ROOF

Thank you for visiting the Routemaster Owner and Operator's Forum (ROOF). Please feel free to use this forum for the mature discussion of any issues of interest and relevance to Routemaster owners. Please do not use this board to publicise your feelings about individuals, National or Local Government or TFL policy. Owners of other London bus types in service during the 1950s, 60s and 70s are also welcome to contribute to this forum.

Please note, the ROOF website no longer exists. The link from the Forum does not work anymore.  Useful information and links from the website has been posted to the Forum.

Please do not respond to abusive posts but notify ROOFmoderator 1@outlook.com.


ROOF
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

With the impending implementation in January 2020 of the PSVAR PSV Accessibility Regulations), all buses and coaches used on regular bus services including rail replacement, planned and emergency, will have to comply with the new regulations. There's a one month extension for rail replacement buses, but from what I gather anything that isn't PSVAR complaint won't be allowed.

But then there's nobody to enforce it..

Maybe one of the Newman family could advise on this?

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

When explained to delayed rail passengers why there are fewer buses than required I don't see this going down well. Congratulations to the authorities for getting the financial burden shifted off politically sensitive and corporate lobby budgets. I am sure the various taxi companies would have welcomed the opportunity to be able to supply the personal service which would be so much more appropriate for the disabled rail passenger in these circumstances.

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

There’s a two year temporary extension announced in November for Council contracted HTS transport with a possible extra two year stay of execution after that and there is some debate as to whether Railways are technically a contract with the Rail Company so exempt ?

My bus number (if any): RML2747

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Rail Replacement Buses in the South East (GTR) have to be 100% accessible from the 1st January 2020. If an operator provides a coach or bus that a wheelchair user cannot board unaided then it has to be sent back to depot and either replaced with a DDA compliant vehicle or that duty cut.

The cherry on the cake is that if a Rail Replacement Co-ordinator sends out a vehicle that is not compliant on such a service and is reported then it isn't just the operator that is fined, the Co-ordinator is liable for a £2500 fine too.

Steve

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

From what I've read in the trade press there is an exemption for rail replacement buses until the end of January 2020. end of the matter unless the new government brings in modified legislation. So no more RMs, RTs and the like on rail replacement, whether planned or emergency. That will only exacerbate the current vehicle and driver shortgae in certain areas, especially when there is a major incident.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Where does this leave a charity / goodwill event such as Imberbus?

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

As I understand it the law will apply to timetabled services where the passenger is paying for the transport either directly or through a third party so charity and free running days shouldn’t be affected nor pre booked private hire where any requirement for wheel chair access would be known in advance by the customer. As coaches go to add a wheel chair facility currently costs around £25,000 to the new build cost with the loss of at least four seats but most touring coach builders aren’t currently properly set up to offer the facility. The rules will apply to any vehicle above 22 seats - many 33 seaters at least already run at full weight capacity when fully loaded with little extra available for luggage without the additional weight of a lift so probably not a practical possibility ? The odd Routemaster has been adapted in the past so perhaps if the lost seat space wasn’t required 99.9% of the time for a wheelchair at least standing passengers could utilise the space unlike on a touring coach where operators need to run coaches on school contracts as well as private hire to make the cost of the vehicles financially viable. I think one option being discussed with councils with HTM contracts is to run an additional dedicated wheel chair adapted taxi with the service if required rather than reduce the capacity of passenger service vehicles permanently as being detrimental to the best use of the carbon footprint of the vehicle ?

My bus number (if any): RML2747

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Copy Graham Brown:

"........rather than reduce the capacity of passenger service vehicles permanently as being detrimental to the best use of the carbon footprint of the vehicle."

Love it. Stuff it to them with their own PC mantra.

They make the rules; make them live by them.

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

My thoughts entirely roy. There will be nobody to enforce the rules anyway.

They won't apply to free bus running days or special services.

It has already been made clear that rail replacement WILL be included, whether planned or emergency. Sepaking with someone today who is financing an additional vehicle for his business, the finance firm is taking an additional 2 weeks to process the paperwork due to the pressure from operators to upgrade their fleets. FFS, they've had nearly 20 years to do that, this isn't a new law by a long stretch.

Back in the mid 1990s when i was running Nostalgiabus at Mitcham I expressed my concerns then about the then new Surrey Hills Leisure bus operations, a whole network of Sunday routes all over Surrey using heritage buses (as they're now called). I told the CPT that my firm would be put out of business if this came in and was told "it's 15 years away", not to worry.
As it happens, the firm shut down in 2003 so I didn't worry too much.

