Reply to: Best and worst places to live in London

Re: It seems to me

Hard to find newly built homes in London. For the best areas... how about Battersea Park if you don't have a fortune to spend for chelsea or Hampstead?

Re: It seems to me

The only nice things about East London is its convienient and cheap.

Other than that Gloucester Road, Queensway area is my favourite although too pricy for my wallet at this stage.

It seems to me

...that you can divide London down the middle.

West London is OK with some good bits, while east London is a large sh1thole with some even worse bits.

Millwall is up there with the worst.

Best place I've lived in - Marylebone - with Regents Park just over the road. Primrose Hill and Maida Vale look good too. (Like sasguru I'm in Hoxton now too - no greenery so I jump on the tube to go to Regents Park if I'm in London at weekends.)

Worst place - Wood Green. What a hellhole - only decent thing is the kebab shops

Having a place in Wimbledon at the moment is good. You can rent it out for £2k a week to some Japanese businessman.

Best
I like the bit from Hammersmith bridge down to Putney. Houses are overpriced fro what they are, but the area isn't too bad for the usual London crimewave. There's an excellent Thai on Fulham Pallace road and the best Indian I've ever been in is just around the corner in Chiswick. The pubs are OK too.

Worst
Had the misfortune to stay at a mates in Wembley during one contract, erm:x

What about the smart, perverted, sluggish, ugly people who have been outside of London? Like me :b

Seems you can divide the world into 2 types:

(1) The intelligent, lively, dynamic and good-looking people who like London
(2) The rest

Yes 2/ includes the more numerous Thick, rude, sluggish, ugly people who have never been outside of London.

I just bought in Putney, it's close enough to city with great transport, got rivers and parks and still enough action going on to keep you local but potential to raise a family.

The private girls' school in Putney produces some decent totty; added bonus.

Wage in 'remembering Juliette' mode.

All depends on what's important.

Central & younger quieter and more moneyed, village like and secluded, close to the city, great links.

There are a million different variables.

I just bought in Putney, it's close enough to city with great transport, got rivers and parks and still enough action going on to keep you local but potential to raise a family. Works for me

One of the worst places in london has to be Streatham/Mitcham. I bought my first place there many years ago becuase it was the only place I could afford at the time. Streatham it is one of the chepest areas in Zone 3 and rightfully so.

It's posh neighbour Streatham Hill, which was just round the corner, enjoyed lovely tree lined streets with Edwardian terraces and large detached properties branching off the High Road. Streatham and Mitcham, however, had street after street of hideous filth-ridden terraced houses, no tube ... just trains in which the local passengers for some reason preferred to piss on the seats rather than the toilets. Everything about it ... the people, the council, the cars, the shopkeepers, the food was awful ... even the traffic was just feckin horrendous.

The day I sold my house in Streatham was quite easily one of the happiest days of my life.

SG, Chelsea and Hampstead are good choices. If you're looking to move west, then there are plenty of nice areas like Hampton, Twickers and Richmond.

WS if money ws no object, these are my favourites:

(1) Barnes, by the river
(2) Chelsea, off King's Road
(3) Hampstead, by the Heath
(4) Highgate, off the High Road
(5) Chiswick

One day, I guess...

Seems you can divide the world into 2 types:

(1) The intelligent, lively, dynamic and good-looking people who like London
(2) The rest

Best is surely Hampstead.