Save the All Inn One pub / Forresters Arms from demolition



Dear Friends,

The campaign to prevent the demolition of the All Inn One pub (formerly The Forresters Arms) in Perry Valehas begun in earnest. We have a short time in which to submit our objections. If you have an objection please submit it to citing Planning Application DC/18/109536 THE FORRESTERS ARMS, 53 PERRY VALE, LONDON, SE23 2NE.

If you do submit an objection, or want to play a role in the campaign, I would be really grateful if you could let me know via email

There are many justifications in planning rules to protect pubs from redevelopment but a good one to mention would be The Mayor of London’s London Plan Policy HC7 Protecting public houses.

There will be more information coming but it would be good to start getting individual objections in now.

Best wishes

Councillor Liam Curran
Chair, Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee


Insightful comment from @Michael on



Surely, a new pub in the development could not be viable without outdoor space, if only for smokers? It sounds like this is something will be dropped in favour of more flats, as soon as demolition was arranged. Btw, how many of the flats are reserved for social housing? The social benefits of the application are questionable, quite apart from the loss of a beautiful building.


Edited after correction from @Michael

I’m in two minds about this now, given I really respect what the proprietors Richard and Julia did to build this pub, and without them, I wonder if a new pub offering would have the same vibe - but it is too late to reverse the loss of Richard and Julia now as they have already sold the property.

I’m not sure why we need a second hotel in Forest Hill (a large hotel is being built down the road on the Co-op site) and I suspect the council might want to use it for their social housing overflow. Good and bad consequences to this.

If there is a loss of pub floor space and/or garden will completely change the character of the place.

The Forest Hill Society is opposing the development and will announce their reasoning soon.


This is an article written from the developer’s point of view:

No endorsement implied, just shared for interest.


From everything people say, they are wonderful landlords, and lovely people, but demolishing the building is a big ask as a retirement present. I think the vocal ‘supporters’ have done them no favours by personalising the case as being about their retirement. Indeed, if I were them I would be quite annoyed. I don’t think anyone knows anything about the finances, and the proprietors are not listed as applicant or agent, so it may be they have no financial interest in the redevelopment. We just don’t know, so let’s stick to the issue of how we would like the site to move forwards, one way or another.


Well said.


Here is a response on that addresses a range of issues raised. Retirement rewards, smoking and outside spaces and death in service.

There are many harsh economic realities and factors that have a bearing on what makes a successful pub. And to inform the successors to R&J and for the record over 18 years of dedication to the local community.


And here is my response to jgdoherty’s post: