almost half past nine

[34D]

Hello,

A bus driver was driving a bus this morning. A lady with an ENCTS pass boarded at a stop. The scheduled time at that stop was 09:29. The actual time was 09:28 (before asks, the stop was NOT a timing point, and the bus was ontime at the timing points either side of the stop).

The time restriction is the national one of 09:30, with no easements applicable. The time applies to the most favourable to the passenger of:
-the actual time
or
-the scheduled time at that stop.

The passenger wanted to sit down and get up at the next stop to touch-in.

The driver explained the restrictions, advised the passenger that they should really pay a fare to their final destination, but showed discretion on this one occasion.

Is this:

-A fair, reasonable use of discretion
or
-theft from the public purse?

If the driver had insisted pay fare or wait for the 10:29 bus, would this have been:
-correct
or
-overzealous jobsworth-ness?

Thanks

 

[Ivo]

Is this:

-A fair, reasonable use of discretion
or
-theft from the public purse?

If the driver had insisted pay fare or wait for the 10:29 bus, would this have been:
-correct
or
-overzealous jobsworth-ness?

Most councils will not pay for pass usage outside of permitted times, so accepting a card at 0928 will not result in payment to the company. On this basis, your second suggestion - "theft from the public purse" - is probably not applicable.

Otherwise however, all of the remaining three suggestions could be considered fair, and representative of a weakness of the system - why should someone have to wait another hour simply because they live 500m from the point at which it becomes 0930?

Well, actually, unless the route does not stop thereafter for quite some time, in which case I would suggest discretion should be used (give the driver your card and allow him to confirm travel at 0930 or otherwise the next time the vehicle is not in motion), then there is no real excuse for trying to bend the rules. People know fully well what the restrictions say, and they should be prepared to either pay an "excess" (i.e. a fare to the first stop the bus should pass at or after 0930), or walk that bit further.

The real problems arise when buses run early and passes are unfairly invalidated as a result...

 

[notadriver]

I have a friend who is a bus driver and he loves posting on Facebook about how he stopped pensioners getting on his 0929 bus.

I don't see the point of these restrictions at all to be honest but it's just my view.

 

[455driver]

Ah the good old twirlys "it says 9-30 on my watch" when its actually 9-28.

There has to be a cut off when free passes are valid and for most Councils/ Companies its 9-30 end of.
A free pass is not valid before 9-30 so the holder should either pay or get the next bus.

Yes I was a bus driver for a number of years before joining the railways.

 

[Deerfold]

Otherwise however, all of the remaining three suggestions could be considered fair, and representative of a weakness of the system - why should someone have to wait another hour simply because they live 500m from the point at which it becomes 0930?

However if you're going to have a time then it's going to affect someone. If you're not the scheme becomes more expensive and less popular with bus operators.

I grew up in West Yorkshire where tickets were generally cheaper after 0930 with the local day passes also being valid from that time. for trains they used the scheduled time, for buses the time the bus passed.

I had a bus timed at 0929 at the stop before mine. It wasn't unusual for me to leave the house 15 minutes earlier to walk down the route a few stops to avoid any arguements.

 

[bb21]

Technically speaking I agree that this is in contradiction to the rules, and if the driver insisted that the passenger either paid a fare or waited for the next bus he would be correct, however I also agree that if the next bus is not going to be for an hour or longer, it is quite harsh that the passenger would have to wait that long.

Maybe the compromise is pay a fare to the next fare stage (split-ticketing). Should the passenger ring the bell for the next fare stage so that the driver can stop and validate his/her combination?

Now what happens if the passenger refuses and gets in an argument, and during the process 0930 is reached?

 

[Ivo]

Now what happens if the passenger refuses and gets in an argument, and during the process 0930 is reached?

There must be someone out there who tries this one regularly :roll:

 

[Deerfold]

There must be someone out there who tries this one regularly :roll:

And possibly if they're the only one at the stop they may find the driver starts not being able to see them on that run.

 

[Darandio]

I guess it is very similar to having a ranger or similar that is valid after 08:45. When I generally use one, the first service I want to catch is timed for 08:44 and offer to buy a single to the next station, sometimes this is enforced, sometimes it isn't.

