In message <vhrdoi95a799c72hvj8jah95jh5ppokltt@4ax.com>, at 14:41:02 on
Sat, 23 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>The was a reported case (which my Google-fu is now failing to find,
>unfortunately) where a van driver was ticketed while delivering a large box
>to an elderly customer who asked him if he would be so good as to carry it
>upstairs for her, which he did. The court decided that "loading" only meant
>taking it as far as the delivery point, which is the front door of the
>property; going beyond that requires waiting as it's no longer strictly
>necessary for the purpose of the stop. Similarly, if you order, say, a
>washing machine from one of the online sellers which offers installation,
>then they can stop outside your house, even on double yellows, to get it
>into your house but they can't leave the van there while they install it -
>for that, they need to find somewhere else to park.

Although in practice, they never do (find somewhere else to park).
--
Roland Perry

In message <um7dco$26mpt$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:45:27 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:

>>>its being totally unrealistic to demand that Amazon
>>>should store your item for up two weeks whilst you're away on
>>>holiday; if this is at the expense of other Amazon customers for
>>>whom this limited resource is a very real convenience.
>>
>> That's Amazon's problem for delivering it to the locker later than
>> they said they would.
>
>Er no. Amazon delivering it later than they said they would,
>and you believing them, has now become "your" problem;
>for which you're now going to penalise your fellow
>Amazon customers by occupying scarce locker space.

Amazon are penalising those other customers.

>>>In such circumstances arranging delivery to a pick-up point
>>>would seem a far more equitable solution
>>
>> And where's your nearest Amazon depot. Mine's in Peterborough an
>> hour's drive away.
>
>Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
>shops.

I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
seller using one of those couriers).

>The only reason I prefer using the lockers is that
>there's no faffing about checking your ID, or remembering
>where they'd put the stuff. With lockers you just tap in
>the number on the screen and a few feet to the left or to
>the right, a door quietly releases itself, as if by magic.
>
>Although no doubt by next week they'll have installed
>beepers or hooters.

--
Roland Perry

In message <um7dur$26ph0$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:55:05 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
>
>"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>news:5XWudYx36ohlFAQs@perry.uk...
>>
>> Three days is too short, if a package is delivered late and you were
>>expecting to pick
>> it up on your way somewhere on holiday.
>
>Hold on a mo !
>
>How does a package being delivered late have any relevance to
>how long it can be left in a locker ?

If it's their fault it's late, the customer should be given longer to
retrieve, due to being away on business, holiday etc.

>Once it's placed in the locker - whether this is on time
>or later than promised - and the buyer is notified of
>this, why should it need to stay in the locker for up
>to three days ?

Because I'm away on holiday.
--
Roland Perry

On 30/12/2023 09:19, Andy Burns wrote:
> Jeff Layman wrote:
>
>> What's that pale "x" on the road? I've never seen that before on any
>> StreetView image.
>
> It appears in the vast majority of streetview scenes as you orbit
> around, I think it denotes where you will move to if you click.

I see what you mean, but I'm always looking at the light grey "carat" in
the darkish grey circle where the pointed finger appears, which is what
I always thought was where the viewpoint moves to. The "x" seems to be
near it but moves around, and isn't always in the picture. I haven't
seen a stationary "x" as in that Suffolk link where there's no carat in
a circle.

--

Jeff

In message <umlvk4$p395$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:22:28 on Fri, 29 Dec
2023, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:

>Going further OT (although perhaps more on topic for this NG), is the
>area of Google StreetView and entering private roads. From your
>34410759 link, the whole of that road is private, including the part I
>referred to off the roundabout which was on StreetView. The rest of
>that private road wasn't on StreetView.
>
>I wondered what the StreetView policy was when it came to private
>roads. It isn't clear, and even if it isn't allowed access, there are
>other ways of getting the information on StreetView.

They are a bit cavalier when it comes to their war driving. I've got
examples of them infringing "buses and taxis only" roads (unless they
have registered a few of their cars as one or the other) and doing
things like banned "no left turns".

