East Anglia Bus Scene

[Russel]

The Clacton depot of Konectbuses is currently using an ADL Enviro200 MMC demonstrator YY25DKX. According to their facebook post on the Colchester borough bus users page, it is a first glimpse of the exciting changes underway.

I have family in Clacton and visit multiple times a year, over the last 20 years I've seen multiple operators come and go with the services and fleet deteriorating with each visit, if Konect can actually make improvements, then fair play, but I'll believe it when I see it, IMO all we will see is more of the same.

 

[buslad1988]

First Essex has won the two P&Rs in Chelmsford - here is the tender award notice https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/085511-2025?origin=SearchResults&p=42

Lots​

Lot 1. Sandon Park and Ride Service
Lot 2. Chelmer Valley Park and Ride Service

Supplier​

• FIRST ESSEX BUSES LIMITED

Contract value​

• £15,960,000 including VAT

Some of the salient details

• 6 March 2026 to 5 March 2030
• Possible extension to 5 March 2033; option to extend up to 3 years in increments at the Authority's discretion
• The contracts provides grounds to upgrade the service by adding a Double Decker Bus to the fleet operating the service, with a proportionate increase in daily rate.

• Lot 1. Sandon Park and Ride Service​

  • 2 tenders received
  • 2 tenders assessed in the final stage:
    • 1 submitted by small and medium-sized enterprises (SME)
    • 0 submitted by voluntary, community and social enterprises (VCSE)
  • 1 supplier awarded contracts
  • 1 supplier unsuccessful (details included for contracts over £5 million)

• ---

  Unsuccessful suppliers​

  • STEPHENSONS OF ESSEX LIMITED

• Lot 2. Chelmer Valley Park and Ride Service​

  • 2 tenders received
  • 2 tenders assessed in the final stage:
    • 1 submitted by small and medium-sized enterprises (SME)
    • 0 submitted by voluntary, community and social enterprises (VCSE)
  • 1 supplier awarded contracts
  • 1 supplier unsuccessful (details included for contracts over £5 million)

• ---

  Unsuccessful suppliers​

  • STEPHENSONS OF ESSEX LIMITED

**********************************************************************************************************

So you can see that TMS didn't bid. Why not - who knows? However, it wasn't that they submitted a non-compliant bid apparently. Now if they had submitted a commercial Sandon bid, the council may have had to recommence the whole tender process (for one site) with no guarantee that TMS would provide a like for like service at Sandon or that they wouldn't then withdraw it again some time in future.

On the wider subject of TMS...

Can't comment on the Norwich P&R but the Postwick one was always supposed to be Sprinters. I saw the Postwick site in summer and was surprised how quiet it was. Perhaps the Mon to Fri loads are higher and demand something larger or, more likely, the Sprinters are better suited to rural country routes so deckers or singles are now preferred. I haven't been up since summer when Konectbus was still in existence so can't comment on how things have changed.

What I can say that TMS took the Essex ops of Central Connect and done a very good job at replacing the frankly awful fleet of stuff that Ensign had in their yard (ex London and ex First) with a mix of decent secondhand stuff and what looks to be a fair chunk of new (I guess leased) fleet, as well as improving standards overall.

Now the question is whether a) are they over extending themselves with the Go Ahead East Anglia purchase in terms of financially and management control and b) can they succeed where Go Ahead couldn't? Of course, they've now pulled out of much of the East Midlands in order to consolidate in East Anglia so that's going to help but there's questions about making such a big move.

So despite Essex County Council awarding the Sandon Park & Ride contract to First, it appears TMS are going to dig their heels in and run the service anyway… so who’s going to give in first?

Chelmsford park and ride

chelmsfordparkandride.co.uk

They’ve put out a message on X saying they are going to continue running the service regardless of ECC’s decision.

So guessing we’ll see two services running from the site side by side? Are TMS even allowed access to it if they haven’t got the contract?

TMS from the outset seem well on track to massively fall out with ECC - also doesn’t look good that tax payers money will be spent contracting First when it doesn’t necessarily need to be! Assuming now though if ECC backtracked on First they could be liable for some kind of payout?

TMS could make a huge rod for their own back when it comes for future contract awards.

