first mate

I think we all have rats within 6-9 feet of us pretty much anywhere in the city environment. They live in sewers and anywhere else they can get a ready source of food, most stay clear of humans as a survival mechanism. In this case, I'm sure it is no reflection on how clean your house is- merely the mix of a bolder rat, wram weather and opportunity.

I think the key point is that it is patient led- therefore if the patient communicates that they are at the end then the LCP can help the last few days/hours. The patient has already started to refuse nutrition and possibly fluids too, this has not been imposed on them. Should they then ask to drink they would be allowed to. It is my understanding that the LCP has been abused/misunderstood and, for instance, seriously ill patients wanting to drink have been refused because they are on the LCP- that is clearly wrong and scary and not the way the LCP is meant to be used.

The possibility that domestic cats may have ended up in the trap is rather worrying- I would certainly want to know more about that and whether there is any truth in the allegation. I have noted a large number of foxes around that area and so it is entirely possible that some trapping is going on but it would be nice to know that this is being properly managed and with a minimum of suffering to the animals trapped.

oh steveo, shssssssh!

malambu, I think that the expert view is that if used properly the LCP is a good thing but there are serious concerns that is has been used inappropriately and has therefore caused/hastened death where this was not the best/only outcome.

I think for someone to take an action as extreme as this is absolutely intent on ending their life and almost certainly would not have expected to survive. The degree of anguish this woman must be in to have done what she did is probably and thankfully beyond the understanding of most of us. I hope that she and her family get all the help they need. I also hope that the driver and witnesses get plenty of support and understanding.

I hope that someone from the school is reading this as they may find themselves on the wrong side of the law. No animal, even a fox, should be caused protracted or unnecessary suffering. By law a trap must be inspected every 24 hours and the fox released or humanely dispatched. It is a bit of a grey area, but given the recent high temperatures, the ease of access to the trap, and the density of the urban fox population, it is arguable that the trap should be inspected much more regularly and that the fox should not be in the trap for very long at all. I would contact the school and ask what is going on and who is managing the trapping.

Moonlaunch, I read your first post and found it most inspiring, in particular your references to the original design of these old terrace houses to ensure that each neighbour has some sense of space and light along the side return. I agree, if your neighbours need more space/light than they are currently getting from a double-fronted 4 bedroom house, then perhaps they should go and buy another house. I do not believe this is about 'need', it is about 'want' and is arguably a type of greed. As I have said before, in building a larger, airy and light-filled space for themselves, your neighbours are quite happy to block your light and wreck your outlook. I find the selfishness of this sort of mindset hard to fathom. Please let us know how you fare and more power to your elbow. I truly hope that the various councillors who visit this website also acquaint themselves with your situation. Might I suggest that you cut and paste your first post to James Barber's thread. Good luck

To my uneducated eye they do look almost identical but the markings on the thorax are different and DJK's has a slightly plumper abdomen. But, the OP's spider also has horrific-looking prongs sticking out of its bottom. Perhaps we cannot see those on DJK's spider because of the angle of the photo..........? I hope so as the prongs might signify a different type of spider...euuugh!

Borderlands, Thanks for this. It sounds worrying. Anyone with experience of 'new model' GP practices like Melbourne Grove/Concordia will have a sense of where our services are bound.

EG, No if you are out with your dog and your dogs crosses a road, either with you offlead or on its own off lead, you are breaking the law- presumbaly the idea is that offlead dogs have no place on a public highway. I ceertainly understand your anxiety about offlead dogs coming at you and your dog. One tip is to always keep some high value treats, like a little pack of cheese cubes (you can chop them up yourself). If you see a strange dog approiaching offlead simply throw a handful of cheese cubes away and in front of you and hopefully the dog will focus on scoffing those while you cross the road and put as much distance as you can between you and the offlead dog. The other tactic, if you can't get away, is to draw yourself up to your full height, put your hand out in front of you like a policeman's stop sign and tell the dog to go away, or to sit . Obviously try to put yourself between your dog and the other dog. Don't be aggressive just be calm and assertive.

