Hulley's of Baslow (Defunct)

[Teapot42]

I'd hope given it's significance, the Traffic Commissioner will do a full write up for this one. Though they have been rather lax on their fuller responses after public inquiries in recent months.

Let's hope so. As all we get in the N&P are the outcomes, are the write-ups available elsewhere on their website?

As an aside, I notice basic details of the tender awards to replace some of the Hulleys services have been posted online.

Runs until October 2027, which presumably brings it inline with other contracts? I originally found this on a site called bidstats.co.uk which listed the total value as over £4m for the revised tender, but I wonder if this is an error. Both the original and revised on the .gov site are for just under £735k.

Would be interesting to know how this compares to what Hulleys were being paid.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I'd hope given it's significance, the Traffic Commissioner will do a full write up for this one. Though they have been rather lax on their fuller responses after public inquiries in recent months.

I don't know - the Transpora one was comprehensive and enlightening

 

[Dai Corner]

As all we get in the N&P are the outcomes, are the write-ups available elsewhere on their website?

A search on gov.uk should bring up any decisions published online.

Search

Find content from government

www.gov.uk

 

[Omnidekkalover]

Sunday 257 is getting the axe by the end of the month

 

[Man of Kent]

Sunday 257 is getting the axe by the end of the month

Worth noting that it is not shown on the operator's website (South Pennine Community Transport), and there is no indication on the Andrew's website (which displays the timetable provided in the tender document) that another operator runs on Sundays.

 

[Trainman40083]

Worth noting that it is not shown on the operator's website (South Pennine Community Transport), and there is no indication on the Andrew's website (which displays the timetable provided in the tender document) that another operator runs on Sundays.

When I was in Bakewell on a Sunday in June, I didn't see any suggestion it ran anyway.

 

[richard13]

When I was in Bakewell on a Sunday in June, I didn't see any suggestion it ran anyway.

Derbyshire CC says:

257

Sheffield - Ladybower Inn - Derwent Dams (Fairholmes) - Bamford Station

South Pennine Community Transport

Sunday

Current timetable

The Sunday 257 service will stop running after its last date of 13th July 2025

https://www.derbysbus.info/times/tt_201_999.htm

 

[Trainman40083]

Derbyshire CC says:

257

Sheffield - Ladybower Inn - Derwent Dams (Fairholmes) - Bamford Station

South Pennine Community Transport

Sunday

Current timetable

The Sunday 257 service will stop running after its last date of 13th July 2025

https://www.derbysbus.info/times/tt_201_999.htm

I just looked on the timetable in Bakewell Square...

 

[Teapot42]

When I was in Bakewell on a Sunday in June, I didn't see any suggestion it ran anyway.

Why would there be a timetable in Bakewell for a service which goes nowhere near there?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jul 2025 ==

Worth noting that it is not shown on the operator's website (South Pennine Community Transport), and there is no indication on the Andrew's website (which displays the timetable provided in the tender document) that another operator runs on Sundays.

It does feature on their Facebook page, but SPCT aren't the best at keeping things updated. Their services are on BODS at last, but they don't send real time data.

It's a shame they are pulling it, especially right at the start of the school holidays, but in a way not surprising. No-one seems to want to fund tourist services to that part of the Park for some reason. The Hulleys Sunday service was operated commercially and it was said they tried to get some funding from DCC but were refused. They seem happy enough to fund week-day and Saturday services - the 257 itself was mainly commercial when Hulleys ran it, only becoming fully tendered when Andrews took over. The Peak Park suffers really badly from traffic, but without funding and publicity it's impossible to try and get people to change to using the bus.

I'm not surprised Andrews don't mention it, as the Sunday variant is a much different offering to what they run. Even under Hulleys the 257 was Sheffield-focused and most of the variants they tried didn't get beyond Bamford.

 

[markymark2000]

It does feature on their Facebook page, but SPCT aren't the best at keeping things updated. Their services are on BODS at last, but they don't send real time data.

It's a shame they are pulling it, especially right at the start of the school holidays, but in a way not surprising. No-one seems to want to fund tourist services to that part of the Park for some reason. The Hulleys Sunday service was operated commercially and it was said they tried to get some funding from DCC but were refused. They seem happy enough to fund week-day and Saturday services - the 257 itself was mainly commercial when Hulleys ran it, only becoming fully tendered when Andrews took over. The Peak Park suffers really badly from traffic, but without funding and publicity it's impossible to try and get people to change to using the bus.

SPCT services aren't on BODS, they don't even have a BODS account. Because of their 'charity' status (I use the word charity very loosely), they use section 22 permits and get around Bus Open Data rules and regulations.

I suppose we just add this to a long list of yet another bus operator making cuts to services because it was somehow beyond their basic capabilities to advertise their own services. In what other industry do businesses just expect people to become customers without any advertising and no one knowing you exist. It's cutting shop opening hours but no one knowing your shop exists because the door is always shut, the lights are turned off and there is no signage outside. It's barbaric. We wonder why the bus industry is having so many troubles.

