Anyone else annoyed In Great Guildford Street?

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 Next
Current: 3 of 5
Friday 11 November 2011 8.18am
markadams99, you clearly have strong (and for some of us, also quite offensive) views but they are of no relevance to this thread at all - a rather unnecessary post to say the least. I have considerable sympathy for those suffering this nuisance so lets not turn this into a ridiculous ideologically driven 'for' or 'against' argument about homelessness (or worse still - hobby horse arguments about 'liberal do-gooders').

I wonder if you might call on local councillors and local police liaison officers to effect some pressure on St. Mungo's management to address this issue (and also provide support for them at the same time: it sounds like they are struggling to deal with this). Whilst there will almost certainly always be some issues around such places I suspect that it may be possible to manage this better (I have been involved with similar places in the past). The temporary closure also provides an opportunity to work with all relevant bodies (including St. Mungo's themselves) in a constructive way to put things in place to better manage such nuisance in the future. The best option, in my opinion, is to engage directly with support from other relevant parties to find a constructive solution together. Good luck, I wish you well.
Friday 11 November 2011 11.01am
The Manager is Nick Wing ring during the Day and state your greivance 0207 6339655


Local Neighbourhood Police 0208 217 6383
peter.Osborne2@met.police.uk

You will soon get a slight reprieve!
St Mungo's is supposed to be closing around April - I believe for approx 18 months refurb/ rebuild
But I am told when it reopens, there will be more recreationl area , so they should not congregate on the street anymore(yes we will belive that when we see it )
and a "Better class of resident"

Unfortunately "Arch Press" the building opposite as was known as ARCH PRESS, is housing squatters, but the owner is not interested in removing them as they are paying all the bills !!!!
Friday 11 November 2011 11.29am
eDWaRD WooDWaRD wrote:
Weaver wrote:
**** As I am sending this message there are people screaming f*** off Patrick F*** OFFFFFFF.
A perfect soundtrack for bedtime.

I had a similar experience. I joined a discussion on a community website, and got told my opinion "makes people sick" and that believes I hold are "bullshit". I won't even go into how I feel about being stereotyped as a "liberal" and a "do gooder", but I agree, not a great soundtrack for bedtime.

I am not affected by this because I don't live there. I am affected by analogous anti-social behaviour. The causes and toleration of that behaviour could not be more relevant. As far as ad hominems go, you seem to have self-identified with a group to which I have no idea and no concern that you belong. That's up to you.
Friday 11 November 2011 11.38am
bdim wrote:
markadams99, you clearly have strong (and for some of us, also quite offensive) views but they are of no relevance to this thread at all - a rather unnecessary post to say the least. I have considerable sympathy for those suffering this nuisance so lets not turn this into a ridiculous ideologically driven 'for' or 'against' argument about homelessness (or worse still - hobby horse arguments about 'liberal do-gooders').
I wonder if you might call on local councillors and local police liaison officers to effect some pressure on St. Mungo's management to address this issue (and also provide support for them at the same time: it sounds like they are struggling to deal with this). Whilst there will almost certainly always be some issues around such places I suspect that it may be possible to manage this better (I have been involved with similar places in the past). The temporary closure also provides an opportunity to work with all relevant bodies (including St. Mungo's themselves) in a constructive way to put things in place to better manage such nuisance in the future. The best option, in my opinion, is to engage directly with support from other relevant parties to find a constructive solution together. Good luck, I wish you well.
"Some of us" might find your de haut en bas tone and presumption to speak for others from behind anonymity to be offensive. Not I; a discussion forum is a forum for discussion.
Friday 11 November 2011 12.08pm
It's amazing how childish grown people can be. unless you live in the area or have experienced the effects of St Mungo's then maybe it would be a good idea to keep quite and stop trying to turn this into a slanging match.

Windmill walker and those living in the area are well within there right to be annoyed with the going on's from St Mungo's.

I am currently living next door and probably the most effected. There isn't a night that goes by where we don't have some kind of incident. In my eyes the residents at St Mungo’s are very selfish people, St Mungo’s are providing them with shelter, warmth and for most counselling yet they behave in this manor.

My advice to the residents effected is to report everything that’s happens using the information given by Barbara E. Can I also add you are well within your rights to contact 101 (non emergency police) to report any incidents.

We shouldn’t have to live with this.
Friday 11 November 2011 12.30pm
This topic started with a post which itself tried to exclude anyone also affected but with differing opinions to start with. Then someone who is not at all affected, but who shares that intolerance of other opinions jumps in and starts using swear words. Do you actually want a solution, or do you just want to have a go at everyone that doesn’t share your opinion or your life choices? This is a community forum. Anyone express their opinion. People who have different opinions from yours will not just go away, insults are not going to drive me away for one, and unless a sensible, workable solution is found, the St Mungo’s problem is not going away either. Nobody wants homeless people at their worst, but many might be more sympathetic or contribute constructively if their opinions weren’t swept under the carpet in a tone that has more in common with the subjects of this topic than with responsible locals.
Friday 11 November 2011 12.38pm
Polite and constructive discussion in a discussion forum perhaps markadams99? That's what I would like to see at least and yet so often do not here.
Friday 11 November 2011 12.47pm
* sigh *

It saddens me that the topic of homelessness always brings out the worst in some people.

As a "liberal", I would like to endorse bdim's very reasonable post of 8.18am this morning.

Please could participants in this thread focus their remarks on positive suggestions for how disturbance to residents can be dealt with, rather than trading insults.

Editor of the London SE1 website.
Subscribe to our SE1 Direct weekly newsletter.
Friday 11 November 2011 1.08pm
perhaps - you should try living with it 24/7 365 x 34 years
Friday 11 November 2011 2.14pm
the problem is though, the "friends or associates" of the clients of st. mungo's are the issue, as we have been told on numerous occasions, when complaining to st mungo's. we are also affected as we live next door and have been told, that we couldn't blame st. mungo's for the anti-social behaviour, as they weren't their clients.
the police got involved and the situation got slightly better, and now it got worse again. there seems to be a wave of "pushing people" east, as soon as they are over the boundary, they are out of sight and and out of the responsibility. this happened a while ago, when the square opposite the old vic was refurbished and people were told to move on (east).
i do feel for these people and also the police, and ambulances, who have to deal with this situation every day, but st. mungo's has to realise that we have to live with this situation 24/7 and the associates are only there, because of the friends who could get shelter.
as for the squatters? i haven't noticed, so it can't be that bad, are these a different set of people? i remember when the now media centre was squatted, which was terrible. and as weaver says, it is not "anti-homeless" to be against anti-social behaviour. abusive language towards children or anyone and drug taking in broad daylight in the street is unacceptable. full stop.
i think the only way is to put pressure on st mungo's and ask the councillors and police to get involved (again), to find a solution. not sure it or the clientele will change, once they re-open.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 Next
Current: 3 of 5

To post a message, please log in or register..

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from: