|Posted on Wednesday, 15 September, 2004 - 11:10 pm: |
Are any other residents on Waldenshaw Road/Manor Mount/Pearcefield Avenue driven mad by Sainsbury's deliveries? During the week, they are not supposed to deliver before 7am and on Sunday's before 9am. Needless to say this is constantly flouted. Clearly, Sainsbury's is open to take deliveries because the lorries arrive and leave before these times. The managers are therefore deceitful- amongst many other things (getting proverbial blood out of a stone is easier than an answer of when the redevelopmant is happening). Nearly every day lorries get trapped at the junction of Pearcefield Avenue and Manor Mount. These roads are simple not designed for them. Also, how inconsiderate is it for a lorry driver to sit outside your window with his engines on whilst he reads a newspaper, and is abusive when asked to move? I for one am sick of the amateurish operation that this supermarket runs...no wonder they made the biggest losses last year.
|Posted on Tuesday, 02 November, 2004 - 01:06 pm: |
I used to live in Manor Mount and launched a campaign against Sainsbury's about this with the slogan Sainsbury's - making life taste bitter for local residents. Even the Chairman at the time, Peter Davis, wrote to me assuring me the problems would stop. After more than a year of pressure and articles in all the local papers it got a little better but not much.
Basically Sainsbury's drivers, local, and regional management didn't care, and head office seemed incapable of doing anything. The store manager knew less about when deliveries came that we did. Drivers broke over a dozen laws, and I was frequently threatened and verbally abused by them when I complained. Lorries much bigger than legally allowed on those roads were arriving 24 hours a day, parkling on pavements and waking residents, leaving radio's blaring and engines and refridgeration units on. One morning I went to complain to one driver parked on the pavement outside my house at 5am with his radio blasting music out and found him masturbating over a porno mag. Other drivers used to get out of their cabs and urinate against garden fences or even on the side of their lorries.
Local politicians were just as useless as Sainsbury's at dealing with it. Someone from Jim Dowds office told me 'I shoudln't have bl**dy moved there then'. Local councilors seemed more concerned about upsetting Sainsbury's than my concerns. They went to a meeting with Sainsbury's but unbelievably, not only didn't tell myself or local residents in advance, but didn't invite us either.
The Police said they couldn't do anything, and the council said that even though the lorries were breaking parking laws, all their traffic inspectors went off duty from 6pm to 8am, so there was nothing they could do. They promised to measure noise polution, but 18 months later, when I moved out, they still hadn't.
|Posted on Tuesday, 02 November, 2004 - 02:02 pm: |
One suggestion - which you may well have tried is to contact the depot the lorries come, which very probably for Forest Hill is the one in Charlton - on Anchor and Hope Lane.
They might be interested - you never know ........ even if it's only on the isuse of the conduct of the drivers.
From the timing of the delivery and the store delivered to, they'd be able to identify individual drivers.
|Posted on Tuesday, 02 November, 2004 - 09:07 pm: |
That sounds terrible Mark. I live on Manor Mount now and though things are better than you describe, I have experienced the same incompetence from the store managers and abuse from the drivers. I have called the police a couple of times because I was physically threatened. You do feel helpless being shunted around from one person to the next when you phone up to complain. Sometimes I think that the council and Sainsbury's are in cahoots. Funny how the wardens are willing to slap a ticket on a car parked for all of five minutes on the double yellow line but turn a blind eye to a driver having a snooze for an hour (usually with his refridgeration unit on). Also, I might be being cynical here, but disabled bays on tricky corners (thereby keeping them clear for huge lorries to turn around)? You do feel sometimes like you are a lone voice.
Basically, putting the access to the store in a residential area seems pretty stupid to me. Maybe I'm missing the obvious but surely the site on the other side of the station (where the large under used car park now is) would be a better move? But the council, in their infinite wisdom, have decided that a new improved Sainsbury's on the current site is what we all need...in another lifetime.
|Posted on Wednesday, 03 November, 2004 - 08:35 am: |
I've got to admit that I have some sympathy (although unpopular), with the agrument from Jim Dowd's office- 'you shouldn't have moved there'.
Sainsburys have been on that site for as long as I can remember and unless your v. long term local resident, you might have considered on buying a property, just how the stock on the shelves miracously arrives.
There is no excuse for rudeness and abuse from Sainsbury's drivers, but as for when they arrive. It comes to no surprise (even as a complete layman) to me that the delivery of milk and bread for example, arrives in the early hours.
|Posted on Wednesday, 03 November, 2004 - 09:09 am: |
I totally agree with most of the points raised about vehicle access via Waldenshaw Road, but a lot of the problem is from parking of cars at the Waldenshaw/Manor Mount Junction. There are invariably cars parked right up to the corners especially in the daytime. I saw a 4x4 trying to park there the other day and the front of the vehicle was overlapping the corner by at least 2 feet-totally illegal! I seem to remember from my driving lesson days that parking within 15 feet of a corner was illegal.Its a pity that the local Parking wardens don't pay a bit more attention to these sort of things rather than hanging around in the Car Park waiting for tickets to run out as I have seen on a number of occasions. I got a ticket for unavoidably being no more than 5 minutes late returning to my car on one occasion.
