AbDabs

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > Sue Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > >> > > > Especially these days when many people have > > > uncarpeted floors and stairs, it's a bit > > > unreasonable to expect them to tippy toe > around > > > their own home :) > > AbDabs Wrote: > > > I don't agree with this at all. If you remove > the > > carpet then you should make sure that doing so > > does not create a noise problem. For that very > > reason many flat leases require floor coverings > to > > remain in place. > > xxxxxxx > > So if, as I do, you live in a terraced house where > noise travels between the walls on both sides, you > should not remove any carpet in case your > neighbours hear you walking about or running > upstairs? > > That's absurd in the extreme. > > The situation where you live in a flat and have a > separate upstairs flat above you with people > walking about on an uncarpeted or unsoundproofed > floor is completely different. > > Edited to make it clearer who said what. Why is it absurd? Wooden floors may be fashionable but without modern standards of sound attenuation the transfer of sound can be intolerable.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >> > Especially these days when many people have > uncarpeted floors and stairs, it's a bit > unreasonable to expect them to tippy toe around > their own home :) > > I don't agree with this at all. If you remove the carpet then you should make sure that doing so does not create a noise problem. For that very reason many flat leases require floor coverings to remain in place.

This is a great idea but how are Southwark going to reduce air pollution near schools? Will it involve banning cars near schools? It would be a great idea if everyone walked their children to school rather than driving (and leaving their engines running while they drop off and collect) but I can't see that going down very well with a lot of the parents.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I stand corrected regarding wardens in Southwark > ticketing those on white lines. I'm not clear why you're standing corrected. The ticketing of a vehicle on a white line is not because of the white line, which as you said, is entirely advisory. I suspect the wardens just woke up to the fact that there was a dropped kerb when the white lines appeared and it reminded them of a ticketing opportunity*. The law now makes it illegal to park in front of a dropped kerb but, like all illegalities, the policing of such is a matter of priority. If you're been blocked in then you can get police assistance to remove an illegally parked vehicle but if you not then it's not at the top of their in-tray. *Southwark allows residents to designate their drop kerb as unenforceable, thereby allowing other members of the family to park there, although this then means that regular traffic wardens won't ticket any other vehicle parked there, whoever they are. You're not allowed to drive across a pavement without a drop kerb (the construction of which will have included rebuilding the pavement to provide suitable protection to any underlying pipes/cables - including a reinforced concrete raft in some cases), and there are plenty of vehicles that sit rotting on driveways with a SORN notice so will never need access onto the highway, so it's only reasonable to assume that a normal kerb is an available parking space.

Siduhe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > KK, I looked this up while back for someone on > here. It is the drop kerb which is key and it is a > PCN offence to park across one in most of London. > The white line is a mere courtesy that some > councils put in place. Will find the post. > > Edited to add: > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?2 > 0,449655,449679#msg-449679 The white line is a relatively recent introduction and has no legal significance. It's an 'added extra' that now comes as standard with new dropped kerbs but there are plenty without. Absence of a white line is no defence if you get towed because you parked across a dropped kerb. There are some very nice people on here who want to avoid parking in front of a car that is parked on a driveway where there is no dropped kerb. I'm afraid I would never be that nice simply because I don't want to encourage anyone to drive across the pavement if it hasn't been properly rebuilt to facilitate that. Even if the driver is 'careful' and even if the paving slabs don't appear to crack, the increased downward pressure (without proper foundation) may cause considerable damage to pipework/cables running underneath. Someone's desire to save themselves ?1000 may end up costing far more that the rest of us will have to pay for.

Jacqui5254 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you want serene and peaceful, wide aisles, > large windows you have to pay for it through high > Waitrose prices. > > They have a price match with 1000 Tesco items. > That means that the remaining 8760000 items cost > MORE than Tesco. I don't think I could fit 8760000 items in my basket. I'll stick to the 1000 at low prices but with Waitrose's service and peaceful shopping experience.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm positive that embedding an RSJ into a party > wall requires a party wall agreement! > > If the developer is able to fix the damage very > quickly (i.e. days rather than weeks) and agrees > to draw up a party wall agreement for any other > similar future work, then I'd be inclined to let > it go. But if he is slippery about it, you need to > get in touch with the council asap. Anything that encroaches on your boundary wall (or beyond!) needs a party wall agreement so there should be one in place in this situation. But the point of the agreement is in part to record the condition prior to any work being done so I wouldn't let them do anything - certainly not repair - until you've had a surveyor check the existing condition and record the damage done so far. If they cover up the damage before an agreement is in place you may not have any redress later e.g if there are latent defects, as you won't have the evidence. The developer must agree to paying all your surveyors costs. I would be very concerned by the behaviour to date and Southwark council would be my first port of call.