 

[Simon75]

So despite Essex County Council awarding the Sandon Park & Ride contract to First, it appears TMS are going to dig their heels in and run the service anyway… so who’s going to give in first?

Chelmsford park and ride

chelmsfordparkandride.co.uk

They’ve put out a message on X saying they are going to continue running the service regardless of ECC’s decision.

So guessing we’ll see two services running from the site side by side? Are TMS even allowed access to it if they haven’t got the contract?

TMS from the outset seem well on track to massively fall out with ECC - also doesn’t look good that tax payers money will be spent contracting First when it doesn’t necessarily need to be! Assuming now though if ECC backtracked on First they could be liable for some kind of payout?

TMS could make a huge rod for their own back when it comes for future contract awards.

I thought it was illegal to have a commercial service compete with a contracted service?

 

[Anthony ross]

ECC was Well aware that TMS was going to run the 701 commercially as they where told that With the passenger numbers the way they where it could sustain itself commercially but ECC eont get a penny from a commercial service so they didn’t want to miss out on all that income from the ECC contract so they contracted first to run a service for them do they could still get the money from the fares taken

 

[transportphoto]

Did I read somewhere that TMS operating the P&R service commercially may cause problems at the car park exit barriers?

I believe the bus ticket also covers the car parking, and that customers will need to scan the bus ticket to get out the car park.

Will TMS’ tickets work the barriers? Probably not.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

My take on this...

Two tenders were received for the P&R contracts - First Essex and Stephensons. Two tenders were considered in the final stage. So it appears that TMS did not submit a tender at all, and certainly not a compliant one.

Award made to First Essex for both sites. TMS has now elected to submit a competitive service from Sandon. The First timetable looks like every 7 mins (peak) and every 15 mins (off peak) requiring 4 and 2 buses respectively.

Now, I might be reading the website wrong so apologies... but use the First bus service and it costs you £3.10. If you only park your car on site (i.e. get a lift from there and travel elsewhere along the A12) then it's £3.60. That looks sensible enough to dissuade people from just parking all day and heading elsewhere and preserving spaces for those heading into Chelmsford (though how you stop people from buying a ticket and not taking the bus, I don't know). You scan your First bus ticket or parking ticket to exit. In addition, you can also use your ticket on the other FE services that pass the P&R later in the evening,

Therefore, the TMS service will require you to pay twice as far as I can see. I can't see it being sustainable. The question as to competition - well, what happens if there is an exit clause so ECC could terminate the contract for convenience. And then TMS say that they can't actually operate commercially what they were paid to do before? New tender...?

I think ECC will bide their time, and TMS will realise that it's an expensive means to market share!

 

[buslad1988]

My take on this...

Two tenders were received for the P&R contracts - First Essex and Stephensons. Two tenders were considered in the final stage. So it appears that TMS did not submit a tender at all, and certainly not a compliant one.

Award made to First Essex for both sites. TMS has now elected to submit a competitive service from Sandon. The First timetable looks like every 7 mins (peak) and every 15 mins (off peak) requiring 4 and 2 buses respectively.

Now, I might be reading the website wrong so apologies... but use the First bus service and it costs you £3.10. If you only park your car on site (i.e. get a lift from there and travel elsewhere along the A12) then it's £3.60. That looks sensible enough to dissuade people from just parking all day and heading elsewhere and preserving spaces for those heading into Chelmsford (though how you stop people from buying a ticket and not taking the bus, I don't know). You scan your First bus ticket or parking ticket to exit. In addition, you can also use your ticket on the other FE services that pass the P&R later in the evening,

Therefore, the TMS service will require you to pay twice as far as I can see. I can't see it being sustainable. The question as to competition - well, what happens if there is an exit clause so ECC could terminate the contract for convenience. And then TMS say that they can't actually operate commercially what they were paid to do before? New tender...?

I think ECC will bide their time, and TMS will realise that it's an expensive means to market share!

Certainly seems like an unnecessary mess regardless. Knowing what people are like they also won’t take much notice over what bus they’ll try and board - just whatever comes first. So that could lead to confusion and passengers caught out over fares.

