Uno Bus

[greenline712]

Yes that's always been the issue. But people who need to get to north London or even further in really don't care about the politics. HCC should have a system of allowing TfL buses to run into Herts to connect with local Herts buses.

TfL fares could extend into the county and be clearly defined as London buses. Bar the current price cap there's no standardised fares on different operator fares and nothing really needs to change. While pricing would need to be something to seek to sort in time, people just want buses to exist and run at convenient times.

You haven't answered my point about financials . . . it's a horrible thing to whinge on about money, but that's what make the world go round, I'm afraid.

Part of the reason for Metroline pulling the 84 from Barnet was that, because London fares were so low, fares from Potters Bar to Barnet had to be lower than the commercial rate, otherwise passenger would have been able to rebook at the boundary . . . think split fares on the railways! In addition, because TfL would not allow the use of Oyster on 84 buses, there was almost no usage of the 84 within London; even though the local fare was the same as the London fare, it had to be paid in cash.

I don't disagree about cross boundary routes being desirable, but someone has to pay . . . in this case either TfL; Herts CC or the passenger. The passenger won't pay . . . I've just illustrated that (and see below in re Bushey); TfL don't want to pay, otherwise they would've contributed to the 84B; Herts CC would prefer not to pay, but the Hertsmere money has run out, and the County really have no choice now.
We've seen this additionally in Watford . . . TfL fares apply (including free child fares) on buses through Bushey; Arriva rerouted their 306 away from Bushey because passengers went for the cheap buses (and why wouldn't they) {and they still couldn't make it pay, so withdrew altogether and Sullivan's decided to have a go}.

Yes . . . 298 and 313 run into Hertfordshire . . . effectively to terminate somewhere. If not Potters Bar Station, then the M25 roundabout, which really WOULD be stupid!

To extend 310 back to Enfield from c0700 to c1900 would cost (assuming at 2 BPH) two buses and probably five drivers . . . no change out of around half a million quid per annum!! At £1.75 per single journey (and don't forget the free children under 16!) . . . who will pay? Someone has to . . .

 

[aswilliamsuk]

A very gradual entry into service from (implicitly late) 2024 to 2026 was the aim when Herts CC announced their revised ZEBRA scheme in December 2023. Uno's launch presser in March 2025 said the shuttle five would be "charging into service this month" before that was quietly withdrawn; infrastructure works (including a DNO grid upgrade) are the likely holdups, and as with previous Uno stock introductions it may be in September again.

No idea if the other twenty-two have been ordered yet.


Driver hearsay isn't the most reliable of sources. In last year's tender exercise for the twenty-two there were references to the 602 & 653, not the 601.

Uno have ordered 27 BYD B12s in total it is understood. five already there, 11 in September, 11 in the new year. (I'm sure this was confirmed since this article) https://www.route-one.net/news/byd-delivers-first-b12-buses-as-uno-launches-uni-service/

 

[jon0844]

They have a number of electric buses for their TfL work but I'm still waiting to see them running in Herts (bar when they run empty from the depot!).

To answer a previous comment, I did agree the financials are and always have been the problem but was pointing out that it is something that needs to be fixed one day to have any chance of growing public transport beyond trains.

Uno has improved massively in recent years so I don't want to sound too negative but the reliability of some routes has put me off using or relying on them. The 601 got significantly worse in the last year or two in the afternoon and evening, with long gaps (or even buses running within almost minutes of each other at other times) and so many cancellations that they did themselves no favours.

What's worse is that they seemed to have improved the reliability of the 601 to at least run the mistimed buses instead of cancelling them - with of course no way for most people to see the bus was actually cancelled. The social media team (person) was often hours behind so you found out an hour or two later that it was cancelled.

 

[aron2smith]

Yes that's always been the issue. But people who need to get to north London or even further in really don't care about the politics. HCC should have a system of allowing TfL buses to run into Herts to connect with local Herts buses.

TfL fares could extend into the county and be clearly defined as London buses. Bar the current price cap there's no standardised fares on different operator fares and nothing really needs to change. While pricing would need to be something to seek to sort in time, people just want buses to exist and run at convenient times.

TfL buses wouldn't be running up to Royston, but potentially along key routes to places like Cheshunt or maybe Broxbourne, Hatfield, St Albans etc.

I know this isn't ever likely to happen because in 20+ years I've seen little evidence that the council is seriously interested in properly managing and investing in public transport.

Strongly agree with this and your other post and I think all councils and bus companies need to be much flexible and cooperative with each other. Despite living in Cheshunt, I am only 3 miles away from where I grew up in Enfield so I really don't understand the disparity in bus services. Even more so when Cheshunt is clearly as much apart of London's built up area as Enfield is. Personally, I am really hoping when devolution and reorganisation are fully under way here, some sensible strategic authorities are proposed. For us in towns in south and east Herts, that clearly means strategic thinking with both Essex and London. In other parts of Hertfordshire, strategic cooperation with Beds, Cambs and even the Thames Valley/ Chiltern region makes more sense. Counties are rarely big enough to run efficient and useful bus networks, and the shape of most counties makes that impossible.

The way Cheshunt and other towns near London are growing, the grown up thing to do would be to work something out with TFL whilst HCC and ECC restore funding for socially necessary late evening and weekend services. Life is so limited if your last bus is at 7pm and after that it's a long walk home from the station!

 

[smtglasgow]

Cheshunt is clearly as much apart of London's built up area as Enfield is.

I tend to agree with this - got family in the area who all work in North London.

This probably needs a separate thread, but I wonder if a possible solution for Cheshunt’s woes might be some form of tap on, tap off on cross-border services where TFL can start charging higher fares outside their boundary? I can't see how you can expect Londoners to subsidise £1.75 fares for Herts/Essex residents - although TfL running trains to Cheshunt certainly confuses the issue.

Sticking with Uno – given the crisis in Higher Education, could the University of Hatfield be tempted to sell it off? Would anyone want to buy it? Most recent accounts show a loss, but has made decent profits in the past.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

I tend to agree with this - got family in the area who all work in North London.

This probably needs a separate thread, but I wonder if a possible solution for Cheshunt’s woes might be some form of tap on, tap off on cross-border services where TFL can start charging higher fares outside their boundary? I can't see how you can expect Londoners to subsidise £1.75 fares for Herts/Essex residents - although TfL running trains to Cheshunt certainly confuses the issue.

There is a lot of criticism for Herts on here saying they need to be flexible and work with neighboring authorities but I suspect the problem is TfL not being flexible not the other way round. Herts do work with their other neighbors productively, my employers have a HCC contract that is part funded by Central Beds for instance - Hertfordshire are a very good shire county for public transport innovation, funding and general management (it doesn't have London funding but compared to similar authorities and it is a well managed one). The issue is TfL aren't flexible and have never been willing to be flexible. They insist on charging non-commercial fares even outside London, they insist on overbussing the outer ends (they insist on scheduling all journeys to run the full route apparently so when you hit the shires you more buses than demand can support) and they refuse to be flexible on vehicle spec to qualify for accessing TfL revenue (subsidised fares or even to accept Oyster or get reimbursement for Travelcards) insisting on London spec dual-door standee vehicles which are entirely unsuitable for shire county operation (a TfL spec 10.8 m E200 has 25% less seats than a provincial spec vehicle for instance). I believe there have been complaints from every one of their neighboring authorities around how much TfL demand from them to fund what cross-boundary services they do still fund and that it is substantially more than they would have to pay if they tendered it on the open market but they have no choice but to pay if they want it (the same complaints have already arisen against Manchester for the same reason, that TfGM are asking for more money to pay for cross boundary services). TfL can, in theory, block anyone from operating within London (not sure they have done it recently but they did in the past) and they can and do make non-TfL operation difficult by limiting access to local passengers but Hertfordshire don't (& I'm not sure legally could even if they do manage their own registrations now).

London has always been better funded for public transport than the shire counties, it is evening out as London loses its extra funding but as a big city with higher population densities it will always be better funded so unless we are prepared to pay more in taxes to subsidise the lower density shires that will always be the case.

There will always be boundaries between responsibilities that will create frictions for travel, there always has been and always will be, as people are individuals and make individual choices. You can move boundaries, or at least try there are more than enough places in the country with very strange looking boundary areas because residents of one place refused to be moved from one authority jurisdiction to another (quite common with big cities and so whether the people of the Lea Valley like Cheshunt & Hoddesdon want to be in London is quite a question), but that just moves the problem not removes it. This argument can be made in many border areas, politicians are elected to make decisions and those funding decisions will be different between places but that doesn't mean you should expect one to provide services in the other or for special circumstances to be created just for the border (I grew up on the Surrey/Hampshire border where you literally can barely see the boundary in places, Surrey are very proactive with their bus funding and management whilst Hampshire does next to nothing but no one expects Surrey to interfere in Hampshire or fund services in Hampshire or demand Hampshire pay them to provide a service for their residents. You can't expect TfL to fund services for Hertfordshire residents just because they live a couple of miles over the border, nor can you expect Herts to just pay what TfL demand to get them to provide the service nor should you expect London style services if you don't live in London or an authority that is in anyway funded or populated like it.

 

[317 forever]

I tend to agree with this - got family in the area who all work in North London.

This probably needs a separate thread, but I wonder if a possible solution for Cheshunt’s woes might be some form of tap on, tap off on cross-border services where TFL can start charging higher fares outside their boundary? I can't see how you can expect Londoners to subsidise £1.75 fares for Herts/Essex residents - although TfL running trains to Cheshunt certainly confuses the issue.

Sticking with Uno – given the crisis in Higher Education, could the University of Hatfield be tempted to sell it off? Would anyone want to buy it? Most recent accounts show a loss, but has made decent profits in the past.

