view counter

King Charles Road...TFL idiocy

12 years ago...

Having made the Ewell Road a congested,obstructed route into Surbiton and Kingston,TFL have decided to make the KCR Bridge a single lane and thus make everyone who wants to turn left for Surbiton centre wait behind those turning right or going straight on.

From 14th July this nonsense will start as an experiment and if it causes huge jams it will,no doubt ,be made permanent.Does no one employed in the TFL drive? Or are they all "bikes and boots"?

We are facing an economic slow down,how will the Surbiton shops cope if more folks are put off by crazy road schemes that are designed to annoy motorists and congest the area.

This country has built one railway line since 1899,a few hundred miles of motorways,one runway since the war and barley improved its ports and underground.How on earth did our forefathers build an empire,canals,roads,sewers etc.


Does anyone know why these traffic lights exist? This doesn't seem to be a particularly busy junction, and it could probably be served just as well by giving one direction, North-South or East-West, priority and making the other direction give way. As a pedestrian, cyclist and motorist user I seem to spend a long time waiting for a green light every time I come to this junction, but there's never anything coming the other way. Nearby residents must get a healthy dose of fumes from unnecessarily halted cars - is it a case of planners deciding to install lights 30 years ago and thinking they need never review things in light of changing times?

No idea where you're on about, but if you're talking of the ones on Cranes Park/Lingfield, you are quite correct.

Not at all clear which traffic-lights you're referring to.

I think the question was about the traffic signals at the junction of Beaufort Road/ Cranes Park as mentioned by "Anonymous": "Er, yes it does matter! As an example, I was driving down Lingfield Avenue the other night, approaching the junction with Beaufort Road/Cranes Park. The lights were green as I approached. Just as I got to the junction, a cyclist bombed through from the Cranes Park direction into Beaufort Road. Fortunately, I was driving slowly and was able to slam on the brakes to avoid him. If I had been going 20-30 mph it would have been a different story - the cyclist would have been badly injured and I would have likely been charged for a driving 'offence' that wasn't my fault."

In which case I'd suggest that the signals are there because the natural priority is down Cranes Park into Beaufort Road rather than Lingfield Avenue/ Beaufort Road because of the hill, whereas the busier road is probably Lingfield Road- Beaufort Road. It's difficult to see between the roads at the cross-roads. You want to be pretty confident that there's nothing going to cross your path if you're coming along any of those roads. It used to be a much busier route along Cranes Park but then the Blue Bridge was closed to motors.

Note: Beaufort Road turns the corner at the traffic signals - very strange alignment.


In the last week or so the planners have got something right.

The traffic along KCR now has to GIVE WAY to traffic joining from Surbiton Hill Park by virtue of a new road priority layout.

We just need the bridge to be restored to two lanes and lo traffic will flow again and pollution will fall.

Great news they have changed it back to KCR having the priority.causing utter confusion to those who had just got used to previous,much better layout.

Thus Surb Hill Park once more gives way to KCR but until drivers are almost at the point of no return do they notice the "give way" road markings.Luckily I am a pedestrian so can observe the resulting confusion from a relatively safe position on the pavement,subject of course to the lycra lout cyclists who have chosen to ignore all road markings.

"....but until drivers are almost at the point of no return do they notice the "give way" road markings"

Hmmm so those drivers have also missed the advanced signs advising them that the priority has changed, and the Give Way sign in the big red triangle? Such drivers should be taken off the road. They must be asleep.

The layout as it previously was, for the summer of 2010, was completely counter-intuitive and caused some scarey moments and maybe collisions and injuries. It was done like that to appease councillors who wanted drivers from Surbiton Hill Park (their electorate) to have priority over drivers rat-running along King Charles Road (not their electorate) - who were in the main taking it in turns before anyway. The councillors spent some money, maybe some people got hurt, and so they spent a little more money undoing the change. Wonder if anyone can spot any efficiency savings?? Are there any road markings that indicate 'don't cycle on the pavement' Mojogit? I really don't think there are....are there? So in whose universe are these cyclists ignoring the road markings that don't exist and causing you so much concern?

That tells us a lot about your approach to road-safety, CranesPark. What a brainless remark.

Of course, there are no road-markings telling cyclists not to cycle on the pavement. It's simply illegal. Might just as well litter the streets with signs telling motorists not to drive on the pavement.