If anything it could result in people not wanting to return and use it again if it’s too complicated and they feel they haven’t received good value or been short changed/ripped off. So it could backfire massively.

Presumably TMS will continue to use the current fleet on the service… will these be repainted or remain black?!

Just my personal view but this does seem very underhand from TMS and it’s certainly not putting them in a good light to the rest of the industry. Stinks of petty childish behaviour. Haven’t they got enough to be fixing with the rest of their operation without getting involved in squabbles like this?!

 

[borage]

It slightly contradicts this quote from a news article from 2024 – Vectare launches 'Bigger Business, Better Buses' strategy – (before the change of name to Transport Made Simple):

“In order to achieve growth, we’ve taken opportunities across a huge geographic area, setting up new depots and outstations as required,” he explained. “This is mainly because we’ve not wanted to engage in head to head commercial competition. We believe that it is wasteful, and does not lead to sustainable transport services for passengers. We will compete where we feel we can offer a genuinely better or more innovative service, but our main focus has been on identifying new opportunities to support business growth without being destructive towards the networks of older, more established operators. [...]

(They would perhaps argue that First and Essex County Council are engaging in competition here and not the other way round.)

 

[ThatOneGuy]

The TMS notification of commercial operation was made to ECC prior to ECC awarding and signing the contract with First.

It is a little baffling why an authority would then choose to spend several hundred thousand quid it doesn't need to, authorities are normally delighted to see contracts commercialised, especially in a world of ever tightening budgets. If you read the delegated decision paper it says the contract is being paid for from BSIP which suggests the money was originally intended for improvements elsewhere in Essex making the council decision even more confusing.

Other interesting nugget from the delegated decision, if compared with the original TMS award is that Chelmer Valley is now costing significantly more than it did previously despite a big reduction in service. It appears ECC could have extended the original TMS contract by up to 3 years which would have presumably saved more budget and saved the service from being slimmed down.

There doesn't appear to be a lot of rationale being ECC decision making in my opinion.

Certainly the only real loser here is the taxpayer!

 

[MotCO]

My take on this...

Two tenders were received for the P&R contracts - First Essex and Stephensons. Two tenders were considered in the final stage. So it appears that TMS did not submit a tender at all, and certainly not a compliant one.

Award made to First Essex for both sites. TMS has now elected to submit a competitive service from Sandon. The First timetable looks like every 7 mins (peak) and every 15 mins (off peak) requiring 4 and 2 buses respectively.

Now, I might be reading the website wrong so apologies... but use the First bus service and it costs you £3.10. If you only park your car on site (i.e. get a lift from there and travel elsewhere along the A12) then it's £3.60. That looks sensible enough to dissuade people from just parking all day and heading elsewhere and preserving spaces for those heading into Chelmsford (though how you stop people from buying a ticket and not taking the bus, I don't know). You scan your First bus ticket or parking ticket to exit. In addition, you can also use your ticket on the other FE services that pass the P&R later in the evening,

Therefore, the TMS service will require you to pay twice as far as I can see. I can't see it being sustainable. The question as to competition - well, what happens if there is an exit clause so ECC could terminate the contract for convenience. And then TMS say that they can't actually operate commercially what they were paid to do before? New tender...?

I think ECC will bide their time, and TMS will realise that it's an expensive means to market share!

And presumably a ticket from First will not be valid on the return trip by TMS, and vice versa. Do First and TMS operate similar hours?

 

[buslad1988]

The TMS notification of commercial operation was made to ECC prior to ECC awarding and signing the contract with First.

It is a little baffling why an authority would then choose to spend several hundred thousand quid it doesn't need to, authorities are normally delighted to see contracts commercialised, especially in a world of ever tightening budgets. If you read the delegated decision paper it says the contract is being paid for from BSIP which suggests the money was originally intended for improvements elsewhere in Essex making the council decision even more confusing.

Other interesting nugget from the delegated decision, if compared with the original TMS award is that Chelmer Valley is now costing significantly more than it did previously despite a big reduction in service. It appears ECC could have extended the original TMS contract by up to 3 years which would have presumably saved more budget and saved the service from being slimmed down.

There doesn't appear to be a lot of rationale being ECC decision making in my opinion.