I understand that, if Uno sell out to Rotala (Diamond) and Transport UK sell out to Mobico (National Express), then the top 7 national operators would be the 7 operators of London buses.

The other 5 are Stagecoach, First, Go-Ahead, Arriva and Comfort DelGro (Metroline).

Digressing a bit I know, but this point does start from whether Uno were to be sold.

 

[aron2smith]

There is a lot of criticism for Herts on here saying they need to be flexible and work with neighboring authorities but I suspect the problem is TfL not being flexible not the other way round.

There will always be boundaries between responsibilities that will create frictions for travel, there always has been and always will be, as people are individuals and make individual choices. You can move boundaries, or at least try there are more than enough places in the country with very strange looking boundary areas because residents of one place refused to be moved from one authority jurisdiction to another (quite common with big cities and so whether the people of the Lea Valley like Cheshunt & Hoddesdon want to be in London is quite a question), but that just moves the problem not removes it. This argument can be made in many border areas, politicians are elected to make decisions and those funding decisions will be different between places but that doesn't mean you should expect one to provide services in the other or for special circumstances to be created just for the border (I grew up on the Surrey/Hampshire border where you literally can barely see the boundary in places, Surrey are very proactive with their bus funding and management whilst Hampshire does next to nothing but no one expects Surrey to interfere in Hampshire or fund services in Hampshire or demand Hampshire pay them to provide a service for their residents. You can't expect TfL to fund services for Hertfordshire residents just because they live a couple of miles over the border, nor can you expect Herts to just pay what TfL demand to get them to provide the service nor should you expect London style services if you don't live in London or an authority that is in anyway funded or populated like it.

To me, all the counties around here are as bad as each other, but if you look at a map that shows both urban areas and county boundaries, is it any wonder things are in such a mess with buses? Outside of city regions, counties are clearly not the right scale for effective and efficient transport operations. Really the country needs to be divided into a number of regional transport authorities (maybe 10 to 12 of these for England, interestingly Wales will be split into 4 for franchising when originally it was 8?), that requires Parliament but also the strong regional government structure that has always been lacking in this country. Residents can keep their local identities but to me that is not how we should run services like transport or our councils.

To say it's interference from one county into another when it comes to buses is an odd argument. I, like most people want our transport, either bus to train, train to bus, bus to bus (locally and across regional divides) to be as seamless as possible for as many journeys as possible, especially with fares and timetables. Clearly the status quo is massively failing this in many places. Driving given its many issues and huge expense is much more seamless than public transport, the blame games between authorities must stop and a way forward found if buses and trains are to become an alternative for a lot more people.

The point is we shouldn't have to have the Lea Valley join Greater London just to get the level of bus services that neighbouring towns like Borehamwood, Potters Bar and Loughton/ Debden already get. I think my expectation with London is that it has a huge impact on the surrounding areas, both good and bad and the way things like buses are run doesn't align with that reality. Even though councils and governments throughout much of the 20th century just accepted London has enormous reach into the regions and planned accordingly. Naturally I was incredibly jealous when I saw Lothian Country buses when I visited Edinburgh and the surrounding towns last year!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jul 2025 ==

I tend to agree with this - got family in the area who all work in North London.

This probably needs a separate thread, but I wonder if a possible solution for Cheshunt’s woes might be some form of tap on, tap off on cross-border services where TFL can start charging higher fares outside their boundary? I can't see how you can expect Londoners to subsidise £1.75 fares for Herts/Essex residents - although TfL running trains to Cheshunt certainly confuses the issue.

Sticking with Uno – given the crisis in Higher Education, could the University of Hatfield be tempted to sell it off? Would anyone want to buy it? Most recent accounts show a loss, but has made decent profits in the past.

I still see myself as a Londoner, albeit priced out! And I luckily have a disabled bus pass but I can understand why buses are not so well used here, people effectively have to pay twice here for a journey into London and with no hopper fare or capping, buses get expensive quick! Weirdly the train is cheaper (and much faster) for trips to Ware for example!! Add in a cramped terminus like Waltham Cross and routes that fail to be of much use for anyone who needs a train, it's no wonder. The whole area needs a major rethink when it comes to buses.

As for Uno, it'd be really surprising if they were sold off. Even if it makes a loss, it seems to be growing a lot and they appear to be constantly hiring people. Interestingly, I still see them training new drivers on the 242, even though they have operated the route for 6 months now!

 

[Edvid]

More changes for 31 August listed on Intalink; as suggested the 242 will be extended.

242 Potters Bar to Waltham Cross
Timetable change and route change. Service now extended from Potters Bar to Hatfield Town Centre, The Galleria and Business Park via Brookmans Park and Welham Green. The service route will replace the withdrawn section of service 610 route.

243 Hatfield to Barnet
New service route. Service will operate up to every 60 minutes Mondays to Saturdays. Service will replace the withdrawn service route 84B between Barnet and Potters Bar and replace a section of the withdrawn service 610 between Hatfield and Potters Bar.

