Buses that cross the TfL border

[Zoe]

What are the rules on buses entering or leaving Greater London as part of their route? Do commercial operators need permission from TfL to enter and stop at locations within Greater London? Are TfL routes leaving Greater London to places like Watford and Dartford and Slough run under the deregulated legislation once outside Greater London? I note that TfL bus stops make it as far west as Slough (although not right into the centre) but don't reach Watford.

 

[anthony263]

Operators used to need to apply to TFL for permission to run a commercial bus service into any of the TFL zones.

The routes operated by TFL which extend outside of of Greater London such as the route which runs out to Slough I think are subsidised jointly with the local councils outside London.

 

[Mikey C]

To take an example, the 96 always used to terminate in Dartford, just outside the London boundary as it would be silly to stop on the boundary edge for a route that went that far before the London boundary was extended in the 1960s. This was always a regulated, London Transport route for its whole distance
After the Bluewater shopping centre was built, they agreed to subsidise certain TfL routes to go out that far, thus the 96 (for example) runs non stop from Dartford to Bluewater, which is a real bargain for holders of inner London Oyster season tickets!

 

[bicbasher]

If I recall, the 96 is non-stop from Dartford to Bluewater as it'd take away revenue from local Arriva routes and the Kent CC subsidised FastTrack, so it's principle role is connecting SE Londoners to the major shopping centre.

There used to be the Metrobus routes in Bromley which didn't come under TfL control, which I used for returns to the town and the 402 remains as a commercial route, although Oyster and Travelcard users can pay the TfL single fare of £1.40 between Bromley and Keston to the driver.

 

[CatfordCat]

Operators need a 'London Service Permit' to operate bus services within Greater London.

I can't find a specific web page to link to, but there are various PDF documents that appear if you do a web search.

The operators of TfL routes (i.e. the PSV Operators Licence holder, rather than TfL) are required to register the bits outside the London boundary in the normal way.

I'm not convinced all the 'shire' councils do put funding into the routes. It must present an interesting argument for a shire to be presented with services provided at frequencies beyond what a shire may think necessary, and at fares well below local market levels.

(I'm not arguing that TfL service levels / fares are necessarily wrong, but they are significantly out of step with what most of the deregulated market offers.)

re Bluewater - the 96 is non stop, the 428 only calls at the intermediate Darent Park Hospital (which probably includes chunks of Bexley London Borough within its catchment area), the 492 is all stops between Dartford and Bluewater.

 

[Deerfold]

Operators used to need to apply to TFL for permission to run a commercial bus service into any of the TFL zones.

However this will not unreasonably be refused. The main reason for few of these existing (other than the ones that just poke into London) is that operators have trouble attracting passengers with higher fares than those of TfL.

In the early 2000s TfL replaced a few routes which were operated independently, generally increasing their frequencies and hours of operation.

The routes operated by TFL which extend outside of of Greater London such as the route which runs out to Slough I think are subsidised jointly with the local councils outside London.

In general TfL routes are not subisidised by councils outside London.

It is odd tha TfL maintain some bus stops outside London - these are usually ones that were originally only used by LT routes.

(I'm not arguing that TfL service levels / fares are necessarily wrong, but they are significantly out of step with what most of the deregulated market offers.)

I'm in general agreement with your post, but thought I'd add that until the early 2000s (2002?) TfL services outside the boundary had a similar fare scale to other local buses and were generally more expensive than the one TfL fare normally charged at the time.

The reduction in fares has seen some of these routes massively increase traffic - the 81 to Slough has gone from a single decker every 20 minutes to a busy double decker every 12.

 

[radamfi]

I've questioned the funding of TfL routes outside Greater London many times but never got a definitive answer. My best guess is that they attract funding in the same way as normal TfL buses. In other words they are funded totally or almost totally by TfL. That isn't so controversial as TfL gets most of its funding from national taxation anyway. Presumably TfL consider that it is worth funding the whole route for the benefit of people living within the Greater London boundary. When you think about it, the surrounding councils would not have the resources to subsidise such low fares and such high service levels.

It is noteworthy that the majority of lengthy excursions outside the area started when Arriva withdrew their commercial routes from Surrey. This was a time when TfL was at its most flush with cash. Subsequent commercial withdrawals have ended up with the new TfL section terminating just outside the boundary, with the councils expected to create their own route for the remaining section. This theory would tally with the routes being totally or mostly TfL funded.