When will cyclists learn that the pavements are for pedestrians ONLY?

"Of course, there are no road-markings telling cyclists not to cycle on the pavement. It's simply illegal. Might just as well litter the streets with signs telling motorists not to drive on the pavement."

Hang on JohnBerry, So why did "Mojogit' suggest that "Lycra louts" (eeek, that Daily Mail term again) were ignoring road markings and causing him a problem while he's on the pavement???? I'm not the one who's apparently disregarding the road signs - Mojogit is saying the drivers don't see the signs. Oh dear oh dear.

And do you know what? There are signs on King Charles Road inviting drivers to drive on the footway...indeed park on it. Clearly the footways aren't solely for pedestrians....they're for cars too.

When will more car drivers learn to respect other human beings?, clean up their behaviour, put away their mobile phones, stop speeding, stop drinking and driving, stop believing that the world should provide them with road space, a free place to park and priority over all other people. That's what I want to know. Answers on a postcard.


I've no wish, CranesPark, to involve myself in the bickering between yourself & Mojogit. I simply wanted to point out that it's just plain stupid to suggest that, in the absence of signs telling cyclists not to cycle on the pavements, cycling on the pavement is permissible. IT ISN'T. If you don't see a sign telling you not to break into your neighbour's house, does breaking into your neighbour's house become permissible?

I agree with a good deal of what you have to say about the irresponsibility of some motorists. A lot of it applies, equally, however, to cyclists. I've seen plenty of damned stupid pedestrian behaviour, too!

My point remains. Pavements are NOT for cyclists.

As a life long and avid Daily Mail reader I have learnt to be tolerant,but cyclists do ignore road signs,zebra crossings,shopping precincts and beachfront promenades.

I do feel pretty safe on most pavements,KCR is an exception as it is used daily by an in line skater (lycra clad) and cyclists,most probably originating from the council estate where,i understand anti social behaviour has occurred.

Motorists don't so much ignore signs as simply not see them given the plethora of street furniture,signs,humps,necks and potholes to negotiate,the "on pavement" parking in KCR is ludicrous as I noticed a mother with one of those huge buggys being quite unable to pass between the car and a wall so resorted to the road.

Any motorist caught using a handset mobile should lose their licence for a year and drink driving cannot be condoned,mind you we should also test old people on legal drug cocktails who neglect regular eye tests to see if they are safe to drive.

Crikey i am agreeing with you on some matters,better get back to my Mail for support and succour.

Excellent news,someone has a live petition on the Kingston Council website proposing a return to two lanes of traffic and that the London Side pavement be used by only by cyclists.
So all those of you that get jammed very morning you have a chance to let the Council know your feelings,probably wont make much difference as they seem to be in thrall of the bycycle but at least you can add your support of a return to sanity.


so let's get this clear - you want people walking from Berrylands to Villiers Road (and vice versa) to have to needlessly cross the road twice in the space of 15 metres just to allow two lanes of traffic to queue for the same paltry 15 metres?
You've already said you don't walk over the bridge any more, but there are many hundreds that do.

Given that the road has to be single file because of the width restriction at the start of the bridge - just what is the point? Do you not recall the road rage incident in the local press 2 months ago, when it was popinted out that two lanes exiting onto Villiers Road wwas dangerous.

What about this for an intelligent idea - petitioning for a cantilever extension to allow for an additional cycle lane on the west side of the bridge. That way we have properly segregated lanes/pavements for all users of the bridge, in the direction they are travelling. And then you can go and find something useful to obsess about.

Totally agree with you,i think a cantilevered cycle path is the sensible answer,I was merely alerting people to the fact that a petition was in place to restore two lanes not that i actually agreed with everything it says.

I did not see the article to which you refer but i fail to see how two lanes could possibly be more dangerous than one that has caused drivers to build up frustration in the jam and then take a risk to get out.

Although I disagree with it, here's the link for those who do:

It seems strange that the cycle lane was introduced to improve road saftey when cyclists are still required to do battle with the cars on the way out of Berrylands. I would welcome a dedicated two-lane cycle path as requested in the petition - but in my humble opinion the single lane of traffic must remain.

> Quite what this does apart from...

Hopefully it makes the drivers of the cars in the queues consider whether there's an alternative to driving. The car driver is a stubborn beast though, so it might take a while.