I seem to recall mentioning this previously and it seemed to open a can of worms if the service was running late and after the 08:45 threshold. One side agreed that it was then fine to use the ranger ticket on the late train whilst others (including the lady in the ticket office) decided that because the train was booked for 08:44, I still had to buy the single, regardless of the train running late.

 

[jb]

I seem to recall mentioning this previously and it seemed to open a can of worms if the service was running late and after the 08:45 threshold. One side agreed that it was then fine to use the ranger ticket on the late train whilst others (including the lady in the ticket office) decided that because the train was booked for 08:44, I still had to buy the single, regardless of the train running late.

There surely can't be any question that the lady in the ticket office was right. Whether discretion would (and/or should) be shown is another matter.

 

[tbone]

I was on a bus today and a Lady got on at bang on 9 (the bus was running a little late aswell) and stated her destination. On trent barton's ticket machines a price is displayed to which she responded "oh I have to pay do I?"

If you let someone on at 9:29, where do you draw the line? It personally annoys me that my timetable on my route is geared towards over 60s, for example most buses leave Ashbourne bus station at :25, except one at 9:30. This bus is then filled with people who haven't payed to use the service and I, as a fare paying passenger, has to stand.

You then also get the people who abuse the system, for example the lady that got on the bus and was asked her destination, to which she replied "whever you go, I'm bored so I thought I'd go for a trip somewhere new," later stating that this trip would not involve getting off the bus. Is this an even greater example of the public purse being robbed?

 

[Ivo]

You then also get the people who abuse the system, for example the lady that got on the bus and was asked her destination, to which she replied "whever you go, I'm bored so I thought I'd go for a trip somewhere new," later stating that this trip would not involve getting off the bus. Is this an even greater example of the public purse being robbed?

No, for one very simple reason. The costs of the ENCTS scheme on a journey-by-journey basis are minute. If an elderly person does this, then this actually saves money as it reduces the cost of keeping these people in residential homes and things like that - a couple of pounds for a bus journey against however much it costs to provide that person with all the things they may need during the day such as food and care.

Now obviously, you get the odd person who will take this a bit far. (I say this having done so myself literally last night.) But then you open about a million "cans of worms", most of which aren't as bad as you might think by the time things like economical benefits at the other end of the route are considered - unless the person literally doesn't leave the vehicle, even when at the terminus.

For the record, I have never liked having to state my destination with my card. It doesn't make a difference cost wise, so why should it matter? (Not to mention that a lot of drivers will not bother putting in the correct stage.)

 

[455driver]

And possibly if they're the only one at the stop they may find the driver starts not being able to see them on that run.

No comment!

 

[jb]

No, for one very simple reason. The costs of the ENCTS scheme on a journey-by-journey basis are minute.

I don't think you even need consider that when considering if "the public purse is being robbed" in this specific case.

Either ENCTS allows unlimited travel (within time limits) or it doesn't. If it were to be restricted to "sensible" travel it would / should be defined as such. I disagree with the tenet that the system is being abused by this lady. EDIT: to make it clear, I'm referring to the "wherever" lady rather than the "oh I have to pay?" one.

ENCTS is (surely) designed, at least implicitly, to include the probably smallish proportion of somewhat loony people who will spend a lot of time on buses as a result. I'll whisper the thought that if I ever find in the position to benefit from ENCTS, I'd probably be a bit loony myself

 

[SS4]

Depends on frequency. If the bus is more frequent than half-hourly then it's right to deny the pass, if it's less frequent let them on, they can always put their pass on exiting the bus if needs be.

I think it was right of the driver to do what he did, explain the rules and then look the other way.

 

[Tibbs]

I don't think you even need consider that when considering if "the public purse is being robbed" in this specific case.

Either ENCTS allows unlimited travel (within time limits) or it doesn't. If it were to be restricted to "sensible" travel it would / should be defined as such. I disagree with the tenet that the system is being abused by this lady.

ENCTS is (surely) designed, at least implicitly, to include the probably smallish proportion of somewhat loony people who will spend a lot of time on buses as a result. I'll whisper the thought that if I ever find in the position to benefit from ENCTS, I'd probably be a bit loony myself

And also for those people who need somewhere warm to be. If I had no money for heating and a free bus pass, I'd get some good books out of the library and sit on a bus (or other free public transport) all day.