The most commonplace private territory they cover is supermarket and
station car parks, although most people would probably agree they are
fair game. There's also plenty of instances of them driving into private
car parks associated with blocks of flats.

--
Roland Perry

In message <slrnuouo49.2nf.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 00:12:58
on Sat, 30 Dec 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> remarked:

>I've been to various parts of Number 10 and the Palace of Westminster.
>But my point of course wasn't that *nobody* is allowed in these places,
>which would be ridiculous, but that you would be breaking the law if you
>didn't have explicit permission to be there.

There's a lot of public areas inside the Palace of Westminster (and next
door - Portcullis House) as well as the private areas.
--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 11:30:25 +0000
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

> I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
> DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
> seller using one of those couriers).

In our Morrison's, it's a great big yellow cabinet, with various-sized
doors all over it, and a scanner in the middle, to read your
receipt's barcode.

--
Davey.

In message <umi7ml$2o95$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:15:43 on Wed, 27 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:

>>> Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
>>> rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
>>> simply never provided for.
>>
>> We all know that.
>
>So are you seriously suggesting, that as per your definition above,
>all deliveries

One rule of Usenet is nothing(sic) is ever "all".

>made to the large stores as can be found in such pedestrianised streets
>in historic city centres

Some have small stores as well.

>, are made by hand drawn trolleys ?

It's commonplace for deliveries to be made using wheeled cages,
especially when there's restrictions on loading etc right outside the
shop.
--
Roland Perry

On 30/12/2023 11:30 am, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <um7dco$26mpt$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:45:27 on Sat, 23 Dec
> 2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
>
>>>> its being totally unrealistic to demand that Amazon
>>>> should store your item for up two weeks whilst you're away on
>>>> holiday; if this is at the expense of other Amazon customers for
>>>> whom this limited resource is a very real convenience.
>>>
>>> That's Amazon's problem for delivering it to the locker later than
>>> they said they would.
>>
>> Er no. Amazon delivering it later than they said they would,
>> and you believing them, has now become "your" problem;
>> for which you're now going to penalise your fellow
>> Amazon customers by occupying scarce locker space.
>
> Amazon are penalising those other customers.
>
>>>> In such circumstances arranging delivery to a pick-up point
>>>> would seem a far more equitable solution
>>>
>>> And where's your nearest Amazon depot. Mine's in Peterborough an
>>> hour's drive away.
>>
>> Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
>> shops.
>
> I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
> DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
> seller using one of those couriers).

I had reason to return an item to Amazon a few months ago. To my
surprise I was able to take the package to a local sub-post office
(whose proprietor was incredibly helpful). So I didn't have to sit in,
waiting for collection. As I found out, I could also have picked items
up there as an alternative to delivery to the house. There are at least
five such locations (all high-street type shops) within a mile of this
spot, not one of which is situated on the other side of a double yellow
line!
>
>> The only reason I prefer using the lockers is that
>> there's no faffing about checking your ID, or remembering
>> where they'd put the stuff. With lockers you just tap in
>> the number on the screen and a few feet to the left or to
>> the right, a door quietly releases itself, as if by magic.
>>
>> Although no doubt by next week they'll have installed
>> beepers or hooters.
>
>

On 30/12/2023 09:09 am, Roland Perry wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&co@mail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>> JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
>
>>>>>  "Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms
>>>>> are  "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to
>>>>> be a synonym  for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
>>>>> they merely require  stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally
>>>>> require parking either.
>
>>>> Well, quite so.
>>>> The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
>>>> various other and similar purposes.
>>>> There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
>>>> travel.
>
>>> Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
>>> aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
>
>> Licenced taxis and certain vehicles transporting disabled people are
>> exempt from the "no stopping" rule on red routes. It would be
>> extraordinary if they were not.
>
> Only by convention.

???

The legislation which provides for the installation and enforcement of
"red routes" provides the exemptions for taxis and buses and certain
other vehicles in certain other uses. In the case of buses and licenced
taxis, there is prior legislation in force which would conflict with any
prohibition under the red routes scheme.

> When I was in Hong Kong, in effect every main street
> was a default red-route, and taxis had to pick up or drop off in
> side-streets.

