn't it?

... and most of the other boroughs in London, and now TFL on the red routes...

You probably have some good points in there but there's only so much rhetoric one can take before switching off.

I would fear for our cherished beer gardens too.

I was told there were a few late night parties there that required some police intervention (loud music etc rather than anything too revolutionary) so they fenced it off. Shame really.

Some twitter news trending that TFL is going to make red routes 20mph in London to cut 20,000 injuries by 2020. Not sure how reliable this is though...