Cassius Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't eat meat but I kill wasps - they appear to > be pretty pointless and can cause harm if they > sting. They're not pointless - a lot of wasps (huge number of varieties) pollinate plants. They also eat aphids so they should be the vegetarian's friend (as aphids cause so much damage to vegetable crops).

(Problem hinted at by Alex K) Does she keep the eggs in the fridge? if so, the temperature of the fridge may be too cold and/or inconsistent, consequently the eggs take a different amount of time to heat to the point that they start to cook. Now don't do this at home (as it might be dangerous boys and girls) but I keep eggs in the cupboard and never have a problem. Electric rings can be a bit slow to heat a pan of water and cooking does start before boiling. Is she using gas or electric? Are they the same size eggs? There is a weight/time ratio

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I actually drink my coffee black, only drink > herbal tea & when I do need milk, use Oat/Rice > Dream. > It is full of vitamins & calcium, available from > all major supermarkets, is dairy free & doesn't > come from cows! You know that Oat stuff you drink - you do know what they use to fertilise the fields where they grow the oats don't you? (Clue - a) hideously evil manufactured chemicals that cause havoc to the natural wildlife, b) that nasty brown stuff that only exists because of all the dairy cows (remember all those little boy calves who have to die...). Rice might be better, but I've never checked what country it comes from, so you might want to do a bit of research on what they use - it's pretty unlikely that anything that has been produced on a large scale hasn't had something to boost the fertility of the soil in a way that might make you uncomfortable.)

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > red devil Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > aquarius moon Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > Why not remove a snail from the pavement to > > safety > > > instead of treading on it? > > > > If you can train snails not to eat my plants, > we > > could have a deal... > > > Plants are probably actually here to feed snails. > As they are living creatures & need to eat. > > So why not share? > > Live & let live ! Um, where do you buy your vegetables? I'm an avid carnivore so I guess I don't care as much if someone's been nibbling the lettuces (that I've been growing in my garden!). I'm guessing that the average farmer growing veg for the urban vegetarian is trying to maximise his/her crop as there isn't a lot of land for a heck of a lot of people, so even if they're seriously wildlife friendly, that just means that they're using lots of organic slug killers rather than (nasty?) chemical* ones. Snails are only here because there is something to eat and nothing else has killed them, just like us I suppose. Annette - you do know that snails know the way home, don't you? *Factory made chemicals, rather than all the natural chemical combinations that we encounter in daily life - like you, me, the sea, the air etc

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 'I can't see a valid reason for anyone to peer > through someone's window on their private > property.' > > Bailiffs do this all the time.....so there's > one.... ;) I did this the other day because an alarm was going off and I wanted to check if anyone was in trouble. (They weren't - simply a fault, but I'd have been xxxxxx annoyed if my face got posted on this forum as a consequence of me trying to be helpful)

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Still very quiet on the Clapham Junction trains > when I was at Canada Water during the evening rush > hour, although they were only running to > Wandsworth Road due to a signal fault. Oh for goodness sake, will everyone please shut up. I've been sitting in a seat on my journey to work for the first time for years. Do you really have to tell everyone else about it?

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Recession that will kick in more especially when > middle class families lose child benefit next > April You've got to be kidding (no pun intended). Child benefit is a life saver at the sharp end but the loss of it is not exactly a life changer for those in the affluent middle classes. Perhaps I can see your thinking for Soup Dragon (middle class poppets spending the pocket money that those nice taxpayers across the wage range provide) but I can't see it having a significant effect along the whole of the Lane.

James - is there any summary of the changes from the previous application? I notice that the consultation period ends on 3rd January, which suggests they've tried to sneak this through while we're all rushing around with Christmas shopping/socialising/increased workload/holidays. A quick look at the drawings and the issues that caused us concern don't appear to have changed at all.

East Dulwich has changed every year I've been here (too many years to mention). I came because the housing was good (OK, dirt cheap) - the shops were depressing and then they got much much worse (3 butchers to 0). But then everything began to get better. And then it all started to get a bit expensive and I may have to move out (OK, make a fortune on the house and retire by the sea). People and prices make the place what it is, so when I leave it must lose a tiny bit of its present character(good or bad!). The more expensive property becomes the more pressure there will be on retail space to make ?/m2 to cover the ever increasing rents. So, if you're hoping to live somewhere with increasing value then you've got to be realistic about retaining that charm. In other words, No, it can't. If you're paying more for your house/flat than the last owner, then you've sent one more invite to Messrs McDonalds/Primark etc.

katesonic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Allotment holder... > > Had my first Peckham Pineapple Guava yesterday:). I'd be interested to know how long it took for them to fruit. I've got four plants grown from seed, now two years old. Can I expect a harvest in the next year or two?

Mmm, shall I be the first to suggest that perhaps M&S fancy having another (slightly more discrete) attempt at entering the East Dulwich marketplace? Sorry, maybe it's just a Waitrose.