Certainly the only real loser here is the taxpayer!

Taking all this into account then it seems ECC has deep rooted issues with TMS - did they have a bad track record whilst operating the contract? There must be rationale behind ECC’s decision making.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Just my personal view but this does seem very underhand from TMS and it’s certainly not putting them in a good light to the rest of the industry. Stinks of petty childish behaviour. Haven’t they got enough to be fixing with the rest of their operation without getting involved in squabbles like this?!

It slightly contradicts this quote from a news article from 2024 – Vectare launches 'Bigger Business, Better Buses' strategy – (before the change of name to Transport Made Simple):

(They would perhaps argue that First and Essex County Council are engaging in competition here and not the other way round.)

I know that some posters have a bit of an axe to grind with TMS/Vectare etc (and not suggesting you have). My view...

They've done some decent things in terms of developing the business. Certainly, the former Galleon/CC operations in that badlands of SE Herts/SW Essex are much different from the days of any old Ensign stuff being turfed out. I suspect much is leased but if that's a sustainable model, fair enough. So when people decry them putting an evaluator out in Clacton as not being real investment... well, let's just wait and see.

That leads onto the next point. TMS have got a lot of work to do with the former Go Ahead ops. Konectbus (Norfolk) was passable but was suffering from a lack of investment from GA with fleet replacement minimal (as the ops continued to contract) though the fleet was generally ok if beginning to age. The former Hedingham and Chambers businesses were the worst I've seen in GA and there's a lot of work to sort that out. People seem impatient to see change - it's only been a matter of months since the purchase and there's probably a lot of back office to sort out as well. Moreover, even with due diligence, there are always things that you don't legislate for.

So with many other pressing issues to deal with, it does seem strange that they embarking in something with little financial reward (and a probable loss) plus souring a potential relationship with ECC.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2026 ==

And presumably a ticket from First will not be valid on the return trip by TMS, and vice versa. Do First and TMS operate similar hours?

It looks as though they are operating much the same timetable as they were, and that First will be operating. The difference is that First can offer later journeys using other routes passing by

Taking all this into account then it seems ECC has deep rooted issues with TMS - did they have a bad track record whilst operating the contract? There must be rationale behind ECC’s decision making.

I don't know if they do.

The tender award... It's standard public procurement and it seems that First won it vs. Stephensons, and that TMS didn't submit a bid (or at least, a compliant bid).

People who aren't familiar with public procurement think that emotion and repute and other intangible issues are part of the decision making process. They aren't and they can't be. Assuming that TMS weren't excluded from bidding or had issues regarding debarment (Procurement Regs 2023 e.g. they've been convicted of fraud, use child labour etc etc), then they would've been expected to tender. After all, they won it last time.

Each tenderer would've submitted standard information (e.g. company reg no, etc - this is Pass/Fail). Then a set of technical responses (e.g. tell us how you will increase patronage using examples from within your business, tell us how you will operate sustainably, etc) and a financial proposal, both of which are scored using a transparent marking system.

What I can't say is a) did TMS enter the process b) did they submit a non-compliant bid or c) did they cock things up.

 

[nesw]

TMS accounts state that hire purchase contracts secured on the fleet are financing the operations with no other external debt facilities. The debt to equity ratio for the main and holding companies are on the high side.

 

[markymark2000]

There doesn't appear to be a lot of rationale being ECC decision making in my opinion.

There's a lot of ECC decisions that don't make sense though route wise. There's been a stupid amount of questionable decisions made by them where they seem to be hellbent on having the most confusing bus network possible. I'm not sure what their actual intentions are or who they are trying to appeal to, but bus passengers certainly isn't it!

This is all turning out to be a bit of a farce though. And even though I've made no secret that I'm not the biggest fan of TMS, I find it absolutely absurd that the council is willing to waste so much taxpayers money to compete against a commercial route. Heads should be rolling over this, and some staff and/or decisions makers should in receipt of a lovely P45 for all of this.