843 Hatfield to Brookmans Park - (School service open to the public)
New service route. Service will operate on schooldays only via Colney Heath and Welham Green.

PB1 Potters Bar to Rushfield (Circular)
Timetable change. Additional evening journeys will operate Mondays to Fridays.

Meanwhile Uno have disposed of nine buses recently. Notations on bustimes say four Citaros have gone for scrap and the B9TL Gemini / ex-Jersey E200s have been sold (didn't say where to).

 

[jon0844]

That's good news and proves my theory right (I saw a double deck Pride bus at Brookfield Farm yesterday so many 601 buses are now in use on the existing pre-expanded 242 route).

Perhaps if/when Uno gets more buses it might even restore the 601 or something similar.

 

[aron2smith]

More changes for 31 August listed on Intalink; as suggested the 242 will be extended.

I should be happy at the 242 being extended and much more useful as a regional route soon enough, but would much prefer it be extended the other way. The lack of any WX - Abbey - Chingford Station route blows my mind. Also the 242 (and nearly all bus routes in Cheshunt) are massively unreliable as it is, so I hope Uno allowed for much more recovery time and a more generous PVR this time. And again I should be happy at Uno taking over the PB to Barnet bus route, but where were they in 2022 when they were really needed? Hertsmere Council had to fight so hard for this cross-boundary service to come back, actually a bit insulting now a private company is interested again, now the route has proven itself. These companies should be willing to look at gaps in the bus network and just take a chance. Loads of gaps between Greater London and the Home Counties without going off-topic again. Also missed opportunity to not introduce a limited Sunday service on the 243. The 298 and 313 both run half hourly on Sundays, even a two hourly Sunday service on the 243 to match the 242 would be better than nothing.

 

[Edvid]

It's September now, and we know what that means for Uno bus introductions...

404 / LF25SYX is the first B12 to enter service on the inter-campus shuttle (and UK roads as a whole, assuming a demo hasn't carried passengers elsewhere on the down low).

BYD B12 - Uno 404 LF25SYX

Explore zkbus221's 5 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[jon0844]

A shuttle bus BYD EV bus operating on the 625 (Hatfield to Stevenage) route earlier this evening.

(LED display is more high resolution - like that of the image in the previous post - than shown due to shutter speed issues)

 

[Edvid]

Wouldn't have expected a B12 to appear on the 625 given it includes a significant length of motorway running, though they have tracked on other non-shuttle routes (usually the 243). For what it's worth term-time schedules don't resume in full until 15 September.

As it happens Uno were giving away goody bags of timetables and trinkets on St Peter's Street this morning, with #403 available for passers by to walk on and sample. I asked staff there about the 22 remaining electrics and was informed that 16 single-door B12s are on order to replace the remaining Citaros and perhaps a few B7RLEs (for routes 602 and 653), scheduled for delivery in March/April 2026. They've not chosen a supplier of the other 6 yet but Volvo was mentioned as an option.

 

[Saint66]

Have also seen a photo of one of the new electric BYD buses on the 602 route.

 

[jon0844]

I managed to get on a 602 with a BYD bus and it's very nice and quiet. NO panels rattling and hopefully with the lack of vibrations from a diesel engine, that might remain the case for a while.

Nice to see USB-C ports, although I am not sure why they've got slide-up covers that will likely get damaged or broken. They're backlit and provide 5V 2.1A which is, erm, not exactly impressive. USB-C could easily support Power Delivery or PPS and go up to 18W and beyond.

The onboard screens weren't showing next stop info, but the exterior displays are really nice and clear.

I really look forward to when they get the next batch, because the Citaro I was on before is really showing its age. Just about every bolt and screw must have been loose and it sounded terrible!

There are still driver shortage issues that Uno needs to fix, but the new timetable seems to be working quite well and with 4 buses per hour on the 602 in particular, it's about the first time I can feel like being in London where you just wait for a bus without checking the timetable. The real problem is the inability for the screens and apps to show a bus that isn't running, and that HCC hasn't bothered to update bus timetables so people won't know all of these new buses are running.

For some odd reason, bustimes.org still shows the 601 each day as running as normal. Obviously it can't track any buses, but does that mean Uno is still providing a feed for it by mistake? With that and the bus stops showing the 601, I wonder how many people are not even aware it hasn't run since the end of August?

 

[greenline712]

I see that the new timetable for Route 602 has been compiled by AI . . . differential running times on every journey. Is it honestly beyond the wit of the compiler to look at the nonsense produced and adjust it to make it both sensible and attractive? A journey may appear to require one extra minute in running time from the journeys either side, but will this apply every day? Of course not! Even a regular 15-minute frequency becomes every 13-17 minutes; that's enough for a passenger to get to the stop just in time to see the back of the bus disappearing into the distance.