It is my unjderstanding that in law the issue is the behaviour of the dog rather than if it is on or off a lead. Bizarrely, a dog that was on a lead but managed to viciously attacked a dog off a lead might render the owner holding the lead liable. It is an anomaly that needs sorting and I agree we need legislation to make having a dog on lead on the street mandatory and not just subject to bye laws. However, the two dogs you describe are clearly not under control as they moved away from their owners. If the dogs jumped up at you they might render their owners liable under the DDA if you felt intimidated or under attack from those dogs. What is little known is that while it may be lawful to walk a controlled dog offlead, you are not allowed to cross a public highway with your dog offlead. The problem I think is the definition of 'control', but a dog being on lead is not proof of control per se, though it is likely to be a mitigating factor.

Assuming your dog was seen by a vet to have the wound cleaned - and it is always best to make sure, don't just leave it- I'd send your neighbour the bill. If you had witnesses you could think about legal action. People like this make me furious, it is so irresponsible. Moreover, this staffie owner has clearly demonstrated that their dog is not under control in a public place. You are right, having done it once it is more likely to do it again and the next dog may not come off so lightly.

I am told by a number of extremely stressed friends within the 'system' at Director level, that the damage (and damage is the word) is irrevocable.

Hi James, Do you know for how much longer the double yellows along one stretch of Melbourne Grove will be in place ofr? The work seems to have finsihed now.

David S, You seem to suggest that a neighbour would have to accept some loss of light- so long as it does not exceed a certain amount of loss- is this correct and how is the 'percentage' value calculated? In two of the cases I know of the loss of light was great and the outlook onto a high expanse of brick wall, only 4-5 ft from the kitchen side window, was depressing and oppressive, with the kitchen cast into constant gloom. You say it has nothing to do with shadow- is it the case that the infill you designed does not cast a longer shadow than any part of the original house formerly? I am not saying this could not happen but I am intersted to know if additional shadow has been completely avoided in your case, so that there is no loss of light? What is your view about those who build out both along the outrigger with an infill extension as well as onto it, as in a large loft conversion? I'm sure you would agree that the overall shadow cast, as well as the loss of light, would be considerable. In the cases I refer to each had an infill as well as loft extension, both building up to and onto the outrigger- they look awful too.

I can undersdtand why Louisa was peeved too. The buggy owners tutted because she didn't ask them to move and would possibly have tutted if she had done so. Sometimes, you don't want to have to ask people to move, you want them to pick up on the bleedin' obvious.

I'm wondering where this plentiful supply of succulent East Dulwich owls is? It'd take a brave and extraordinarily agile cat to catch one. I've never heard of anyone leaving the toilet lid open for their cat to sup from. Overall this thread is a bit of a hoot!

It looks like there may be a few cases launched for right to light/loss of light too.

Cam123, the cases I know of are both single-fronted terraces with, as you say, narrow side returns. Effectively the wall to the extension is as little as 4 -5 feet from the neighbouring property; the properties with side extensions also have loft extensions which take light- the overall effect is incredibly oppressive, the neighbours have lost whatever sense of space there was. Having looked briefly at the new regs, it seems that the rationale behind the new PD is to turn unused retail units into dwellings and to provide more homes for our burgeoning population- unfortunately however, it also gives carte balnche to more of the above.

gerry , Again, so sorry.

Yes the SNF team is a good idea. I'm not suggesting thsi is the case here but there have been reports of nasty things happening to dogs in other parts of the country, so it is good that local police at least know this might be the case. I'm guessing that as the dog was heard by a neighbout in the early hours of the morning that you must have been out? Were you broken in to for the dog to be able to get outside the house on his own? Was he outside and possibly taken from your garden? Anyway, I hope you get some answers, the collar just seems odd- especially bits missing.

gerry, How horrible- this must be extremely distressing for you and I hope you are able to find out what has happened. It is not a nice thought, but I wondered if you has considered a veterinary autopsy which might at least help determine the cause of death. That might give some pointers. Have you reported this to the police? The collar strikes me as very odd. Again, I am so sorry, please let us know if you find out more.

LM, that is really useful- thanks.

LM, Don't know height but ceratinly higher than the 7ft'ish fence they had there before. John K, I'm sorry, but are you suggesting that it is impossible to devise an extension that would not affect the neighbour, or that I must be mistaken in suggesting that the impact I perceived was negative?