Unlikely the girls like their cars too much,especially the X5 brigade.Not much hope for us pedestrians these days.

Excellent result for the planners.
At 1115 Sat 24 OCT the jam to cross the KCR bridge was back beyond the old Kia garage and the jam was building nicely on Surbiton Hill Park.
Quite what this does apart from creating more pollution,loss of business to Surbiton shop owners I do not know.

As cyclists still prefer the pavements to the ludicrous cycle lane what objectives have been achieved?

What does the Council/Tfl Mission Statement say or have they yet to have an away day, in a country house hotel, to formulate one?

Nice to read a well reasoned post that isn't from a totally selfish viewpoint.
Nice one Poppy, applaud your comments & sentiments!

I'm glad that the balance has been redressed. I don't know if car drivers are locals or rat runners but seldom do any of them wait for pedestrians to cross as they hurtle up to join the queue then... stop.

As a pedestrian I have always thought that the carriageway was for motor traffic and therefore one has to wait before crossing the traffic flow.I never cross in front of moving traffic and never assume vehicles will slow down or are slowing down to let me cross.If you look at the faces of drivers you will notice most are engrossed in conversation,looking at the satnav or changing the cd etc.

Not only that if they have paid their road taxes and fuel duties I reckon they have a basic right to be on the road and to move freely and swiftly without the encumbrances of the TFL or Kinngston planners,now I read that motorists will judged automatically to blame if they are hit by a passing cyclist,regardless of who is actually at fault.

The world has gone crazy and what about my right to walk on a pavement without having to dodge cyclists!

With you, all the way, Poppy. All's fine if pedestrians remember that the pavement is for them & the carriageway is for motorists, and if motorists remember that the reverse applies for them.

The problems are cyclists who use the pavement, and cyclists who use the carriageway without observing its rules (traffic-lights - little details like that!).

(Yesterday, I saw a cyclist careering along the pavement, using a mobile phone - dumb, or what?!).

Rather than adjudging motorists to be automatically at fault in any motorist/cyclist incident, we should be requiring cyclists to be licensed & insured comprehensively.

I have used it a few times and think it is a good improvement. I have suggested (by email) they drain the puddle and make it for either direction of travel as it’s just wide enough and would save bikes having to wait.

When it was two vehicle lanes the one right hand lane was usually empty as most divers go straight on. So a good use of road space. Well done TFL. For the record I usually drive a car.

The new cycle lane is a great success and looks really cool,its odd that many cyclists prefer the pavement on the Surbiton side however.

The cycle lane maybe a huge success for those cyclists coming from villiers rooad/Cranes Drive, but did you notice it is one way? How utterly ridiculous as now the cyclists going from Berrylands into Kingston/Surbiton have to join the conjested single traffic lane, thus causing more danger to themselves and as you said, using the pathway to get through (as the traffic is now at a standstill), thus endangering the pedesrians. Wake up TFL, stop wasting our money and employ someone with a braincell!!

New signs uncovered to reveal KCR Bridge will be wilfully obstructed in the cause of increased traffic congestion and pollution commencing July 2009.

The bridge will be one lane only and thus cause stationary traffic in the morning rush,Ewell Road is now virtually impassable due to traffic lights and bus lanes so in the depths of a recession that affects all bar those in the public sector our leaders are trying to stifle any free movement of goods and services to Surbiton and Kingston from the A3 and return.

Great news the bridge has been restricted to its new one lane experiment and at 1000 today 12 August the jam was back to the old Kia garage.

This is the quietest period with no school runs to LEH,Tiffin Girls or Boys and the recession cutting shopping and commuters.

It will be interesting to see how it develops this Autumn and winter and by how much the Surbiton retailers takings decline.

By next week the rat runners will have got the message and will stop using this residential road as a rat run.
I'd like to see some enforcement of the 20mph speed limit along there as well - especially during the summer months.

Do you not drive? For most of us in Berrylands (who work for a living) it is our only way out...WAKE UP.

Rubbish, you can get out of Berrylands at two points along the Ewell road, at the A3 at Tesco, and alongside the A3 to new Malden as well.

As other posters have pointed out, nearly all the traffic turns right anyway at this junction so there's no real impact.
I walk along here every morning (on my way to WORK), and haven't noticed any great change.