As for Disabled bays at the corners. This would not solve the access problem as there would still be vehicles parked there. Witness the one at the bottom of Taymount Rise; it causes access problems and the vehicles parked there are rarely Disabled persons vehicles. Lets face it some people just ignore all restrictions, just see how many cars are parked in the Red Route/Bus lane areas of London Road at any time of day and the scramble to drive off when a traffic warden appears. The presence of a Bus lane is a waste of time, the buses are not able to use it most of the time
|Posted on Wednesday, 03 November, 2004 - 02:45 pm: |
You are being naive if you think the milk in Sainsbury's -if they have any in stock- has been squeezed out of a cow that week, let alone day so the argument in favour of morning deliveries is invalid. The same goes for bread. I lived in Forest Hill in the eighteenth century and it was lovely and quiet but I accept that things change; is it not possible that things can also change for the better? The argument that just because something is as it is means that everyone should like it or lump it is short-sighted and reactionary.
|Posted on Wednesday, 03 November, 2004 - 03:46 pm: |
Although not as short-sighted and reactionary as you - what has the argument that things can also change for the better got to do with Sainsburys making their lives a misery? If big business being allowed to run riot is deemed as 'progress', then clearly it's not a good thing. I'm sure that if you lived in that area, you wouldn't be posting such a smug load of rubbish.
|Posted on Wednesday, 03 November, 2004 - 03:56 pm: |
I'm more intrigued by J's claim that he lived in Forest Hill in the 1700s - is this the forum's first post from beyond the grave or do we have a sprightly IT literate 300 year old on the board?!
|Posted on Thursday, 04 November, 2004 - 01:06 pm: |
Jim, if you could read properly (i.e. with intelligence), you would have understood that my post was arguing against the current unsatisfactory situation and in favour of positive change. And I do live in the area. And I am 263 next birthday.
|Posted on Thursday, 04 November, 2004 - 03:25 pm: |
Perhaps in your advanced years you have forgotten how to construct a coherent argument, as it seems to me that you're arguing in favour of Sainsburys. Anyway, hope you make it to your 263th birthday.
|Posted on Thursday, 04 November, 2004 - 03:41 pm: |
Just realised that I put 263th rather than 263rd - I wish I could read and write properly like you, J.
|Posted on Friday, 05 November, 2004 - 11:33 am: |
Jim, you have clearly missed the subtleties of J's very lucid point. Rather than smugness read wry humour.
|Posted on Friday, 05 November, 2004 - 02:09 pm: |
So Jim, do you live in the area then? Or do you just enjoy pedantically surfing various area's web sites?
|Posted on Friday, 05 November, 2004 - 02:58 pm: |
Not standing up for Jim or anything (I have no doubt he is perfectly capable of defending himself) but what's your point Pip?!
|Posted on Friday, 05 November, 2004 - 06:09 pm: |
Pip, no I don't live in the area. In fact, I have never stepped foot in the place. I'm just in to pendatic surfing, as you put it. BTW, hope you don't miss the subtleties of the very lucid point I've just made.
|Posted on Monday, 08 November, 2004 - 12:42 pm: |
Re Born sceptic comments
I lived in manor mount from the age of 1 years old, moving in in 1971, and lived there on and off for 30 years. When my mother moved there the store didn't open so early in the morning, so deliveries were not so early. Nor did it open on Sunday, so no deliveries were made on that day. There were legal restrictions on the size of lorries, some of which have now been removed and the Council does not enforce the rest. Lorries were about a third of the size, less noisy, and rarely had refridgeration units. Drivers were generally considerate, obeying the law rather than being abusive. My mother apologises for not being able to see 30 years into the future.
To be honest none of that is relevent though. It is outrageous to suggest that residents should expect these problems if they move there. They shouldn't. Residents are not at fault, as the person from Jim Dowds office and 'Born Sceptic' suggest. If drivers obeyed the law, Sainsbury's acted responsibly, and Lewisham Council enforced the law, there would not be a problem.
Re TTTTTT comments about the Depot, thanks for the suggestion. They didn't care, in fact that was where the main problem was, as they manage the drivers, knew what was happening, knew which drivers were breaking the law and being abusive, but did very little about it.
|Posted on Tuesday, 09 November, 2004 - 09:54 am: |
Have you considered using an anti-social behaviour order?
These have been used against companies in the past (i.e. Camden Council v. Sony), and what you have described constitutes individual and corporate anti-social behaviour.
|Posted on Tuesday, 09 November, 2004 - 09:57 am: |
Have you considered issueing an anti-social behaviour order? These have been used in other cases against businesses (Camden Council v. Sony) and what you describe would seem to constitute both individual and corporate anti-social behaviour.
|Posted on Tuesday, 09 November, 2004 - 01:44 pm: |
How do you go about getting one? I do think abusive behaviour, flagrant disregard for noise and flouting of the general rules of the road is deemed anti-social. Hawever, cynic that I am, I doubt the council will be all that interested. They haven't shown much in the past.