On 6 Mar, 16:20, "p.k." wrote:
La Puce wrote:
I've just received a post saying genista lydia. I didn't think of
'lydia' because it's usually very low, no more than 1/2ft high and
grown covering.

I don't think so:
original:http://www.pbase.com/rbel1/image/75228486/original
VS Genista lydiahttp://helmers.de/pflanzen/laubgehoelze/genista_lydia.JPG
It's always best to check a picture before identifying a plant.

Ho I do beleive me I do. I'm quite obsessed with searching! ;o) This
is what was sent to me. Other photos I have of this genista are in
flowers so I just can't see the swirls of the OP's original plant.

http://davesgarden.com/pf/showimage/3159/

And in any case it is very ground covering - so indeed it's not the
Lydia.