The doom merchants and naysayers have been proved wrong.
Well done RBK, TfL and Holyfield School pupils who suggested this.

I'd like to see TfL go further and have all traffic diverted back onto the Ewell Road at the old Kia garage. Ratrunners would stop using the King Charles Road. Locals could still get out along Surbiton Hill Park.

I do agree in part with you,KCR is a ludicrous rat run made worse by crazy road humps and obstructions.

If the Ewell road was a proper free flowing road from and to the A3 it would solve the problems of the KCR and Surbiton Hill Park being used instead.My more serious point is that the small business sector of Surbiton will suffer as many Berrylands residents will find it less stressful and quicker to drive to New Malden and shop.

Turning to the 20mph limit on the KCR,have you noticed that on the estate the limit INCREASES to 30 mph,now how crazy is that.

What's the problem?

I walk past this every morning and can assure you that there is already stationary traffic almost every morning rush hour.

And the bridge is effectively one lane only because of the existing width restriction (to prevent heavy vehicles damaging the weak bridge).

Anything that makes it safer for kids to cycle to school has to be welcomed.
I'd go further and divert the rat runners back onto the Ewell Road.

The cycle lane is one way! You cannot cycle to kingston unless you squash your way through the stationary traffic in the vehicle lane. Why didn't the council use the right hand pedestrian walkway for the new cycle lane, (and make it both ways) simpler, easier and costs me the taxpayer less money. I am a driver and a cyclist and have used this route for 20yrs or more, and this route is used mostly by us locals, so as for a 'rat run', it has never really been any quicker than the Ewell Rd, which is also congested enough as it is.
The bridge is not 'effectively' one lane, never has been, it WAS 'effectively' one way/two lane traffic. Left hand side for vehicle turning left or going straight over, and right hand lane for vehicles going right. Now all the traffic has to wait for anyone turning left, who are also waiting for the traffic lights. This whole scheme is utterly ridiculous and does no good for pedestrians (as cyclists are still using the left hand pedestrian walk to get past the traffic), no good for cyclists going into Kingston (having to risk weaving through stationary traffic) no good for driver road rage and especially not good for our environment.

Sadly for the planners and road safety experts the KCR Bridge has rarely if ever been the site of a serious accident,apart from the traffic coming up from Kingston on Villiers which sometimes produces a a prang as they fail to negotiate the bend.

It seems to me that in order to redress this lack of incident and therefore to produce enough data to close the bridge they have introduced this bizarre road scheme which encourages cycling on pavements or cyclists crossing the now inching traffic to get to the mad cycle lane.The clear outcome of this blinkered view will be accidents where once there were none.

Its a pity the whole bridge cant be widened to take cycle lanes and allow two lanes of cars to cross.Surely cycle lanes could be cantilevered alongside the existing bridge with a little pruning and minor construction,we do not need massive weight bearing beams to support a couple ok bikers.

I too am a pedestrian and today in KCR i saw2 cyclists on pavements and a crazed in-line skater hammering along.
We all have "rights" and more importantly "responsibilities and obligations",why do cyclists ride on pavements even with cycle lanes provided,why do cyclists ride with no lights or reflectors,why do motorists drive too quicky for the prevailing conditions,why do pedestrians (usaully the elderly)cross roads at 45 degrees thus exposing themselves for longer to the traffic flow?

I haven't a clue but to deliberately restrict through roads and make most roads (in this area at least)oversigned and littered with street furniture and traffic congestion measures,only serve to cause even more problems for all of us.I expect to see the morning Q well past the old Kia garage,the Ewell Road is already jammed and much of that overspill now comes off the A3 at Elmbridge and routes along Surb Hill Park to turn right onto the KCR bridge.As that will be gridlocked the Q in Surb Hill Park will be back to Park Road.

Heigh Ho lets all watch the commercial life drain from our area as companies relocate.


The council changed the priority of the King Charles Road/ Surbiton Hill Park in 2010 to give priority to traffic from Surbiton Hill Park. The giveway sign on Surbiton Hill Park came down. This was in response to moaning from Berrylands residents that the rat-runners- along King Charles Road had priority. As far as I could see, during the busy time 8 to 9am drivers tended to take it in turns to queue across the bridge anyway. The change in priorities was deemed by the council not to have been a success because the layout is counter-intuitive, so it it goes back to traffic on King Charles Road having priority.