The fines foroperating non-compliant vehicles on rail replacement are quite high for the train operating company, and even the rail services co-ordinator/controller could face a fine of up the £2500 for sending a non-compliant vehicle on service. any that turn up must be turned away and the duty cut.

So much for putting the passenger first.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Am I missing something here......

The ImberBus event is a fully registered scheduled service even though it operates on just one day. Fares are paid to ride on any participating bus and the revenue generated goes to good causes. The team who arrange Imberbus have always ensured that a few `new` Routemasters work alongside traditional RM`s to provide for access needs. Everyone who attends seems to have nothing but high praise for the way in which the event runs. The only significant revenue stream that the church at Imber receives is from this event.

So if a significant unforeseen long-term `blockage` to a rail/tube line occurs that severs a major route thus requiring alternative road transport replacement, is it really right to cause massive inconvenience to potentially thousands of people who would be grateful for their journey to continue in part by an `older` vehicle that should not be used? If it meant taking a few accessible buses away from their usual routes to be part of the replacement transport to show a will to provide for everyone, common sense thinking and practicality has to play a big part. Where would thirty, or forty or fifty fully accessible buses suddenly come from to cover a major need? How many operators have a great quantity of spare vehicles and drivers?

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Absolutely spot on Neil I would say but isn’t it the most powerful lobby that wins over common sense when policy is developed ? I don’t know where the much reduced H15 stands now or is that ok as there are alternative accessible vehicles running in which case Imberbus should be able to carry on ?

My bus number (if any): RML2747

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Well, if all really does mean `all`, I can`t see how the 15H can continue even if it is just a handful of non-accessible buses running alongside many that are unless an exemption is made to permit a mixed operation if accessible vehicles are the majority. I can`t see the will being there to permit this.

At ImberBus, the proportions are different. Majority non-accessible buses, minority that are - and all running on a registered, timetabled service. Likewise, the Great Dorset Steam Fair service. It`s registered and timetabled to fill a need to get people to an event in the middle of nowhere. True, it would be possible to replace the `heritage` buses used this year and last with compliant deckers as the event falls in August when the lack of school contracts creates spare vehicles but the end result is that a wheelchair user is going to alight onto a sloping field with all the challenges of moving on from there. So even if the heritage vehicles are replaced in 2020 by compliant buses, the use to a wheelchair user doesn`t improve either side of the time on the bus.

Earlier this year here in Bournemouth there were several railway suicides within a short time span. Unusual and desperately sad with each media covered case potentially putting the idea into other troubled minds. This isn`t the place to discuss social failings but one thing that became very clear and announced at each relevant time was the failure to source replacement road transport due to the commitment of local operators to covering school buses. And school buses always come first even if that means taking a bus and driver away from front line service. The length of duty now is quite widely in excess of ten hours and in many instances eleven hours. There is no longer the scope for a driver doing two or three hours overtime on emergency rail even if vehicles are available. The proof is already here that even when surrounded by fleets of compliant buses, a `one off` emergency need cannot be covered so where do we go when a `Dawlish track washed away` issue forces a two month closure?

Maybe my thinking isn`t as pc as it needs to be but I cannot comprehend how it can be right that any respected operator (and one in particular) can have a shed full of serviceable (but non-compliant) buses and a pool of willing volunteer crew members just a phone call away but come 1/1/20 cannot do what they have a proven and appreciated record of doing successfully. It is now written in law that all users are provided for. No issue with that on a day to day, normal scenario basis. But in an emergency unforeseen situation, how can it be right to discriminate against thousands of people who could use a non-compliant bus in order not to upset a few that cannot? As Roy pointed out, in an emergency situation it would make good sense to have accessible taxi`s on standby that could even be a better option for a disabled user if their journey before of after the bus travel element could also be provided for. In such an instance, a person unable to use a non-compliant bus would be free of the vast crowds that are often synonymous with emergency rail replacement and would have a much better experience. Or is this this common sense thinking now out of date? Has anybody actually asked the groups representing less able users what they would prefer in emergency situations?

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

The heritage route 15X is probably a "special service" and special services are exempt to a greater degree. they may be registered, but don't quality fo fuel duty rebate or BSOG or whatever it's called this year. Rail replacements have now got the right to claim BSOG/FDR.

Such registered services don't have to accept senior bus passes and if they did would not get rebated for their acceptance; rail replacement can't claim for senior passes, but still claim BSOG.

The Ensign running Day extras are I suspect extras on a compliant service. Ensign advertise that senior passes are not accepted on the extra services because they don't get paid for them. I suspect the EOR services may be the same.