------

There's been reports on social media from the Transport Made Simple Facebook group that there is a fair few accusations of anti competitive behaviour going on from Essex Council. People saying that First are departing from the car park rather than the normal bus stops (which one would assume is so that people see and use the First buses) and also that the council has locked the foyer doors to the main bus stop, again to try and stop people getting to the TMS buses)

Transport Made Simple Bus Enthusiasts | Unfortunately very empty buses this morning and it doesn't help First Bus are using the car park | Facebook

Unfortunately very empty buses this morning and it doesn't help First Bus are using the car park!

www.facebook.com

Spoiler: Screenshots of the post and comments

TravelEssex has also put out on social media that the First ticket includes parking and the TMS bus doesn't, so you must use the First bus to be able to leave the car park.

TravelEssex

TravelEssex. 2,001 likes · 187 talking about this. Your sustainable travel information page for Essex

www.facebook.com

Using Sandon Park & Ride?
Make sure you hop on the First Essex Bus
Your Park & Ride ticket includes your parking, and it’s the only ticket accepted at the exit barrier — so you’ll need to travel on the ECC‑operated First Bus services to leave the site smoothly.

Spoiler: Screenshots of the post

 

[Cesarcollie]

ECC was Well aware that TMS was going to run the 701 commercially as they where told that With the passenger numbers the way they where it could sustain itself commercially but ECC eont get a penny from a commercial service so they didn’t want to miss out on all that income from the ECC contract so they contracted first to run a service for them do they could still get the money from the fares taken

All operators were asked prior to tenders being issued whether they were interested in running the services commercially. I am presuming no one said they wished to, otherwise the tender process would not have been needed (either fully or in part). Plus the revenue covers both the bus operation and the car parking - I very much doubt Central Connect have agreed to pay anything towards car park running costs.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Gotta say it made me laugh on the various people reading about First making vehicles around 10-12 years old on the Park and ride route and that TMS would never run something that old.

Have they not come to Essex or Suffolk. a vehicle 10-12 years old would be the newest in the fleet here!

 

[Bedford OB]

It seems that this will now be resolved in court as both parties have taken legal advice and I understand Central Connect has applied for a Judicial Review into the Council's actions.

 

[Flange Squeal]

There's been reports on social media from the Transport Made Simple Facebook group that there is a fair few accusations of anti competitive behaviour going on from Essex Council. People saying that First are departing from the car park rather than the normal bus stops (which one would assume is so that people see and use the First buses) and also that the council has locked the foyer doors to the main bus stop, again to try and stop people getting to the TMS buses)

Transport Made Simple Bus Enthusiasts | Unfortunately very empty buses this morning and it doesn't help First Bus are using the car park | Facebook

Unfortunately very empty buses this morning and it doesn't help First Bus are using the car park!

www.facebook.com

Spoiler: Screenshots of the post and comments

View attachment 199716View attachment 199717

The Travel Essex website confirms First are now picking up from within the car park rather than the proper bus stop layby outside the Park & Ride buildings.

The new ECC bus services are now running at Chelmsford Park
and Ride sites.

The official ECC Park and Ride buses are run by First - the £3.10 day ticket (£1.60 for concessionary pass holders) covers your parking and the bus ride to and from the City centre.

At Sandon, your service 700 ticket will soon activate the exit barrier from the car park. Currently service 700 buses running from Sandon board from within the site.

At Sandon there is additionally a commercial 701 service which runs from outside the site. The ticket for that service covers the bus ride but not parking at the ECC site. If passengers chose not to buy an official ECC Park and Ride ticket on a First bus, parking must be purchased separately at a cost of £3.60. Payment for parking can be made by following the instructions posted on site. Please factor this into your travel planning if you choose to take
the 701 commercial service.

The message to passengers is clear:

• ECC considers that the best value journey is on the official
service 700 ECC Park and Ride bus provided by First
• Hop on a First bus - at Sandon that's service 700 from within
the site
• Keep your ticket safe - it will allow you to exit the car park as
we further improve the safety of our parking

Source: https://www.travelessex.co.uk/park-and-ride/sandon-park-and-ride

It is also the subject of today’s blog by Roger French, who said:

This bizarre situation took an even more unbelievable turn on the road yesterday when Council representatives were out in force literally standing by a bus stop encouraging passengers to use its taxpayer funded subsidised bus rather than the commercially provided bus, despite both providing an identical 15 minute frequency service with the same times and same fares.