The dog may not have been stressed in the slightest, just guarding what it perceived to be its territory, for reasons that only it would know. My brother had the softest mutt ever (lab/spaniel/god knows what mix) but when he had his first child the 'cute dog' suddenly started guarding everything. Natural instinct I guess. Absolutely fine if you were formally introduced - would immediately revert to cute dog mode, but any unknown stranger, however small, would send the hackles up. There must have been a first time before my brother realised what was happening. I'd never approach an unknown dog without checking with the owner first but then I grew up in the country where a lot of dogs were working animals and not what you'd consider pets. I'd hate to see all dogs on leads at all times; although it might stop the rare occasion of a good dog turning bad, the majority of dangerous animals are that way because they are mistreated, and those sorts of owners don't take any notice of legal restrictions.

Burbage Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There's a bingo hall at the Elephant. And they do > tea dances at the Blackheath Halls. But I can't > think of anything nearer. That's not to say the > seniors don't get out for a natter once in a > while, but the Post Office does neither drinks nor > dinners. Mmmm, I think it may be your age Burbage. Bad eyesight comes to us all eventually. The OP said 50, not 80

mynamehere Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I had no idea what these T Brown vans were. > Interesting how Southwark plays a parking game. > Today I saw these vans "waking up" and as they > blocked traffic in all directions yielding to no > one they drove with one hand as they all made > phone calls > > What about these vans using and paying for > Sainsbury parking overnight? I'm pretty certain that the majority of these vans are not staying overnight so Sainsbury's car park isn't an option. The reason that they think that they can (and do) get away with parking so badly is that the drivers stay in the vans or are very close by so are ready to move if a traffic warden arrives (So a CPZ wouldn't help). When I walk to the station at just after 7 there are frequent arrivals. I think they are simply getting ready for the day's shift; to clock on, hand in yesterday's paper work and get their work orders for the day. If I catch a later train I sometimes see them starting to leave for their first jobs. They're clearly working on behalf of Southwark, although they may also be using that office to service their jobs in other boroughs. If they park carefully I wouldn't complain but they're getting lazy and those parking right on the corner are dangerous. Hopefully James will be able to encourage a little consideration on their part.

James, the problem with the T Brown vehicles has suddenly escalated. The last few days there seem to have been far more, with continuous parking all round the corner, which is highly dangerous. I noticed this morning that not all of their vans have company livery so the true number is much higher than it may first appear.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I guess we need to find out the most effective > method of dealing/reporting such messes . > > Presumably emailed photographs of the offending > areas . > > But I'm not sure who to send to or who to escalate > to if no action taken . > > Who can advise - James ? Email environment@southwark.gov.uk with a photograph. If they don't react in a reasonable time, resend the email stating 'It is now X days since I notified you.....'. Some issues will have specified response times so you won't get a 24hour response to something that could wait a few days (it may have been there for a week but the clock only starts when you notify) General wording is less likely to get a reaction than something specific. Be very clear where the problem is ie which house it is outside. And you need to put your own full name and address on the email Including wording that prioritises the issue - if it's dog faeces in a children's play area, highlight health and safety, and possible negligence - helps enormously. If you've witnessed someone slip on rubbish/leaves, say that you're prepared to be a witness in court. I've never had to escalate it - the most emails on the same issue was three to get a response (they were going through a bad patch). I'd never bother phoning them - if it's not in writing it's easily 'lost'.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have a problem with a collapsed drain under the > back garden > > It is worthwhile checking with Thames Water - > although if it is a soak-away (a drain to take > e.g. rainwater from gutters or even from the > kitchen sink) away from the house, but not them > connecting with the public sewer (foul water) > system it may not the utility's responsibility. > Actually, I think a kitchen sink should link to > the sewer system, but sometimes rain water from > gutters doesn't. It may also be that Thames Water > takes responsibility only from the public sewer to > the house (which would normally be a route which > ran through the front but not the back garden). > However some houses have linked drains where they > link at the back of the house - so a number of > houses link together and exit into the public > sewer through a single link serving more than one > house. > > It's worth checking anyway. www.cila.co.uk/files/private-sewers-leaflet-june_-2011.pdf . If the pipe that has collapsed carries drainage from more than one property (with an intended final destination of a sewerage treatment plant) then the utility is responsible (ie shared drainage = public/private sewer - doesn't matter if it's in the front or back garden). If it's only carrying your roof drainage to a soakaway, or if it only carries your drainage on your property, then it's down to you (Any pipework - even a single household drain - outside your property's curtilage that leads to a sewer is their problem now). It would be interesting to know why the insurance company refused the claim. Even if the utility is responsible that won't stop it passing charges on to you if you've done something that caused the problem - eg damaged during building works.

VanessaPMR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone know why the logical policy of fining > people who don't pick up after their dogs isn't in > play? > You can't fine someone if you don't know who it is. If you know who is causing the offence (name/address and regular time of dog walking), contact Southwark and there is a chance something can be done about it.