 

[transmanche]

For the record, I have never liked having to state my destination with my card. It doesn't make a difference cost wise, so why should it matter?

It's needed for the council and the bus company to calculate the 'reimbursement for revenue foregone' - i.e. the fare that would have been charged if the ENCTS did not exist.

You then also get the people who abuse the system, for example the lady that got on the bus and was asked her destination, to which she replied "whever you go, I'm bored so I thought I'd go for a trip somewhere new," later stating that this trip would not involve getting off the bus. Is this an even greater example of the public purse being robbed?

The reimbursement formula recognises this by incorporating a 'generation factor' - i.e. journeys that are undertaken solely because the ENCTS exists, where the bus company is only reimbursed for net additional costs (e.g. wear and tear on buses and possible costs from changes in service frequency).

 

[Welshman]

No, for one very simple reason. The costs of the ENCTS scheme on a journey-by-journey basis are minute. If an elderly person does this, then this actually saves money as it reduces the cost of keeping these people in residential homes and things like that - a couple of pounds for a bus journey against however much it costs to provide that person with all the things they may need during the day such as food and care.

Unfortunately it's not quite as simple as that.

They still need a home to go to at the end of the day, as sleeping overnight on the bus in a cold depot is usually not encouraged.

And whereas the driver does have a reasonable duty of care, I've never known one feel obliged to cook a hot lunch or dinner for their elderly passengers.

But I know what you mean. And I've known several pass-holders employ this tactic. And it does save on heat.

 

[Ivo]

It [stating the destination] is needed for the council and the bus company to calculate the 'reimbursement for revenue foregone' - i.e. the fare that would have been charged if the ENCTS did not exist.

In that case, whatever formula you are used to is different to the one I am used to - and I am saying this as a person who has probably made 2,500 journeys on an ENCTS card (in less than four years hock.

Advice I received about two years indicates that Bath & North-East Somerset reimburse operators according to the following "formula", on a route-by-route basis (note the lack of a requirement to state a destination):

Reimbursement = 60% of Median Single Fare (i.e. ((Min + Max) ÷ 2) x 0.6)

This does of course create problems on a route such as the famous X5 between Oxford and Cambridge, on which I have probably used my pass about six or seven times (all end-to-end) - but that's for another thread

The reimbursement formula recognises this by incorporating a 'generation factor' - i.e. journeys that are undertaken solely because the ENCTS exists, where the bus company is only reimbursed for net additional costs (e.g. wear and tear on buses and possible costs from changes in service frequency).

This is the first time I have heard this line, although it is plausible in some respects.

 

[Hyphen]

You then also get the people who abuse the system

But it's not just ENCTS holders.

For note, I am a fare paying passenger. I have three cities in which I use buses regularly. In one I buy cash fares (usually a return but day tickets on rare occasions). The second I pay singles by smart card, this will cap at the day fare should that be reached. The third I buy monthly passes.

In location three (home) the cost of the month ticket is less than a month's worth of return tickets from home to work, and cheaper again than buying a day ticket every day. So it could be argued the bus company is already down on revenue. The area covered by the month ticket is a LOT larger than that covered by the normal city day ticket (this covers south west Wales). Knowing this, I will happily go on trips I wouldn't cover if I were buying cash tickets. I will happily make short-hop journeys for which I'd ordinarily walk, I go on longer-distance trips I wouldn't necessarily make and I try to use my ticket wherever and whenever I can.

In city two I usually only make a trip into the city and out again, unless I'm arriving in by train, when I'll go out, in and out again. Three trips tops the daily cap (by about 15p). At this point I feel I now have the 'freedom' of the bus network so if I have the time, I may decide to go for a long trip out somewhere far flung on the network (trentbarton). This trip is free, I've already paid for the journeys I've wished to make. If I'd only done two trips in a day, it's unlikely I'd pay a few quid for a ride out.

In city one the day ticket is 10p more than the return I buy. However, I'm usually only here on business so I don't often get time to spare. On the odd occasion I do, I will pay the extra 10p and buy the day ticket and take a trip around the city.