That's there (I have no comment to make on that).

This is here, and see above.

>> There are any number of internet citations for that, in London and
>> elsewhere.
>>
>> Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
>
> I disagree, there are many pedestrianised areas where large numbers of
> drivers clearly feel entitled, including ignoring "No Entry" and "No
> Motorised Vehicles" signs. Other pedestrianised areas have exemptions
> for Loading, and holders of certain blue-badge add-on permits (you need
> the specific local permit, just having the badge or a permit from a
> different local authority isn't sufficient).

There, you appear to claim to be able to read the minds of transgressors!

You have no evidence that they feel themselves to be exempt.

On 30/12/2023 11:37 am, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <umi7ml$2o95$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:15:43 on Wed, 27 Dec
> 2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
>
>>>> Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
>>>> rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
>>>> simply never provided for.
>>>
>>> We all know that.
>>
>> So are you seriously suggesting, that as per your definition above,
>> all deliveries
>
> One rule of Usenet is nothing(sic) is ever "all".
>
>> made to the large stores as can be found in such pedestrianised
>> streets in historic city centres
>
> Some have small stores as well.
>
>> , are made by hand drawn trolleys ?
>
> It's commonplace for deliveries to be made using wheeled cages,
> especially when there's restrictions on loading etc right outside the shop.

And local postal delivery staff round here use little trolleys.

"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message news:pud6jGIR9$jlFARW@perry.uk...
>>
>>Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
>>shops.
>
> I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
> DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
> seller using one of those couriers)

In Cambridge you can pick up your parcels from Next

quote:

You can now pick up your Amazon parcels from Next 11:02, 14 MAY 2019
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/you-can-now-pick-up-16272104

quote:

But not Primark just yet, unfortunately.

While in London, Costcutters are especially popular

Amazon Counter - Costcutter Supermarket
17 Golborne Rd
Open ? Closes 9?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter Supermarket
128 Westmount Rd
Open ? Closes 9?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter Express
305 Finchley Rd
Open ? Closes 9?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
178 Thessaly Rd
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
53 Stratford Rd
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
38-40 Sydenham Rd
Open ? Closes 12?am

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Greenford
Open 24 hours

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
428-430 Well Hall Rd
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
555 Barking Rd
Open ? Closes 12?am

Amazon Counter - Costcutter Raynes Park
52 Coombe Ln
Open ? Closes 7:30?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
13 The Mound
Open ? Closes 10?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Harrow
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Harrow
Open ? Closes 10?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Sutton
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Enfield
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Northolt
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Costcutter Bromley
Bromley
Open ? Closes 11?pm

Amazon Counter - Drinks Food & Wine
11 Station Parade
Open ? Closes 11?pm

bb

"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
>>
>> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
>>
>> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
> >rubber.
>
> >A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
> >have any industry.
>

>
> All worthwhile points.
>
> For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".

Eh ?

If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*

As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
state.

bb

>

On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
> "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
>>>
>>> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
>>>
>>> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
>>> rubber.
>>
>>> A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
>>> have any industry.
>>
>
>>
>> All worthwhile points.
>>
>> For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
>
> Eh ?
>
> If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
> example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*

I was responding to that very point!

> As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
> state.

That might be a little over-literal.

The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians
only". If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.

"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kvbd4rFu21U1@mid.individual.net...
> On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
>> "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
>>>>
>>>> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
>>>> rubber.
>>>
>>>> A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
>>>> have any industry.
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> All worthwhile points.
>>>
>>> For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
>>
>> Eh ?
>>
>> If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
>> example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
>
> I was responding to that very point!
>
>> As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
>> state.
>
> That might be a little over-literal.
>
> The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians only".
> If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.

In many pedestrianised areas bicycles, ebikes, escooters, are indeed
totally prohibited, but often to little effect. Usually because any
wardens etc. assuming there are any, are usually on foot. And are
precluded from running after miscreants on health and safety
grounds. Same as those tasked with clearing up leaves are denied
the use of brushes and the air is instead rent with the gentle
soothing sounds of petrol driven leaf blowers.