In reply to the question as to whether they run under the deregulated legislation, certainly other operators are allowed to operate in competition with the TfL route. There are some areas where TfL and commercial routes overlap, for example in Langley and Slough. However, given the low flat fare charged on TfL routes, competing head on with a TfL route is surely not viable.

 

[southern442]

405 (West Croydon-Redhill)

 

[Deerfold]

405 (West Croydon-Redhill)

Anything particular about it?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In reply to the question as to whether they run under the deregulated legislation, certainly other operators are allowed to operate in competition with the TfL route. There are some areas where TfL and commercial routes overlap, for example in Langley and Slough. However, given the low flat fare charged on TfL routes, competing head on with a TfL route is surely not viable.

This is probably why most of the First Beeline routes start in locations west of Slough so they're more convenient (and, with a pass possibly cheaper) than changing in Slough onto an 81.

 

[Zoe]

However this will not unreasonably be refused.

Would this only be a case for a route entirely within Greater London though or could a commercial route entirely within Greater London start running?

 

[Deerfold]

Would this only be a case for a route entirely within Greater London though or could a commercial route entirely within Greater London start running?

I'm not sure an exact duplicate would be allowed, but there's plenty of routes registered entirely within Greater London - such as the rather odd (as it's local authority sponsored) 812:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plus_Bus_route_812

There used to be rather more services which filled gaps between TfL services.

Many of the registrations now are for the tour buses in Central London - many of these have local fares which undercut TfL fares. They don't tend to advertsie them very well though.

 

[radamfi]

Probably the most comprehensive network of commercial services within London were run by Metrobus, a brief history of those routes are shown on their Wikipedia page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrobus_(South_East_England)

The routes were mostly transferred to TfL in 2002. One of those routes (I can't remember which one) will in the near future transfer to another company after being run by Metrobus for 26 years, first commercially and then won under tender.

 

[Goldfish62]

Operators need a 'London Service Permit' to operate bus services within Greater London.

I can't find a specific web page to link to, but there are various PDF documents that appear if you do a web search.

Here's the web page link:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/businessandpartners/busoperators/1228.aspx

 

[bicbasher]

Probably the most comprehensive network of commercial services within London were run by Metrobus, a brief history of those routes are shown on their Wikipedia page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrobus_(South_East_England)

The routes were mostly transferred to TfL in 2002. One of those routes (I can't remember which one) will in the near future transfer to another company after being run by Metrobus for 26 years, first commercially and then won under tender.

I thought it was the 261, but it was one of the early tender routes to be awarded in 1987. It started as an LT route from 1982 and is moving to Stagecoach Selkent.

Route 358 is another one of their long term routes which started off as a commercial operation in 1989, however it's staying with Metrobus.

The B12 has some funding from Kent CC for it's recently introduced Sunday service to Joydens Wood.

 

[radamfi]

I thought it was the 261, but it was one of the early tender routes to be awarded in 1987. It started as an LT route from 1982 and is moving to Stagecoach Selkent.

Route 358 is another one of their long term routes which started off as a commercial operation in 1989, however it's staying with Metrobus.

Yes, that's sounds right thinking about it. I knew they were losing a route after 26 years but I assumed it was an original commercial one. They just got a 2 year extension for the 358.

 

[bicbasher]

Yes, that's sounds right thinking about it. I knew they were losing a route after 26 years but I assumed it was an original commercial one. They just got a 2 year extension for the 358.

To be fair, I've always assumed it was a 'classic' Metrobus route in the late 80s/early 90s, however even in those days it had the "LONDON TRANSPORT SERVICE" signs where as the 35x series of routes didn't until 2002.

Routes that spring to mind which were commercial Metrobus routes within London are the 352, 354, 356 and 358. There may have been other routes, but those are the ones I remember doing the main London Borough of Bromley runs.

 

[Be3G]

It is odd tha TfL maintain some bus stops outside London - these are usually ones that were originally only used by LT routes.

An interesting exception/augmentation of this is Waltham Cross bus station: a bus station run by TfL (albeit only barely – the enquiry office and toilets are rarely open), located beyond the London boundary, and served by more non-TfL bus routes than those of the red, Oyster-capable variety.

Considering all the changes that occur to the Hertfordshire bus routes, TfL must be really kept on their toes producing all the blue-bordered timetables and the corresponding spider map (which actually is often too slow to update). In fact I think it could be the only spider map produced for a location outside Greater London.