In all three examples I'm making journeys just for a ride out and the bus companies are probably losing money as a result. Whilst I'm admittedly not a drain on the public purse (and as others have noted, it's not a huge cost in the grand scheme), I'm still a burden on the bus companies. At least with ENCTS the company gets reimbursed for each journey. But I'm a fare-paying passenger, so nobody ever accuses me of abuse. How is that fair compared to those with ENCTS passes?

 

[transmanche]

In that case, whatever formula you are used to is different to the one I am used to

A proforma for use by councils when calculating reimbursements to bus companies is available from DfT.

This is the first time I have heard this line, although it is plausible in some respects.

Not just plausible, but extracted from the DfT's Guidance for Travel Concession Authorities on the England National Concessionary Travel Scheme - sections 1.59-1.63.

 

[Ivo]

A proforma for use by councils when calculating reimbursements to bus companies is available from DfT.

Not just plausible, but extracted from the DfT's Guidance for Travel Concession Authorities on the England National Concessionary Travel Scheme - sections 1.59-1.63.

Hmm. Interesting data. I shall have to put my Excel abilities to the test

 

[overthewater]

I remember getting on a bus one morning, behide some grannies, its was 09.00 (point allowed to travel )

The driver said there had to pay since he was late the grannies said no, and the bus driver, " Your F***** joking you complaining about paying 40p" The Grannies replying your F***** late and thats your problem not ours and got off the bus and waited for the next one. Driver shock his head, and the grannies looked at him with the dirties looks.

 

[jon0844]

It's interesting that on a bus it's merely down to the time. Late bus, passing 0900/0930 and it sounds like they can travel.

On a train, a peak train remains so even if it's late.

 

[Ivo]

It's interesting that on a bus it's merely down to the time. Late bus, passing 0900/0930 and it sounds like they can travel.

On a train, a peak train remains so even if it's late.

In my opinion the same ruling should apply. I've lost count of the number of times I've see a bus running early and rejecting pass holders who should be permitted travel - even in instances of seconds making the difference (I think the closest I've known was 08:59:53 in a 0900 area). But equally, if a bus is due at 0928, and it arrives at 0931, why should benefit people who shouldn't be allowed to travel on it?

I've never knowingly taken advantage of this situation, but I've also never been "caught out" either. Not that said situation should exist.

 

[34D]

Reimbursement methodologies can vary between areas, for example one of the areas I serve does surveys, and then your reimbursement is based on that. Another looks at the actual passengers travelled, builds an average fare from each stop, and does it like that. On most tenders nowadays, there is no reimbursement.

What I think personally should happen (regarding the issue in the OP) is that people should be allowed to travel on their last bus (from a stop/cluster of stops, going in each direction) in the window 0845 to 0959. Example if there are hourly buses at 0901 and 1001, they are allowed to travel on the 0901, if half hourly at 0850 0920 0950 then only the last one, etc etc.

However, we are where we are.

The areas this company serve btw do not allow 'split' tickets (in both council and operator rules), and state that passengers boarding before 0930 must pay the single fare to their destination.

A bus driver (in scotland I think) was prosecuted for fiddling concessionary reimbursements, and I personally fail to see how the scenario in the OP is different. This makes me think that applying discretion could land the driver in hot water.

 

[High Dyke]

And also for those people who need somewhere warm to be. If I had no money for heating and a free bus pass, I'd get some good books out of the library and sit on a bus (or other free public transport) all day.

Heating on buses must have improved since my time as a driver...

Long before the ENTCS was introduced it was up to individual councils to provide some form of concession. One of the routes i drove involved two district councils and a city council - all of whom had differing systems; one was metal tokens, one paper tokens and the third a local area pass. To add to the fun the bus company introduced a 'Wednesday Special' fare for pensioners - valid from 09:30, so similar to the thread here. Many a time the debate about timings/validity happened - especially when the 'wrinklies' in one village frequently complained the drivers 'deliberately ran early' so they couldn't have the special fare...irrespective of the fact that their village was timed for 09:28. However we tried to explain the situation we, and ultimately the bus company, were always deemed to be wrong. They could be quite abusive when they pointed out their friend 2 minutes further up the road was allowed the fare, but they weren't; as though were we personally discriminating against them.