And don't get me started on the Intalink County Map . . . in re Route 601, all mention has been expunged, so Park Street and Frogmore now have no bus service . . . the new Route 362 isn't mentioned at all. And Intalink now have a message on their site apologising for roadside timetables not being updated (after over three weeks). It simply isn't good enough . . . employ extra staff temporarily to get it done, and get it done NOW!!

I despair . . . I really do . . .

 

[jon0844]

They used to go around daily to clean many bus shelters, which I guess HCC probably thought was money being wasted... but even if they scaled back the cleaning, not changing timetables that show buses that don't exist is unacceptable.

What will happen is Joe Public won't be aware of the changes, and either get upset waiting for a bus that is never coming, or not be aware of the many new or extra buses.. which if not advertised anywhere else will just lead to these services not being used, and thus scrapped in six months!

The new commercial director at Uno apparently took control of all the changes and had deemed the 601 to not be profitable enough, and yet it regularly ran with double deckers and a large number of people (mostly students and school children). But when they left huge gaps (sometimes nearly 90 minutes) it must have had an impact. For one, school children were unable to get the 601 after 1500 unless an earlier bus was heavily delayed - so they all switched to the Arriva buses (the 725 in particular) which seems very well loaded.

I didn't realise that behind the scenes there has been quite a lot of protest about the loss of the 601 in multiple areas now not served, so perhaps another bus operator could take it over and run a more sensible timetable?

Clearly the double deckers were moved on to the 242 service, and I've noticed that on some buses the mention of Wi-Fi has been removed (badly - scratching off the decals) so I think they might be attempting to save money there too. Certainly I've noticed that while the buses still have the Icomera system, they report there being no connectivity - so you're just connecting to the bus access point but nothing else.

I forgot to check if the EVs have Wi-Fi.

 

[markymark2000]

The new commercial director at Uno apparently took control of all the changes and had deemed the 601 to not be profitable enough, and yet it regularly ran with double deckers and a large number of people (mostly students and school children). But when they left huge gaps (sometimes nearly 90 minutes) it must have had an impact. For one, school children were unable to get the 601 after 1500 unless an earlier bus was heavily delayed - so they all switched to the Arriva buses (the 725 in particular) which seems very well loaded.

Would this be Simon Newport? The same guy who was commercial director of Yellow Buses (now ceased) & Transpora (who also ended up with a lot of difficulties and now also largely ceased)?

 

[aron2smith]

There are still driver shortage issues that Uno needs to fix, but the new timetable seems to be working quite well and with 4 buses per hour on the 602 in particular, it's about the first time I can feel like being in London where you just wait for a bus without checking the timetable. The real problem is the inability for the screens and apps to show a bus that isn't running, and that HCC hasn't bothered to update bus timetables so people won't know all of these new buses are running.

I knew it! The changes Uno just enacted were huge for a company of its size and I thought they bit off more than they could chew! As a user of the 242, it was frustrating if it turned 20 minutes late before but it always turned up! Since the changes, I've had at least 2 occasions where it didn't turn up at all. Unacceptable for an hourly service, it's really great having the regional connectivity from Cheshunt to Potters Bar back, so they really need to sort out the reliability issues.

Also seen similar issues with the 243 not turning up from a Potters Bar Bus Group I'm apart of on Facebook. In my opinion, another fragile route due to the gap left by the 84 cuts. I appreciate Uno want to expand but if these routes end up being cut in future because they weren't run properly, I'll be very angry. Us areas adjacent to Greater London really need these routes as they've been neglected for far too long.

Also thinking the way 242/ 3 serve Potters Bar is confusing. The 242 is fine but the 243's double run to the station is bonkers. It should just run down Darkes Lane like the 610 did, instead of the High Street/ Bus Garage. Also the routing in Barnet continues to cause a lot of delays!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2025 ==

And don't get me started on the Intalink County Map . . . in re Route 601, all mention has been expunged, so Park Street and Frogmore now have no bus service . . . the new Route 362 isn't mentioned at all. And Intalink now have a message on their site apologising for roadside timetables not being updated (after over three weeks). It simply isn't good enough . . . employ extra staff temporarily to get it done, and get it done NOW!!

I despair . . . I really do . . .

It's so frustrating as HCC has introduced several late evening buses recently that no one knows exist. 242 - last bus Waltham Cross 19:55 instead of 19:05, last PB to Hatfield is now 21:35, very good for the villages on the way! 625 Stevenage last bus 20:50. Not Uno but 907 runs till 21:21 (Stevenage) and 21:50 (Cheshunt) over 2 hours later than before!, Arriva made the 310 and 321 every 30 minutes on Sundays, an hourly service now runs between Letchworth and Royston! A town that hasn't had much of a bus service ever! Why aren't these changes being advertised?

There's some quite impressive developments and they have known about these changes since July! So they have no excuse. I just can't imagine putting millions into this stuff and not getting the basics such as bus stop information right!