I'm sorry that Anonymous was hit by a car at this junction. It seems that drivers coming along Surbiton Hill Park don't look right because they don't expect traffic from the right, only the left. For many motorists it seems that people on bicycles are not traffic and therefore they don't have to look out for them. The lesson for people using bikes is not to trust motorists to obey the law, pay attention, be respectful or even safe. Some do all of these things, but sadly there are some around Surbiton with an awful standard of driving.

I'd agree about the standard of driving, but I also think that there are a lot of cyclists and pedestrians who have no regard for the traffic rules, and that can be just as dangerous.

The most abused traffic rules in Surbiton for me are:

1. Cyclists ignoring red lights. It is ages since I actually remember seeing a cyclist stop at a red light in Kingston/Surbiton. I walk and cycle in central London all the time and the cyclists are much more respectful of lights than they are around here.

2. Drivers and cyclists at zebra crossings. On faster roads, drivers now seem to routinely ignore zebra crossings. The one on Portsmounth Road (near Catherine Road) is a prime example. I have often waited for 2 or 3 cars to file through while I am waiting to cross. Cyclists have long felt that these crossings do not apply to them. This might not be as dangerous as red lights, but stills causes problems for elderly pedestrians assuming (correctly) that they have right of way.

3. Pedestrians assuming right of way on normal roads. This happens a lot around the station and Victoria Road - people just walk out into the road expecting cars to stop for them. Invariably, the cars do stop or slow down, but it is still dangerous.

Road safety is the responsibility of all of these groups, but there are a lot of people who don't seem to care anymore.

As you say, that's your view. I could write a different list and then we'd disagree. We all have responsibility for our own and the safety of others. The impatience of drivers in the centre of Surbiton is scandalous. Victoria Road and Claremont Road should have a 20 mph limit - but no; drivers are allowed to race around at 30 even where there are masses of people going about their everyday tasks. People should be allowed to cross where they want - it's a town centre. On the positive side, at least no one has been reported killed this year as a consequence of a road collision Surbiton borough, unlike 2007 when a pensioner was hit outside Waitrose:

I don't think that people trying to cross the road 'expect' traffic to stop for them. But it does seem to me that some drivers don't expect people to try to cross the road.

Cyclists are a pampered set, but probably the greatest dangers in our streets. They have allocated lanes, and exclusive waiting areas at traffic-lights. Yet, they abuse the road, by paying no attention to traffic-lights and zebra-crossings; and the pavement, by encroaching on the very areas that are reserved for the safety of pedestrians. Many of them do not use lights after dark - and most do not have even a bell, to warn of their approach.

> probably the greatest dangers in our streets

This is a joke, right? As it seems to be OK to talk in sweeping generalisations, how about all those car drivers on their phones, picking their noses, and applying their make-up? I would say that's more dangerous when there are pedestrians around.

Cyclists and red lights - yeah, grrr! - but if there are no pedestrians trying to cross then does it really matter? If it means the puffed-out cyclist doesn't have to stop and restart then I say fine. Live and let live. I'd say the same goes for cars too, despite what the law says (common sense, anyone?) - although you don't see many doing it. But you do see plenty of cars tailgating through as lights change at junctions and surely that's a more heinous act?

Er, yes it does matter! As an example, I was driving down Lingfield Avenue the other night, approaching the junction with Beaufort Road/Cranes Park. The lights were green as I approached. Just as I got to the junction, a cyclist bombed through from the Cranes Park direction into Beaufort Road.

Fortunately, I was driving slowly and was able to slam on the brakes to avoid him. If I had been going 20-30 mph it would have been a different story - the cyclist would have been badly injured and I would have likely been charged for a driving 'offence' that wasn't my fault.

I wasn't clear. What I meant was, I don't think we should get so het up about bicycles (and cars) jumping reds at simple Pelican crossings when it's clear there are no pedestrians around. Where two roads intersect then of course it's crazy to disobey the lights.

Motorists are a pampered set, but probably the greatest dangers in our streets. They have allocated lanes, and they are the reason that we have traffic lights. Yet some abuse the road, by paying no attention to traffic-lights and zebra-crossings; and the pavement, by encroaching on the very areas that are reserved for the safety of pedestrians. Many of them have headlights that don't work after dark - and none even have a bell, to warn of their approach.