So that all "pedestrianised" usually means in practice, is that motor
vehicles no longer have unrestricted 24hr access as they formerly
did.

As against say, "Motor vehicles no longer have 24hr access ised"
areas. Which you must admit, is a bit of a mouthful.

bb

>
>

On 29/12/2023 10:57, billy bookcase wrote:

> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
>
> "Ised" is the past participle or something of the verb that described
> the changing process
>
> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
> rubber.
>
> A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
> have any industry.
>
> A street that is "pedestrianised" wasn't formerly the sole preserve of
> pedestrians, but also admitted cars etc at some point.
>
> If such a street only ever admitted pedestrians then it wouldn't need
> to be "ised".

As in "sexualise", as if you can make an inanimate object like a ladies'
shoe into something sexual; oh, hang on!

--
Max Demian

"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:umrnhf$1nml5$2@dont-email.me...
> On 29/12/2023 10:57, billy bookcase wrote:
>
>> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
>>
>> "Ised" is the past participle or something of the verb that described
>> the changing process
>>
>> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
>> rubber.
>>
>> A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
>> have any industry.
>>
>> A street that is "pedestrianised" wasn't formerly the sole preserve of
>> pedestrians, but also admitted cars etc at some point.
>>
>> If such a street only ever admitted pedestrians then it wouldn't need
>> to be "ised".
>
> As in "sexualise", as if you can make an inanimate object like a ladies' shoe into
> something sexual; oh, hang on!

I thought that aspect had already been covered by "rubberised"

"As appealing to the more budget -conscuious fetishist"

bb

On 31/12/2023 10:02 am, billy bookcase wrote:
> "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kvbd4rFu21U1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
>>> "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
>>>>>
>>>>> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
>>>>> rubber.
>>>>
>>>>> A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
>>>>> have any industry.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> All worthwhile points.
>>>>
>>>> For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
>>>
>>> Eh ?
>>>
>>> If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
>>> example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
>>
>> I was responding to that very point!
>>
>>> As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
>>> state.
>>
>> That might be a little over-literal.
>>
>> The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians only".
>> If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.
>
>
> In many pedestrianised areas bicycles, ebikes, escooters, are indeed
> totally prohibited, but often to little effect. Usually because any
> wardens etc. assuming there are any, are usually on foot. And are
> precluded from running after miscreants on health and safety
> grounds.

That is the fault of those who breach the rules.

> Same as those tasked with clearing up leaves are denied
> the use of brushes and the air is instead rent with the gentle
> soothing sounds of petrol driven leaf blowers.
>
> So that all "pedestrianised" usually means in practice, is that motor
> vehicles no longer have unrestricted 24hr access as they formerly
> did.

If vehicles are allowed in under certain conditions, the thoroughfare
has not *been* pedestrianised.
>
> As against say, "Motor vehicles no longer have 24hr access ised"
> areas. Which you must admit, is a bit of a mouthful.

But not enough to justify an abuse of language, I'd suggest.

On 31/12/2023 05:19 pm, JNugent wrote:
> On 31/12/2023 10:02 am, billy bookcase wrote:
>> "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message
>> news:kvbd4rFu21U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
>>>> "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>> On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous
>>>>>> condition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't
>>>>>> coated with
>>>>>> rubber.
>>>>>
>>>>>> A country that is "industrialised" is  a country that formerly didn't
>>>>>> have any industry.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All worthwhile points.
>>>>>
>>>>> For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
>>>>
>>>> Eh ?
>>>>
>>>> If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
>>>> example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
>>>
>>> I was responding to that very point!
>>>
>>>> As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
>>>> state.
>>>
>>> That might be a little over-literal.
>>>
>>> The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians
>>> only".
>>> If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.
>>
>>
>> In many pedestrianised areas bicycles, ebikes, escooters, are indeed
>> totally prohibited, but often to little effect. Usually because any
>> wardens etc. assuming there are any, are usually on foot. And are
>> precluded from running after miscreants on health and safety
>> grounds.
>
> That is the fault of those who breach the rules.
>
>> Same as those tasked with clearing up leaves are denied
>> the use of brushes and the air is instead rent with the gentle
>> soothing sounds of petrol driven leaf blowers.
>> So that all "pedestrianised" usually means in practice, is that motor
>> vehicles no longer have unrestricted 24hr access as they formerly
>> did.
>
> If vehicles are allowed in under certain conditions, the thoroughfare
> has not *been* pedestrianised.