As for 601, I rode it in the quiet Summer Holidays, from the edge of Borehamwood, it was steadily picking up and dropping people off the whole time, I imagine it was well used in school term times, the cut made no sense. Was surprising the number of people who used it direct St Albans to Welwyn Garden City. The replacement at the western end of the 601 is the 362 which is co-ordinated with the 361. So a bus every half hour from Borehamwood to St Albans, one via Park Street, one via Bricket Wood.

 

[jon0844]

Any idea why the 601 still shows on bustimes.org?

Uno

bustimes.org

Does this mean Uno or HCC/Intalink is still providing data for a service that ended at the end of August?

 

[markymark2000]

Any idea why the 601 still shows on bustimes.org?

Uno

bustimes.org

Does this mean Uno or HCC/Intalink is still providing data for a service that ended at the end of August?

Uno still includes this service in their open data. It was removed before manually by bustimes but the data must have refreshed and added it back.

Best way to know where a timetable has come from on Bustimes is check just underneath the timetable and it tells you and normally provides a link to where it's come from.

 

[jon0844]

Uno still has many buses with audio only announcements, with broken (flickering) displays or displays switched off entirely. I was also on a bus with no hardware, but I think it was a 2008 vehicle so maybe it is exempt until next year.

For the last two days the service has been pretty woeful from the business park (bus garage) and there have been buses running late that get turned around there, so never reach their destination (e.g. train station) and means going from 4-6bph to 0. Today, one bus came out and went the wrong way, while another late bus opted to terminate at the business park and ran 'dead' to the town to start back - saving maybe a minute or two at most.

Now, these things happen for operational reasons and I get that, but until there's a way for a bus operator to modify the data so bus stops and apps can show a bus is cancelled, people will end up waiting ages for a bus that disappears even if you've been tracking it for some time. Can we imagine if trains were like this? Terminate a train from King's Cross at Letchworth but still show it running to Cambridge...

I've spoken to drivers who say a lot of new drivers aren't getting on well with route learning, so they are taking wrong routes and also stopping at the wrong bus stops. I can't call Uno to ask what's going on because the number on the bus stops has been disconnected!

They are apparently taking on another new (TfL) route soon, and possibly bringing back the 601 at peak/school hours only, but they're looking to also offload some to another operator.

It wasn't made clear, but some of the more local buses are no longer of interest to Uno. But to confuse the situation, if another operator takes over, say, the 641, they may not be allowed access to the campus/university bus stops - which would presumably mean they'll get a huge drop in patronage and become unprofitable, then die. Another operator certainly couldn't accept discounted student tickets and passes.

The opinion amongst crew is that they've bitten off more than they can chew and must be trying to figure out how they can cope, especially as they're now having to store buses off-site because they've outgrown the current location.

But, on the plus side, HCC has updated the bus timetables at last. Not bad for service times that changed in August...!! So people can at least look to see what buses haven't turned up.

 

[markymark2000]

Uno still has many buses with audio only announcements, with broken (flickering) displays or displays switched off entirely. I was also on a bus with no hardware, but I think it was a 2008 vehicle so maybe it is exempt until next year.

For the last two days the service has been pretty woeful from the business park (bus garage) and there have been buses running late that get turned around there, so never reach their destination (e.g. train station) and means going from 4-6bph to 0. Today, one bus came out and went the wrong way, while another late bus opted to terminate at the business park and ran 'dead' to the town to start back - saving maybe a minute or two at most.

Now, these things happen for operational reasons and I get that, but until there's a way for a bus operator to modify the data so bus stops and apps can show a bus is cancelled, people will end up waiting ages for a bus that disappears even if you've been tracking it for some time. Can we imagine if trains were like this? Terminate a train from King's Cross at Letchworth but still show it running to Cambridge...

I've spoken to drivers who say a lot of new drivers aren't getting on well with route learning, so they are taking wrong routes and also stopping at the wrong bus stops. I can't call Uno to ask what's going on because the number on the bus stops has been disconnected!

They are apparently taking on another new (TfL) route soon, and possibly bringing back the 601 at peak/school hours only, but they're looking to also offload some to another operator.

It wasn't made clear, but some of the more local buses are no longer of interest to Uno. But to confuse the situation, if another operator takes over, say, the 641, they may not be allowed access to the campus/university bus stops - which would presumably mean they'll get a huge drop in patronage and become unprofitable, then die. Another operator certainly couldn't accept discounted student tickets and passes.

The opinion amongst crew is that they've bitten off more than they can chew and must be trying to figure out how they can cope, especially as they're now having to store buses off-site because they've outgrown the current location.

But, on the plus side, HCC has updated the bus timetables at last. Not bad for service times that changed in August...!! So people can at least look to see what buses haven't turned up.

With all of this in mind, it sounds like the perfect time for Uno to be awarded for their 'Outstanding customer experience' at the RouteOne awards
(though the awards in previous years have just been self congratulatory nonsense that the industry is currently full of, rather than awarded based on any logical criteria. I'm not sure how anything Uno has done recently could count as providing an outstanding customer service).

