Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Nisha tells me that the council arrived last night and gave her 20 minutes to move all the veg back to the window or suffer its wrath, a display that as far as I can recall has been that way for twenty odd years.


Still, making her shop shrink its obtrusive display area should give a struggling Sainsbury's a much needed opportunity to establish a better foothold in the local market.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9507-trouble-at-vals/
Share on other sites

My memory of the boundaries for that parade is that the curtilage extends 12 feet from the shop frontages.


Val needs to check out where her boundary lies.


Unless the law has changed recently the council cannot stop her having a vegetable display within her boundary.


John K

Whatever the facts are, 20 minutes warning is hopeless. How can someone move a display like that so quickly? To do so in such a lightly staffed shop would take her away from dealing with customers and would potentially make the shop vulnerable to thiesves or shoplifters while the owner struggles with the external display.

This sounds like nonsense and a jumped up council official likely exceeding his power (possibly prompted by Sainsburys who have been disappointed at how many people are continuing to use the local shops) - it doesn't even sound like they provided any paperwork to back up their request. These sorts of things only usually happen when another trader complains.


Agree get James Barber on board.

Personally, I am not at all against Sainsbury's opening their store and I have started to use it simply because it does decent stuff and is local. I also still use Vals if all I want is some teabags or a pint of milk. I do not, however, approve of the COuncil getting arsey with any shopholder in the way described.

I was in there last night - the guy working there wasn't too clear about it but apparantly they have to apply for a suitable license to use the outside space. Something linked to new council rules. He didn't seem too bothered about it, almost as if it was a temporary problem.


Would like to hear what Nisha has to say about it. She may have more precise information.


*Edited for clarity and crap iPhone typing.*

eater81 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sounds like somebody at Sainsbury's is trying to

> turn the screw, probably some repulsive store

> manager who's getting told off by his bosses for

> the shop doing so poorly.

>

> SAINSBURY'S OUT!


Boycott Sainsbury's - placards,picket lines etc - it's the only way to get back at 'em!!!

You can't go accusing Sainsburys or anyone at Sainsbury's of this with no evidence whatsoever! What is this a vigilante thread!


I agree the council are being ridiculous but this obviously needs sorting through the proper channels, passing blame unnecessarily and without cause really doesn't help.


I for one are pleased Sainsburys have opened up this end, saves a nuisance treck to DKH to buy all the things (of which there are many) that the shops this end do not provide!

KalamityKel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> is this now about sainsburys then?


Well to quote Stevo above :-

"Nisha tells me that the council arrived last night and gave her 20 minutes to move all the veg back to the window or suffer its wrath, a display that as far as I can recall has been that way for twenty odd years"


Sainsburys arrive and in less than a month the small shops are getting hassled - perhaps just a strange coincidence.

Firms like Sainsburys have a huge influence on local councils and that's a fact. (Try reading "Shopped" by Joanna Blythman if you don't understand the facts).

I think it is a bit naive to think that this is just a coincidence. Of course it may be! But a similar thing happened to Dulwich Kebab further down LL - just after Bombay Bicycle Club opened next door the council raised issues over the terms of Dulwich Kebabs' licence to trade after 11pm (BBC being open to at least midnight I think) and they were forced to re-apply for their late-opening hours licence (or whatever its technical term is!).


The council doesn't trawl the streets of East Dulwich looking for shopfront displays in breach of regulations etc - it will have been prompted to look into this by a third party. I can't think of who that could have been....

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...