[I should have added that in any case, motor vehicles are operated only
under a certain set of quite stringent legal conditions at all times.
One or two more is surely not that big a deal?]
>
>> As against say, "Motor vehicles no longer have 24hr access ised"
>> areas. Which you must admit, is a bit of a mouthful.
>
> But not enough to justify an abuse of language, I'd suggest.

On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:17:08 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:

> On 27/12/2023 08:54 pm, Mark Goodge wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:31:40 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 27/12/2023 11:35 am, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 23:12:53 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 25/12/2023 10:01 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
>>>>>> On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>>>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
>>>>>>>>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
>>>>>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously
>>>>>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under
>>>>>> some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> Calling such places "pedestrianised" is a category error.
>>>>
>>>> "Pedestrianised" is the usual term for a street which formerly was open to
>>>> all users, but is now restricted to predestrians other than with some
>>>> limited exemptions for vehicles.
>>>
>>> The term is undoubtedly in common usage. But it has no legal meaning and
>>> no obvious exclusive meaning in everyday parlance.
>>
>> Indeed not. It isn't necessary for a street to be exlusively for the use of
>> pedestrians in order to be described as pedestrianised.
>
> Of course, individuals cannot be prevented from misusing words. But it
> doesn't have any legal implications.
>>
>>>> It's often impractical to fully prohibit vehicles from a street where they
>>>> have previously been permitted, because there are often premises that can
>>>> only be accessed from that street for the purpose of deliveries. So limited
>>>> exemptions (typically, deliveries before 10am or after 4pm) are common. That
>>>> doesn't mean that, as far as people on foot are concerned, it's not a
>>>> pedestrianised street.
>>>
>>> Yes, it does.
>>
>> You're arguing with common English usage here. You may not want to use the
>> word in that sense, but nearly everybody else does.
>
> On that basis, all streets are pedestrianised. Even in ancient Pompeii.

Not so; pedestrianise means restrictively CHANGE access. Pedestrian ways are
not in general pedestrianised. In 79 A.D. access to the streets of Pompeii
was not merely restricted but forclosed to all and including to pedestrians.

In message <umprft$1clkk$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:36:26 on Sat, 30 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
>
>"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
>news:pud6jGIR9$jlFARW@perry.uk...
>>>
>>>Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
>>>shops.
>>
>> I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
>> DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
>> seller using one of those couriers)
>
>In Cambridge you can pick up your parcels from Next
>
>quote:
>
>You can now pick up your Amazon parcels from Next 11:02, 14 MAY 2019
>https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/you-can-now-pick-up-
>16272104
>
>quote:
>
>But not Primark just yet, unfortunately.
>
>While in London, Costcutters are especially popular
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter Supermarket
>17 Golborne Rd
>Open ? Closes 9?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter Supermarket
>128 Westmount Rd
>Open ? Closes 9?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter Express
>305 Finchley Rd
>Open ? Closes 9?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>178 Thessaly Rd
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>53 Stratford Rd
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>38-40 Sydenham Rd
>Open ? Closes 12?am
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>Greenford
>Open 24 hours
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>428-430 Well Hall Rd
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>555 Barking Rd
>Open ? Closes 12?am
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter Raynes Park
>52 Coombe Ln
>Open ? Closes 7:30?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>13 The Mound
>Open ? Closes 10?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>Harrow
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>Harrow
>Open ? Closes 10?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>Sutton
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>Enfield
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter
>Northolt
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Costcutter Bromley
>Bromley
>Open ? Closes 11?pm
>
>Amazon Counter - Drinks Food & Wine
>11 Station Parade
>Open ? Closes 11?pm

Before it permanently closed, our Costcutter did that for UPS, but not
Amazon.
--
Roland Perry