 

[317 forever]

Uno still has many buses with audio only announcements, with broken (flickering) displays or displays switched off entirely. I was also on a bus with no hardware, but I think it was a 2008 vehicle so maybe it is exempt until next year.

For the last two days the service has been pretty woeful from the business park (bus garage) and there have been buses running late that get turned around there, so never reach their destination (e.g. train station) and means going from 4-6bph to 0. Today, one bus came out and went the wrong way, while another late bus opted to terminate at the business park and ran 'dead' to the town to start back - saving maybe a minute or two at most.

Now, these things happen for operational reasons and I get that, but until there's a way for a bus operator to modify the data so bus stops and apps can show a bus is cancelled, people will end up waiting ages for a bus that disappears even if you've been tracking it for some time. Can we imagine if trains were like this? Terminate a train from King's Cross at Letchworth but still show it running to Cambridge...

I've spoken to drivers who say a lot of new drivers aren't getting on well with route learning, so they are taking wrong routes and also stopping at the wrong bus stops. I can't call Uno to ask what's going on because the number on the bus stops has been disconnected!

They are apparently taking on another new (TfL) route soon, and possibly bringing back the 601 at peak/school hours only, but they're looking to also offload some to another operator.

It wasn't made clear, but some of the more local buses are no longer of interest to Uno. But to confuse the situation, if another operator takes over, say, the 641, they may not be allowed access to the campus/university bus stops - which would presumably mean they'll get a huge drop in patronage and become unprofitable, then die. Another operator certainly couldn't accept discounted student tickets and passes.

The opinion amongst crew is that they've bitten off more than they can chew and must be trying to figure out how they can cope, especially as they're now having to store buses off-site because they've outgrown the current location.

But, on the plus side, HCC has updated the bus timetables at last. Not bad for service times that changed in August...!! So people can at least look to see what buses haven't turned up.

The TfL route they are taking up is route 292. Having a pvr of just 7 it needn't cause much of a problem all being well.

 

[aron2smith]

Uno still has many buses with audio only announcements, with broken (flickering) displays or displays switched off entirely. I was also on a bus with no hardware, but I think it was a 2008 vehicle so maybe it is exempt until next year.

242 and 243 don't have audio announcements at all, despite screens existing on the buses that could be used for that purpose.

They are apparently taking on another new (TfL) route soon, and possibly bringing back the 601 at peak/school hours only, but they're looking to also offload some to another operator.

That is the 292 - Borehamwood to Colindale. 601 should never have been cut, cross-county routes that cover several towns in 1 route make sense with Hertfordshire's geography.

It wasn't made clear, but some of the more local buses are no longer of interest to Uno. But to confuse the situation, if another operator takes over, say, the 641, they may not be allowed access to the campus/university bus stops - which would presumably mean they'll get a huge drop in patronage and become unprofitable, then die. Another operator certainly couldn't accept discounted student tickets and passes.

In bold is exactly why we need some form of franchising. Then the University has to work with the county to sort out issues such as campus access. The ticket issue would be gone too, as everything is valid on all buses with a simple show or verification of staff/ student ID allowing for a discount, making the bus more attractive across the region, even encouraging multi-leg bus journeys cross-county. Could work similarly to the Savercards and Intalink Connect tickets or be a university specific version of this.

As for not wanting several local routes, that is again where franchising could come into its own, then its on the authority to let someone run it for 5 years or whatever, allowing both passengers and the company some much needed network stability. Public control could mean stuff like garage and staff capacity would be more easily managed too.

The opinion amongst crew is that they've bitten off more than they can chew and must be trying to figure out how they can cope, especially as they're now having to store buses off-site because they've outgrown the current location.

But, on the plus side, HCC has updated the bus timetables at last. Not bad for service times that changed in August...!! So people can at least look to see what buses haven't turned up.

I'll give Uno the benefit of the doubt and say they operate buses in a challenging and really inconsistent area. Traffic is ridiculous across Herts and the outer parts of North London and in part because of a lack of consistency and a bit of a disconnect in transport policy across the whole south east.

I was on the 614 trying to get to Queensbury and on to Harrow on Friday night, the A1 was a total standstill as the traffic lights stopped working. Several 614's ended up 90 minutes late, despite starting off being on time and up to 10 minutes late initially! (I abandoned the bus on that section but could see the tracking on bustimes!) Not as bad as that but they really struggle with the 242 and 243 too, seen both be over 40 minutes late several times before. It reminds me of Ensignbus and their constant struggle with the X80 and the Dartford Crossing! The infrastructure, planning and priority isn't there and the lack of a regional approach means these companies are left to get on with it, with no say on the roads at all and certainly no obligation to serve new developments. It must kill off bus routes for sure. And while buses are fragmented, they clearly can't do anything that will make buses run as effectively as they could be, which in turn would greatly increase ridership.

