If you are claiming that Transport for Greater Manchester is looking for a £20m deposit, there must be some document in the public domain that backs this claim up.
Also drivers have been offered jobs at Diamond's Eccles depot. The letter of which being shared in a public Facebook group.Interestingly, LJ09KPF has seemingly been repainted in Diamond livery
Go Goodwins LJ09KPF
Little Gem (Go Goodwins Group) LJ09KPF seen on Hardy Lane, Chorlton on service 84 to Withington. This bus seems to have for some reason been recently repainted into Rotala Diamond Buses "Two Tone Blue" liveryflickr.com
www.facebook.com
Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) have a fairly rigorous contract management system in place for their bus service work. It's possible for an operator not complying with the terms of the contract to find that they're paying TfGM to run the tendered routes after the penalties for non compliance are issued. If there are multiple violations, that could outstrip the payment for operating the contracts. This could be customer complaints, observations from TfGM supervisory staff in bus stations, failing to show a destination, failing to operate a journey, operating a journey later than timetabled, using an non compliant vehicle (age of vehicle, or the capacity/size of vehicle)on a journey, general condition of the vehicle. I've even heard of penalties issued for a failure to respond to requests for information from the authority in the required timeframe.
Source, please!
Didn't Mr Peddle throw his toys out of the pram over a relatively minor dispute and withdraw from Manchester as a result?
The 288 operates wholly within Manchester, do the High Peak ones not also get funding from other councils?
Insurers do increase premiums and excesses on drivers who have high accident rates - or rather are involved in claims against the operator's insurance. Larger operators like First self insure but most operators don't do this. One way to cut down your premium is a high excess - insurers have been known to increase it on drivers who are involved in multiple accidents. That could pose a problem to a bus operator that doesn't have their pick of the driver pool, and is having to employ people dismissed from others operators for having accidents. If you have tendered for the work at a given price, it's an additional cost that eats into the profit from the work.
VOSA said:
Most private operators will have a right of centre leaning otherwise they wouldn't be in business! All businesses trim accordingly so that any dead wood is removed before the entire enterprise rots, those that fail sees the entire place go to pot - which is a sign of a badly ran bussiness.It depends on the leanings of the owner, I guess. There is some historic evidence that the owners of Go Goodwins may possibly have right of centre learnings rather than the left leanings of the current Mayor of Greater Manchester.
The link won't let me download the image so I can't attach it here.
There is a possibility that Little Gem may have been slowly winding down their operations, hence why the fleet appeared to look badly turned out.
www.route-one.net
So effectively Goodwins threw their toys out of the pram because TfGM refused to pay Little Gem more than the agreed terms in the contracts for the tendered services. And there is a hint that relations had broken down over franchising:
I can see why you've taken the view you have as it's a logical one to take. But fuel surcharges have been applied by a number of councils up and down the country as a response to the doubling of fuel prices. After driver costs this is the largest single cost to an operator. It's possible that the operator doesn't store fuel on site, and has to fill up at a filling station, in which case they'll be paying the at pump price. You then become vulnerable to price variations. I think it more likely Goodwins will have fuel cards which drivers can use - so the pence per litre is agreed with the card provider. If TfGM don't want to recognise that, then they'll see operators hand in tenders.A story giving Goodwins version of events:
Little Gem owner hits back over closure of bus operation - routeone
The owner of Little Gem has hit back at claims by Transport for Greater Manchester that it had no notice of a likely closure of the business.
AIUI "handing in the tender" would normally be a prescribed process with a notice period, in accordance with the terms of the contract. That is very different from the Goodwins "nuclear option" of winding up a subsidiary company and surrendering its O-licence with only one day's notice, in order to avoid any financial liability to the Go Goodwins Group holding company.
But how does that work if the operator has ceased trading and no longer has any officers or employees?
In the case of Nippy Bus down in Somerset, the licence was revoked by the traffic commissioner. The former owner had applied to surrender it, but the commissioner isn't bound to accept a surrender. He was given a 10 year ban from holding an operators licence. They ceased operations with 12 hours notice. In the case of D Jones & Son, the former owner was banned for stopping services with next to no notice. The precedent doesn't favour Goodwins in this respect - they're looking at licence revocation at the worst instance. They don't have a regulatory history but then neither did Nippy Bus.
They would be better off selling them, there is always demand in the market for low floor minibuses.