 

[southern442]

Anything particular about it?

Not really, it is just funny how you can use your oyster card to get to Redhill but not Ashtead:-x

 

[Deerfold]

Possibly the cheapest bus fares in London on T3-T6 starting at 80p:

http://www.theoriginaltour.com/UserFiles/File/Timetables2013.pdf

I note on the main T1 and T2 the minimum fare is £15! Presumably they really want you to buy a day ticket if you catch those.

 

[Be3G]

I think the compiler of the T1/T2 tables might have simply forgotten how many pence there are in a pound, as the tables include some ‘3000’ fares which are more than a day ticket.

 

[causton]

I think the compiler of the T1/T2 tables might have simply forgotten how many pence there are in a pound, as the tables include some ‘3000’ fares which are more than a day ticket.

No no, I'm sure they're actually there deliberately to do that!

 

[Deerfold]

I think the compiler of the T1/T2 tables might have simply forgotten how many pence there are in a pound, as the tables include some ‘3000’ fares which are more than a day ticket.

That's on the main services where they want you to buy a day ticket.

On the feeder services they're encouraging a little local usage, presumably to help them pay their way.

 

[duncanp]

Not really, it is just funny how you can use your oyster card to get to Redhill but not Ashtead:-x

Also Epsom, Leatherhead, Box Hill and Dorking are reachable with an Oyster Card, but as you say Ashtead is not, which is a bit funny when you consider the sequence of stations on the railway line between Epsom and Dorking.

 

[southern442]

Also Epsom, Leatherhead, Box Hill and Dorking are reachable with an Oyster Card, but as you say Ashtead is not, which is a bit funny when you consider the sequence of stations on the railway line between Epsom and Dorking.

I think the oyster zones should be extended to those two latter stations as I have friends at Ashtead and cannot use my oyster to get there.

 

[londonbridge]

This sort of thing has come up in other discussion, someone who doesn't fully understand Oyster may reasonably argue why is it that they can use Oyster to get out to Redhill on a bus, but cannot use it to travel back towards London on a train.

 

[Deerfold]

This sort of thing has come up in other discussion, someone who doesn't fully understand Oyster may reasonably argue why is it that they can use Oyster to get out to Redhill on a bus, but cannot use it to travel back towards London on a train.

Someone who doesn't fully understand Oyster may argue all sorts of things.

The Oyster rail map is fairly clear about where it's accepted.

TfL have decided it will be available on all its services - including buses outside the London boundary.

If you want it extending, the rail company are the ones you'll have to convince.

The easier way to have a common boundary would be to reduce the availability on buses.

 

[bb21]

Possibly the cheapest bus fares in London on T3-T6 starting at 80p:

I wonder how many provincial operators even offer an adult fare under 80p these days.

Some of these fares are very reasonable. Shame that the T5 doesn't run more often.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the oyster zones should be extended to those two latter stations as I have friends at Ashtead and cannot use my oyster to get there.

The Oyster area is not determined by one person's needs, and must be balanced over the interests of many stakeholders.

I can possibly see an argument for it to be extended to Epsom, but not Ashtead.

 

[radamfi]

Ashtead to Shenfield is 44 miles 45 chains according to Railmiles, not a great distance. It is possible to travel from Vlissingen to Groningen by the Dutch OV-Chipkaart smartcard: 381 km 'tariefeenheden' (official distance for fare calculations)

 

[southern442]

I wonder how many provincial operators even offer an adult fare under 80p these days.

Some of these fares are very reasonable. Shame that the T5 doesn't run more often.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The Oyster area is not determined by one person's needs, and must be balanced over the interests of many stakeholders.

I can possibly see an argument for it to be extended to Epsom, but not Ashtead.

Yes, as at the moment a person travelling from, say, Worcester park to Sutton would have to circulate via Clapham Jn if they wanted to use an oyster, I suppose if there was no guard on the SWT train you might be able to get away with it but the consequences are awful if you were to get caught. I would've thought that all stations within the M25 should be in the zones.

 

[34D]

Yes, as at the moment a person travelling from, say, Worcester park to Sutton would have to circulate via Clapham Jn if they wanted to use an oyster, I suppose if there was no guard on the SWT train you might be able to get away with it but the consequences are awful if you were to get caught. I would've thought that all stations within the M25 should be in the zones.

To be fair, this is a reasoned point of view.

What other stations inside the M25 aren't oyster?