Penguin68

Perhaps that, or possibly, since this happened in the very early morning, that this was a car stolen by an individual and, certainly, badly driven but perhaps by someone intent on reckless driving. Throw the book at them certainly, but perhaps don't add them to your 'all car drivers are careless b*rstards' list.

Goodness, I can't imagine why people bother with car insurance then, if this cover is so comprehensive.

It actually depends on how the user data is collected and stored and what uses the data can legally be put to. Once an individual bike has been checked as OK it is quite possible that the user data is disassociated from the bike and maintained simply as a charged use, so it may not be possible for any length of time to associate a journey with a person.

If this was, as is clearly possible, a stolen car then the chances of the driver being found and arrested are remote. So going on about banning the driver and making him or her pay for the damage is very unlikely actually to happen. Virtue signalling like this is anyway not pretty.

I believe that public transport was once excluded from central Dulwich, so if you wanted to take e.g. a bus to 'Dulwich' the Library was about as close as you could get and hence that became Dulwich for maps. The Estate thought that public transport was infra dig.

I think your second point is spot on - if the report the driver was seen fleeing the scene is true - a high performance car being driven possibly at speed, at 5.00 am (if those reports are correct) with a fleeing driver does suggest to me the possibility that the driver was neither the owner nor driving with the owner's permission - whilst I do not know, of course, it would not surprise me to hear that the car itself had been stolen, and possibly by someone neither fully qualified to drive, nor sober. In which case generalities about driver error etc. are perhaps not being properly directed towards 'your average car driver'.

ADSL over copper is obsolete, but until the copper is pulled you should be able to get a partial fibre service FTTC - (fibre to the cabinet) before full fibre to the premises (FTTP) is rolled out by BTs infrastructure subsidiary. If your current supplier doesn't offer this another will, including BT Retail, which may now be trading as EE.

At that time of day it may also reflect a driver having to alter course to avoid a hazard, or perhaps, because this is recorded I think above, an issue with poor of confusing road signage - this is a real issue where one-way roads are also two way for cycles, or where there is a confusing set of different routes with different restrictions or different signals. I personally doubt whether speeding is likely to be an issue at this junction in the morning in the 'rush' hour (anything but rush, of course). But maybe we should wait until there is a formal report on the cause before leaping to conclusions. Amended to note that later info suggests that the event took place at 5.00am, when speeding and driver error is more likely. The driver is reported as 'fleeing', I wonder if the car might have been stolen?

Was this before the snow started? The car does seem to be on the wrong side of the road. Fallen and decaying leaves do appear to be creating slip hazards but that sort of car should have appropriate electronics to overcome these. And weight. Had the car manoevred to avoid a hazard and ended up like that (better hit a traffic light than a person)?

Is there an electricity sub station anywhere in the vicinity?

But this is not about Hate Crime but about Non Crime Hate Speech. Which is in the eye of the beholder. My view would be the police should be handling crime and some other body non crime. PCSOs perhaps. Or Social Workers.

You are only covered for theft of the bike, not for accidental damage or injury, to yourself or others. Any general injury insurance you do take out will not cover injury to others caused by you.

Nobody would know because no force is collecting any statistics to see if actioning NCHS is linked to reductions in actual hate acts. The only basis for this is a paper written 70 years ago which hypothesised such a link. Face validity, rather than statistics, seems the basis for this.

There is also a Post Office at Mount Pleasant. Which isn't the Royal Mail Sorting Office for London. If you Google it it seems quite a large building, I doubt it's doing the trade that justifies it now.

I believe that Crown Post Offices are normally owned by the Post Office, and are frequently in valuable high street sites, so I would not be surprised if their sale value (or rentals to be derived if not sold) would be enticing, particularly for those offices running at slim or no profit margins. Happy to be proven wrong, of course.