I seem to remember when the age ban was proposed many years ago there was a limit of I think 25 days per year when an individual bus can be used on a regular service. That may be why the EOR "gets away" with it as they have a large enough fleet to not use the same bus more than 25 times. But as I mentioned earlier, there's nobody to enforce it anyway.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

The easiest solution is stop providing top quality tour coaches for rail replacement and obtain a fleet of low cost time expired DDA compliant service buses from Barnsley for rail replacement work ?

My bus number (if any): RML2747

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

It’s a shame that vintage buses and non DDA coaches will no longer be allowed on rail replacement work as when the hundreds of often frustrated commuters are faced with the inconvenience of a cancelled rail journey, at the least in London, previously the chance arrival of an RT or RM (or any bus) must go some way to sweetening the journey experience for many members of the public and the whole atmosphere and PR of the situation. It seems a bit ironic particularly as has been said these are the buses and coaches that are usually sitting available for use rather than normal service buses in an emergency. In London if on tube replacement much of the underground network isn’t disabled accessible anyway so wouldn’t really be detrimental to anyone ? It’s a shame that there’s not a stronger common sense lobby to balance policy making in these situations ?

My bus number (if any): RML 2747

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

If this issue isn`t resolved quickly in a common sense way it will only be a matter of time before a major rail blockage creates a need for replacement road transport on a weekday when vehicle and driver resources are at full capacity covering normal service work. Then, at the point where a lot of people need moving and the existing nearby alternatives are seen to be incapable of coping with the increased demand and tempers start to boil, someone is going to have to say `do you want this to continue or do you want the situation turned around quickly with non-compliant but perfectly usable vehicles?`. At the point where it becomes obvious that a new piece of legislation massively disadvantages the majority, an emergency rail replacement exclusion may have to be made. It is so obvious that when normal service work is at maximum use, there are simply not the resources standing idle just waiting for the call. Plenty of coach operators could get involved between school runs and a good few provincial firms whose largely seasonal business would be ideally placed to cover unexpected work but how many of these are going to involve compliant vehicles? And as for the shed full of heritage deckers that have been so useful in the past........

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

As I said earlier, "special services" such as those mentioned above are largely exempt as the y do not qualify for fuel duty rebate. the law has been clarified that rail replacement does qualify for FDR.

The first instance of PAVAR (which has actually been law for several years now) affected me this weekend. Doing a rail replacement for Sullivan Buses at Newbury Park, as standby driver I usually take alon a stove and tea making facilities, much appreciated by our drivers. But tragedy, I forgot to take the cups! Disaster. I know I thought, I'll ask a coach driver, loads of them have got tea making facilites and no doubt I can scrounge a few cups for someone. Of the 100-odd coaches on the service, none had tea machines on board. It turns out theose are used for tour work and are not PSVAR compliant. All we had were the London sightseeing and airport transfer coaches. I did eventually find a driver with a few plastic cups so all was not lots.

But on a couple of buses, PSVAR faults were noted, route numbers or information missing is now a PSVAR offence. It's a bit like when the same regulations were applied to the rail indusrty. If for instance a light for the disabled was not working, that carriage had to be locked out of service. It was pointed out that something like the York-Whitby line is run with a single car unit with a train every 4 hours. Better a train with no light than no train at all. The law was amended.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Let’s hope similar common sense will prevail in this predicament Roy !

My bus number (if any): RML 2747

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement


Just to clarify some of the above comments.

1. The 15H operated under a DfT exemption.
2. EOR and Ensignbus operate their vehicles strictly within the allowed number of days per year per vehicle.

My bus number (if any): RM1368

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

That's what I thought the answer would be. :) It just makes the service more expensive to operate as you need 3 times as many buses as before. Not to worry, at least you get variety.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Re: PSVAR means the end to older buses on rail replacement

Rail passengers expect to travel by train with a reasonably easy access onto and off from the train. Also space to put their luggage. If there are no trains, the closest to that requirement should be provided. Train fares in the UK are not cheap!

People tend forget that this isn't just about people in wheelchairs, it is about people with impaired mobility, impaired vision, the elderly, pregnant women, those whom have suffered injuries or are post op on crutches, all of whom cannot easily climb stairs,or stand for too long.

With all due respect to RT and RM owners, I really would not want an RT or RM turning up in place of a train, if I had luggage and there is a possibly to have to go upstairs for a seat.
The general public do not care if an RT or RM turns up, they just want the warm comfortable ride they'd get on most modern buses and on off peak trains.


Planned train replacements use coaches for long distance passengers and buses for suburban services where most are not carrying luggage, access to these vehicles should be as easy as possible. That is what I see happening now with these new regulations.

We are getting a long way from Routemasters now and this group has never allowed opinions or comments on government or TFL policies, and that is what this has now become, so I am locking this thread now.

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RM 1585, RML 2667 and several RTs