Very sorry to hear of your accident and I am sure you are one of the sensible cyclists so ignore my further comments about cyclists below.

I am somewhat bemused however as the road markings are so clear that all road users should be able to negotiate the junction safely.

The cycle lane from Lamberts is clearly marked,just before the junction, with a give way road marking and a temporary red "change of priority" sign,as is the KCR approach.

Traffic coming up Surbiton Hill Park has to slow down due to a road hump/pillow calming measure so cannot be moving that quickly even with the junction priority in its favour(apart from cyclists who can avoid the humps without losing speed).

Many surbiton cyclists seem to be aggressive simpletons with their ipods or Bluetooths locked into their ears so perhaps it would help to be able to hear clearly and be concentrating on the road ahead and pedestrians like me would feel safer.

Just noticed the "July 08" indication signs are uncovered again,does this mean the bridge will only have one lane or have the wind and weather simply eroded the fastenings?

Hey, I'm a Berrylands resident too, and I'd love to see the KCR closed to through traffic. Full stop.

Make the KCR no entry at the old kia garage, forcing cars back onto the Ewell road.
The rat runners would disappear overnight.
Make Berrylands Road, Regent Road and the Ridge no entry as well.
Local traffic could use the bridge by travelling up to Raeburn and back down Surbiton Hill Park. Rat runners wouldn't bother, as they'd lose any time saving.

Either that, or just close the bridge like they did with the bridge at Springfield road, just south of Kingston. Its a really pleasant cycle / walking route now.

I think you are right, but sometimes I wonder if rat-runners actually care about making a time saving, or just get satisfaction from assuming that they are.

Most of the KCR rat-runners continue once they get over the bridge - down Cranes Park and Beaufort Road until emerging back on the A240 at Denmark Road by the court building. All of the speed humps and mini roundabouts on this route means that it will take longer than going doen the main road most of the time.

What are our planners doing now?

I notice that the signage for the new layout is still covered in black plastic sheeting,does this mean that maybe a planner has had a rethink and now wonders if it is right to foster traffic jams and further pollution, or has the blessed Rose Theatre used up all available monies?

I walk this route and I guess should be pleased that the School cyclists will no longer be a danger on the pavements.

However sometimes the minority should be made to suffer for the greater good of the majority,by deliberately causing traffic jams around the KCR and surrounding area the commerce of both Surbiton and Kingston will suffer and currently are suffering from planning blight.

Adults,and yes even drivers have rights,or least should have.If rights are always loaded in favour of children will responsibilities be similarly allocated?

Turning to rat runs,why do you think they exist?It is because main arterial routes are so made so difficult to navigate that traffic is forced to find alternatives,the whole of Elmbridge and Surb Hill Park is a rat run from the A3 due to the shambles of the Ewell Road.

Just widen the KCR bridge to two way traffic and incorporate cycle lanes,keep traffic moving and commerce prospering

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

By posting content on, you agree to adhere to the following guidelines.

  • Your username and password must only be used by you, keep them safe. If a posting is made using your username and password it will be considered to have been posted by you. If you have a friend who wants to use our site and post messages on the site, show them how to register.
  • Be courteous at all times, inciting racial hatred, posting abusive, obscene, threatening, harassing, defamatory, libellous or sexually explicit material or any material that is found to be offensive is not acceptable and we may suspend your username and password.
  • Retaliating to offensive posts causes more problems for other users on the discussion boards. Just report such messages to us using the Feedback link which is available at the top of every page or the 'report this' link associated with individual postings. We will act on every report we receive.
  • Please respect other people's work and do not post material that infringes copyright.
  • Do not post information that you know to be confidential or sensitive or otherwise in breach of the law. You should only post material that you know to be public knowledge. If you have any doubts do not post it on the site.
  • Never attempt to gain unauthorised access to any area of the site. This is known as hacking and is illegal.
  • Content posted represents the opinions of the author, and does not represent the opinions of or its affiliates and has not been approved or issued by You should be aware that the other participants are strangers to you and may make statements which may be misleading, deceptive or wrong.
  • Spoofing or posing as another user is unacceptable. Anonymous users' postings should always be considered with suspicion.
  • Help keep a safe place for information and opinion. Please alert us of any anti-social behaviour as described above.
Please note that does not monitor the comments posted and we are therefore reliant upon users reporting antisocial behaviour.