The scale just isn't there at the moment. Uno only runs 14 regular routes in Hertfordshire and a handful each in London and Bedfordshire. It clearly can't singlehandedly run a full bus network on its own or consider the development implications that can impact buses a lot.

 

[Mikey C]

The TfL route they are taking up is route 292. Having a pvr of just 7 it needn't cause much of a problem all being well.

Unlike the London operators, the Borehamwood northern terminus will be more convenient for them than the southern one in Colindale!

 

[jon0844]

Uno appears to be diverting the 614 to avoid the roadworks but there are still delays. As said above, the roads just aren't designed to allow buses to move freely - from traffic hotspots to narrow lanes from bad parking (limited to no parking enforcement).

 

[markymark2000]

In bold is exactly why we need some form of franchising. Then the University has to work with the county to sort out issues such as campus access. The ticket issue would be gone too, as everything is valid on all buses with a simple show or verification of staff/ student ID allowing for a discount, making the bus more attractive across the region, even encouraging multi-leg bus journeys cross-county. Could work similarly to the Savercards and Intalink Connect tickets or be a university specific version of this.

No, franchising is not what is needed. What you actually need is to put a ban on exclusivity or access agreements. Work already happened in 2012 with the Competitions Markets Authority investigation which forces bus operators who run bus interchanges to permit non discriminatory access to other operators (full report). The govt could look to expand the act to apply the rules to all publicly accessible interchanges (irrespective of the owner). Uni of Herts is not the only one shafting public transport users with a dedicated interchange, and shoving all other bus operators or routes out to inferior stops to push some kind of exclusivity agreement.

The issue is not deregulation of the bus networks, it's agreements which are designed to make some people a lot of money, while also screwing over public transport users and networks for the majority. Franchising will only mean that the uni would charge Intalink silly money for access or just run more closed door dedicated student buses and get around it that way (same as happens in London). They can get around franchising very easily.

Not as bad as that but they really struggle with the 242 and 243 too, seen both be over 40 minutes late several times before. It reminds me of Ensignbus and their constant struggle with the X80 and the Dartford Crossing!

The MAJOR difference with EnsignBus X80 is that it's a small standalone route. It's not used for smaller local journeys. If Ensign Bus linked the X80 though to one of their local Thurrock services, they would, rightly, face criticisms over having unreliable services. Uno has made an active choice to operate most routes <90 minutes in length. No one has forced them to. Routes should be timetabled better, or they should stop relying on long mega routes and split services into smaller offerings, which enable delays to be kept more localised. Yes maybe not as operationally convenient for Uno, but operational convenience should never be a higher priority than passenger experience.

The scale just isn't there at the moment. Uno only runs 14 regular routes in Hertfordshire and a handful each in London and Bedfordshire. It clearly can't singlehandedly run a full bus network on its own or consider the development implications that can impact buses a lot.

14 regular routes is quite a lot, more so when you consider it's an operation with <50 buses on the Hertfordshire routes and they have been operating buses for 30+ years.

 

[aron2smith]

No, franchising is not what is needed. What you actually need is to put a ban on exclusivity or access agreements. Work already happened in 2012 with the Competitions Markets Authority investigation which forces bus operators who run bus interchanges to permit non discriminatory access to other operators (full report). The govt could look to expand the act to apply the rules to all publicly accessible interchanges (irrespective of the owner). Uni of Herts is not the only one shafting public transport users with a dedicated interchange, and shoving all other bus operators or routes out to inferior stops to push some kind of exclusivity agreement.

The issue is not deregulation of the bus networks, it's agreements which are designed to make some people a lot of money, while also screwing over public transport users and networks for the majority. Franchising will only mean that the uni would charge Intalink silly money for access or just run more closed door dedicated student buses and get around it that way (same as happens in London). They can get around franchising very easily.

I'm pretty sure a county council or regional transport authority has a bit more weight behind it than a small or medium sized bus company. And it would be silly as Uno/ the university would be charging themselves if they did what you say under franchising. They would likely still be running most of the contracts in Hatfield, but under the county/ authority, all would be equal and the final say of the network would be with the authority.

The MAJOR difference with EnsignBus X80 is that it's a small standalone route. It's not used for smaller local journeys. If Ensign Bus linked the X80 though to one of their local Thurrock services, they would, rightly, face criticisms over having unreliable services. Uno has made an active choice to operate most routes <90 minutes in length. No one has forced them to. Routes should be timetabled better, or they should stop relying on long mega routes and split services into smaller offerings, which enable delays to be kept more localised. Yes maybe not as operationally convenient for Uno, but operational convenience should never be a higher priority than passenger experience.

Yeah but the X80 is the only public transport available connecting people either side of the Dartford Crossing, which is a big issue in itself.

For one garage, it is a lot to run but across the wider area and a complex one like Hertfordshire into North London with no obvious centre, not so much.