Source: https://busandtrainuser.com/2026/03/07/is-this-even-legal/

 

[Megafuss]

Forgive me....but why didn't TMS put in a compliant bid to run the service?

I'd rather have circa £15,000,000 gross in my bank account than having to fight for passengers out of my own pocket.

Something just feels off with the "woe is me" act. Reminds me of the stunt Grant Palmer tried to pull when Stagecoach won a load of Bedford work.

I'd also point out that TMS have not re-registered with the TC and the registration falsely states the service is supported by Essex County Council

Having worked for both the public and private bus sector, I have my own thoughts as to why Essex are taking this action, but I shall keep my powder dry for now...

 

[MotCO]

It is also the subject of today’s blog by Roger French, who said:

The comments in Roger's blog offer two suggestions for why the situation has arisen:

1. TMS want to keep all the fare revenue (since, rightly or wrongly) they see it as revenue positive, without offering the Council any funding towards their costs of maintaining and running the car park;
2. The Council want to retain the surplus (if the contract states that First run the contract for £x and pass all revenue collected to the Council) so they can use it to subsidise other routes.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

I'd also point out that TMS have not re-registered with the TC and the registration falsely states the service is supported by Essex County Council

They wouldn't need to. At most it would be an e-mail to the Licensing Office that the status has changed, which they will need to do this for the BSOG claim at some point but such things don't show immediately and I suspect most operators only do such things around the time of the claim.

The comments in Roger's blog offer two suggestions for why the situation has arisen:

1. TMS want to keep all the fare revenue (since, rightly or wrongly) they see it as revenue positive, without offering the Council any funding towards their costs of maintaining and running the car park;
2. The Council want to retain the surplus (if the contract states that First run the contract for £x and pass all revenue collected to the Council) so they can use it to subsidise other routes.

The easiest way to solve this issue is for the council to introduce departure charges from the Park & Ride site to pay for upkeep and management of the facilities in a similar way as happens at other facilities like bus stations. It could be applied to a contracted operator just as much as a commercial operator, so isn't anti-competitive, but of course the cost of the latter would be rolled into the contract price so effectively just vanishes in the council accounts. If the commercial operator still thinks it is a commercial proposition with the departure charges applied then the council save money (but the commercial operator isn't benefiting from a council funded resource that their service wouldn't exist without) and if they don't then the situation doesn't change and the fares revenue is covering the costs as before.

 

[MotCO]

They wouldn't need to. At most it would be an e-mail to the Licensing Office that the status has changed, which they will need to do this for the BSOG claim at some point but such things don't show immediately and I suspect most operators only do such things around the time of the claim.


The easiest way to solve this issue is for the council to introduce departure charges from the Park & Ride site to pay for upkeep and management of the facilities in a similar way as happens at other facilities like bus stations. It could be applied to a contracted operator just as much as a commercial operator, so isn't anti-competitive, but of course the cost of the latter would be rolled into the contract price so effectively just vanishes in the council accounts. If the commercial operator still thinks it is a commercial proposition with the departure charges applied then the council save money (but the commercial operator isn't benefiting from a council funded resource that their service wouldn't exist without) and if they don't then the situation doesn't change and the fares revenue is covering the costs as before.

But the departure point, I understand, is on the highway, not a private road, so could charges be applied?

 

[38291018]

I'd also point out that TMS have not re-registered with the TC and the registration falsely states the service is supported by Essex County Council

Might be true however could just be because the TC have backlog and are known to have delays in changing the service registrations so could be that TMS have but TC haven't got round to updating this yet

 

[ACBest]

It is also the subject of today’s blog by Roger French, who said:


Source: https://busandtrainuser.com/2026/03/07/is-this-even-legal/

An observation is that there are some very interesting comments explaining the situation in detail turning up on that post, and a lot of them haven’t gone in Central Connect’s favour.