In some cases then discretion should be shown...if the bus does arrive late (after the cut-off time) IMO let them travel; what difference does it make...apart from less earache for the already stressed driver. But if the time is before the cut-off time then the rules should be applied. As someone said if you let one go where do you stop?

 

[dzug2]

Certainly in some areas councils will allow usage prior to 0930 - particularly on services they are subsidising anyway. I can get to my nearest large town on a bus leaving before 0900 despite it being an hourly service

And the services from Heathrow out to Slough/Maidenhead allow it - certainly beyond the normal free bus limit if not the whole route

But there is always a problem with cut offs - fine tuning what they are rather than discretion is an answer - though maybe a bureaucratic nightmare

 

[tbone]

But it's not just ENCTS holders.

For note, I am a fare paying passenger. I have three cities in which I use buses regularly. In one I buy cash fares (usually a return but day tickets on rare occasions). The second I pay singles by smart card, this will cap at the day fare should that be reached. The third I buy monthly passes.

In location three (home) the cost of the month ticket is less than a month's worth of return tickets from home to work, and cheaper again than buying a day ticket every day. So it could be argued the bus company is already down on revenue. The area covered by the month ticket is a LOT larger than that covered by the normal city day ticket (this covers south west Wales). Knowing this, I will happily go on trips I wouldn't cover if I were buying cash tickets. I will happily make short-hop journeys for which I'd ordinarily walk, I go on longer-distance trips I wouldn't necessarily make and I try to use my ticket wherever and whenever I can.

In city two I usually only make a trip into the city and out again, unless I'm arriving in by train, when I'll go out, in and out again. Three trips tops the daily cap (by about 15p). At this point I feel I now have the 'freedom' of the bus network so if I have the time, I may decide to go for a long trip out somewhere far flung on the network (trentbarton). This trip is free, I've already paid for the journeys I've wished to make. If I'd only done two trips in a day, it's unlikely I'd pay a few quid for a ride out.

In city one the day ticket is 10p more than the return I buy. However, I'm usually only here on business so I don't often get time to spare. On the odd occasion I do, I will pay the extra 10p and buy the day ticket and take a trip around the city.

In all three examples I'm making journeys just for a ride out and the bus companies are probably losing money as a result. Whilst I'm admittedly not a drain on the public purse (and as others have noted, it's not a huge cost in the grand scheme), I'm still a burden on the bus companies. At least with ENCTS the company gets reimbursed for each journey. But I'm a fare-paying passenger, so nobody ever accuses me of abuse. How is that fair compared to those with ENCTS passes?

I too use Trent Barton, they run the route through my village. If I go into Derby, a zigzag ticket is cheaper than a return. This is something that happens on a number of routes, the zigzag is effectively an off peak ticket. I too have made trips around the network but the reality is it doesn't cost very much at all for me to be on there, I doubt my weight adds to the fuel bill!

The reality is that no person should pay trent barton more than £5 if travelling after 9:00. Trent Barton accept and promote this. However, if someone uses a pass then there is a possibility that the reimbursment that trent recieve would be more than £5 and as such I see that as the public purse being robbed.

The reimbursment system seems a little generous in some cases too, obviously two singles is more than a return which is what the company would get if the passenger paid. Also, the fact that companies get a median fare is unusual, and easy to manipulate, I've heard that one route was established with very high fares, knowing it would only be used by those with over 60s passes, in order to bump up the median fare and therefore recieve greater reimbursment.

 

[Tom B]

There were a few routes in villages north of Doncaster where SYPTE specified that OAP passes were valid on specific journeys from an earlier time (e.g. two-hourly routes, where a journey leaves at 08:50).

As I understood it the initial principle of the scheme was to provide pensioners with free travel outwith peak periods - i.e. when the buses would otherwise be quite empty.
In some areas (e.g. Edinburgh) it was permitted for pensioners to travel on the buses at all times, even peak periods. This resulted in fare-paying passengers being turned away from some services, which were full to the rafters with pensioners.