I'm not surprised Andrews don't mention it, as the Sunday variant is a much different offering to what they run. Even under Hulleys the 257 was Sheffield-focused and most of the variants they tried didn't get beyond Bamford.

Andrews timetables on the website are either the timetables that are displayed by Derbyshire Council on Derbsbus.info, or in the case of the 257 it's just a copy of the tender specification timetable. Given Andrews went from no local buses, to having a PVR of 6 overnight and all of the stuff they were dealing with fleet and driver wise etc, I'm not surprised Andrews have just thrown up a basic timetable for now. It's also correct for what they operate. It's a tender too, why would they be bothered about another operators commercial service on another day?

 

[Trainman40083]

SPCT services aren't on BODS, they don't even have a BODS account. Because of their 'charity' status (I use the word charity very loosely), they use section 22 permits and get around Bus Open Data rules and regulations.

I suppose we just add this to a long list of yet another bus operator making cuts to services because it was somehow beyond their basic capabilities to advertise their own services. In what other industry do businesses just expect people to become customers without any advertising and no one knowing you exist. It's cutting shop opening hours but no one knowing your shop exists because the door is always shut, the lights are turned off and there is no signage outside. It's barbaric. We wonder why the bus industry is having so many troubles.


Andrews timetables on the website are either the timetables that are displayed by Derbyshire Council on Derbsbus.info, or in the case of the 257 it's just a copy of the tender specification timetable. Given Andrews went from no local buses, to having a PVR of 6 overnight and all of the stuff they were dealing with fleet and driver wise etc, I'm not surprised Andrews have just thrown up a basic timetable for now. It's also correct for what they operate. It's a tender too, why would they be bothered about another operators commercial service on another day?

Paragraph 2 says it all.. Why would you use it? You'd give up looking if you had an alternative.

 

[Bletchleyite]

SPCT services aren't on BODS, they don't even have a BODS account. Because of their 'charity' status (I use the word charity very loosely), they use section 22 permits and get around Bus Open Data rules and regulations.

I don't know where they get the data, but the timetable for the Sunday operation *is* on bustimes.org.

 

[mangad]

SPCT services aren't on BODS, they don't even have a BODS account. Because of their 'charity' status (I use the word charity very loosely), they use section 22 permits and get around Bus Open Data rules and regulations.

I know you used quote marks, but they're a registered Community Interest Company, which is a different legal status to a charity. Both exist to do social good but there are many differences - including the ability for a CIC to potentially pay profits to its shareholders if the company members agree.

That's not really related to the topic in question, but worth a few seconds to clarify this.

 

[Teapot42]

SPCT services aren't on BODS, they don't even have a BODS account.

Sorry, you are correct, I conflated BODS with Bustimes. Their service listings on there were often incorrect until recently.

I suppose we just add this to a long list of yet another bus operator making cuts to services because it was somehow beyond their basic capabilities to advertise their own services.

What I don't understand is how many of their other services survive. Look at the 87 for example, a wonderfully scenic service but timed in such a way that it's very difficult for anyone who doesn't live near the route to do. If they are going for niche services, why not at least combine the offering so enthusiasts might also take advantage? Merge the 87 and 351 and fill in the gap to do a full loop Holmfirth > Castleton > Glossop.

 

[markymark2000]

I don't know where they get the data, but the timetable for the Sunday operation *is* on bustimes.org.

Data for South Pennine comes from Traveline. On every single route page, Bustimes tells you where it gets it's data from for that route.
(while not something you raise, just as a disclaimer, even when operators do share data to bods, sometimes bustimes uses other data sources because the data quality is better or something else. Bustimes not using bods data does not instantly mean the operator is not sending data to bods)

I know you used quote marks, but they're a registered Community Interest Company, which is a different legal status to a charity. Both exist to do social good but there are many differences - including the ability for a CIC to potentially pay profits to its shareholders if the company members agree.

That's not really related to the topic in question, but worth a few seconds to clarify this.

That's rather interesting as surely if profits are being paid to shareholders, they shouldn't be eligible for Section 22 community bus permits but I guess that is another topic

Sorry, you are correct, I conflated BODS with Bustimes. Their service listings on there were often incorrect until recently.

IT's down to local authorities to maintain Traveline data. Some do a good job, some a less good job.

 

[mangad]

That's rather interesting as surely if profits are being paid to shareholders, they shouldn't be eligible for Section 22 community bus permits but I guess that is another topic

A CIC can be set up so that profits are retained and not distributed to shareholders. Where distribution is allowed there is also a cap on how much can be distributed (35% max I think.)

I don't know how South Pennine is set up. They may well be set up so that all profits are retained. But it's a CIC decision.

 

[Teapot42]

The latest N&P show Hulleys licence being revoked, but oddly still no mention of the PI outcome. Others held more recently have had the outcome shown - could this mean it has been postponed again?

 

[Trainman40083]

The latest N&P show Hulleys licence being revoked, but oddly still no mention of the PI outcome. Others held more recently have had the outcome shown - could this mean it has been postponed again?

Maybe they are waiting for the owner's health to improve. I've know too many people in business almost kill themselves through stress etc.