 

[markymark2000]

The easiest way to solve this issue is for the council to introduce departure charges from the Park & Ride site to pay for upkeep and management of the facilities in a similar way as happens at other facilities like bus stations. It could be applied to a contracted operator just as much as a commercial operator, so isn't anti-competitive, but of course the cost of the latter would be rolled into the contract price so effectively just vanishes in the council accounts. If the commercial operator still thinks it is a commercial proposition with the departure charges applied then the council save money (but the commercial operator isn't benefiting from a council funded resource that their service wouldn't exist without) and if they don't then the situation doesn't change and the fares revenue is covering the costs as before.

Or just charge the parking separate to the bus ticket, which is how Oxford operates.

 

[buslad1988]

A part 2 to Roger’s blog has now been posted for balance… certainly adds more background and clarification around matters!

Is this even legal? Part 2.

Sunday 8th March 2026 Unsurprisingly my take on the strange goings on experienced as a passenger in Chelmsford on Friday drew a record number of comments to yesterday’s blog and in case reade…

busandtrainuser.com

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

A part 2 to Roger’s blog has now been posted for balance… certainly adds more background and clarification around matters!

Is this even legal? Part 2.

Sunday 8th March 2026 Unsurprisingly my take on the strange goings on experienced as a passenger in Chelmsford on Friday drew a record number of comments to yesterday’s blog and in case reade…

busandtrainuser.com

I think Roger was taken aback by the vociferous reaction. The early comments were generally supportive of his view. However, it quickly turned as more comments were made a) about the unquestioning and partisan nature of the post and b) someone provided a chunk of additional information that was clearly well informed and added a lot more light to the subject (and is what Roger posted as pt2).

Not surprised he turned the comments off.

 

[Wawanesa]

Might be true however could just be because the TC have backlog and are known to have delays in changing the service registrations so could be that TMS have but TC haven't got round to updating this yet

The latest issue of Essex Bus magazine has a statement attributed to Peter Nathaniel(chief cook and bottle washer at TMS) that the Traffic Commissioner had been updated regarding the commercial status of the service registration.

Given various comments on the forum about the TMS group I think it's fair to say that the original Vectare operation in Essex (including the P & R) was pretty good. They have improved the Galleon Travel/ Central Connect operation but to sort out the Hedingham & Chambers business is a mammoth task. They took on the very experienced Alex Carter last August but he seems to have been low profile so far, maybe beavering away in the background.

 

[Megafuss]

I think Roger was taken aback by the vociferous reaction. The early comments were generally supportive of his view. However, it quickly turned as more comments were made a) about the unquestioning and partisan nature of the post and b) someone provided a chunk of additional information that was clearly well informed and added a lot more light to the subject (and is what Roger posted as pt2).

Not surprised he turned the comments off.

I accept he is just a member of the public these days. But he should have known better, especially given his decades of industry experience.

Time immemorial he'll have known of similar local authority standoffs with commercial operators appearing to play games during tender processes during his own professional career. Dissapointing and he's went right down in my opinion.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I accept he is just a member of the public these days. But he should have known better, especially given his decades of industry experience.

Time immemorial he'll have known of similar local authority standoffs with commercial operators appearing to play games during tender processes during his own professional career. Dissapointing and he's went right down in my opinion.

I have to say I was a bit disappointed. He has his opinions and loyalties, and I generally enjoy what he writes even if I don't always agree. As you say, he has both experience and insight. However, he really didn't pose or answer some fundamental questions...

• Why didn't TMS submit a compliant bid in the first place?
• How long before the award (and at what stage of the award process) did they come up with their commercial proposal?
• What impact on the site costs - were the fares also funding the upkeep of the facilities, and how would TMS's proposal impact that?
• What potential impact on First and their costs? Was there a mechanism for ECC to cancel and at what cost?
• What would happen with the other P&R service? As it was a combined tender award, then a new tender process would have to be initiated and at what cost?

There was little if any consideration of these; just that it was the council that were behaving incredibly when he should have known that these were some of the issues that would be "in play".

Other issues that were glossed over were "and what if TMS subsequently decide they can't make it pay" and "what about the other pressing issues that they need to sort such as the inheritance from Go East"?

I really don't have any view on TMS as a business, good or bad, but it was a very partisan post and as I say, I think Roger quickly realised he'd underestimated the potential reaction. Oh, and I didn't make any of the comments that were posted