 

[duncombec]

The latest N&P show Hulleys licence being revoked, but oddly still no mention of the PI outcome. Others held more recently have had the outcome shown - could this mean it has been postponed again?

I would imagine the revocation is automatic on the entering insolvency, presumably for reason of absence of necessary funds and/or no TM in the insolvent business?

 

[Teapot42]

I would imagine the revocation is automatic on the entering insolvency, presumably for reason of absence of necessary funds and/or no TM in the insolvent business?

Wouldn't that render the business worthless to any potential buyer though? Granted there isn't a right lot of value anyway, but without a license the administrator will surely get even less than they could otherwise.

That said, have operators ever been bought out of insolvency, or once that stage is reached is it always terminal and someone else just registers the services and takes over?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Jul 2025 ==

Maybe they are waiting for the owner's health to improve. I've know too many people in business almost kill themselves through stress etc.

Has his health deteriorated since the initial stage of the PI and his two recent holidays?

 

[MotCO]

Has his health deteriorated since the initial stage of the PI and his two recent holidays?

Is Alf of an age when it is unlikely he would want to work in the bus industry again, so is the outcome, if some sort of ban, somewhat irrelevant?

 

[zkyx02]

Is Alf of an age when it is unlikely he would want to work in the bus industry again, so is the outcome, if some sort of ban, somewhat irrelevant?

Well considering he now works for Linburg I’d assume not..

 

[Teapot42]

Is Alf of an age when it is unlikely he would want to work in the bus industry again, so is the outcome, if some sort of ban, somewhat irrelevant?

I'm not sure he has much choice - from what the Derbyshire Times article says it sounds like he took on personal debts to keep Hulleys going, so presumably needs to service those.

He's in his early 50s and by the sounds of it has only worked in the bus industry, so I can't see a career change being an option.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

Well considering he now works for Linburg I’d assume not..

Not clear what role he has there, and whether a ban would affect that.

Of course there are non-TM related issues he may have to face if the allegations against the company prove true.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

I would imagine the revocation is automatic on the entering insolvency, presumably for reason of absence of necessary funds and/or no TM in the insolvent business?

Wouldn't that render the business worthless to any potential buyer though? Granted there isn't a right lot of value anyway, but without a license the administrator will surely get even less than they could otherwise.

That said, have operators ever been bought out of insolvency, or once that stage is reached is it always terminal and someone else just registers the services and takes over?

I don't think revocation would be automatic on entering insolvency as there has always been some allowance for a company to fix the issue (find the money to restore the necessary funds and/or hire a new TM) but there is a time limit to that allowance though normally such things are done via a PI even when the operator tries to surrender due to ceasing operation to tie all the rulings together (as simply ceasing overnight is breaching conditions even without issues of funds or TMs being in place).

Not many companies seem to be saved once they enter insolvency but in most cases that seems to be because the administrators rarely seem to understand that the biggest value for a bus business is often the routes & contracts they run and so cease operation as they are concerned about being able to cover outgoings in the future but by doing this they immediately halve the value of the assets to sell (though not sure if UK bankruptcy protections allow sustained loss making continuous operation to try and rescue the business in the way some other countries, like the US with Chapter 11 protections, offer).

 

[markymark2000]

Others held more recently have had the outcome shown

Hattons Transport in Merseyside were up at a PI in June 2024 and while the outcome is known (curtailment), there hasn't been any of the summaries posted for us to read through (like Transporas for example). The summaries only seem to be posted as/when the Traffic Commissioners can be bothered.

 

[Trainman40083]

South Derbyshire Coaches have too

 

[duncombec]

Today's North West Notices and Proceedings reveals the outcome of the Public Inquiry:

Public Inquiry (90305) held at The Public Inquiry Room (Warrington), WA3 2SH, Suite 4, Stone Cross Place, Stone Cross Lane North, Golborne, Warrington, on 10 June 2025 commenced at 13:30 (Previous Publication3172)) Previous hearing on 21 January 2025 was adjourned. PC0003407 SN HENRY HULLEY & SONS LTD Director(s): ALFRED VINCENT CROFTS DERWENT GARAGE, CALVER ROAD, BASLOW, BAKEWELL, DE45 1RP
S17 - Licence revoked with immediate effect
S28 - Operator and sole director Alfred Crofts disqualified with immediate effect for a period of 2 years

 

[MotCO]

Today's North West Notices and Proceedings reveals the outcome of the Public Inquiry:

Revocation of licence presumably because of insufficient financial standing?

 

[Teapot42]

This appears to be an inquiry in to the operator - was there also one in to the TM?

And in terms of the disqualification, is this just from running a bus company, or are there other things he is banned from doing in relation to PSVs?

 

[duncombec]

This appears to be an inquiry in to the operator - was there also one in to the TM?

There was, but the outcome is no different to that already stated above in regard to the operator.

Revocation of licence presumably because of insufficient financial standing?

I wouldn't like to speculate - remember, these proceedings began well before the insolvency, and indeed before the most recent bridge bash. Those will be additional to whatever the original reason for calling the PI was.