On 23/11/2012 19:23, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
I realise a replacement bus company isn't paid to think about
passengers, but the railway companies might consider what passengers
are trying to achieve with their travel.

Then contact the TOCs and let them know your opinion. Then they may
change the rules.

I don't think you've quite understood the concept of discussion groups...


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On 23/11/2012 19:30, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 13:59, Portsmouth Rider wrote:

general public are not carried:

Erm...

The general public are, in this context, those who have not bought a
ticket to ride on the service operated by the TOC.

The passengers on the rail replacement service are those who have paid
the Train Operating Company for a ticket to ride from station A to
station B by the route specified on that ticket. They are a sub set of
the set called the general public.

I doubt people with any permitted tickets or things other than A to B
tickets would be refused travel!

the only passengers who should use it are
train passengers as directed by the railway people,

But there is no train!

(railway people? What railway people?)

Train passengers in this context are those who would be travelling on
the train, were it running. The "railway people" are the staff of the
TOC who are charged with supervising the replacement rail service.

I think I might have seem some of those once.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 15:35, John Williamson wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:22:06 on Fri, 23 Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I believe bus replacement services have designated "bus stops",

No, they just stop on a country road somewhere near the station.

They stop at the point designated by the Train operating Company. This
is the only point approved by the insurance company.

Is the insurance thing really true, or is it like the common idea that
you should never clear snow off a path or give someone first aid? ISTR
that the often quoted idea that if a someone who hasn't bought a ticket
is killed then the transport company and/or its insurers can have no
liability is not actually true.

I've been told by many managers over the years that it is true.

Clearing snow can leave you responsible for the consequences if you do
it and don't leave a safe surface. First aid is a legal minefield and a
number of people have been successfully sued, especially if they have
professional training. An example would be a nurse or doctor, or even a
vet doing the best they could at the time, but still leaving the patient
with a problem that could have been cured if they had called an
ambulance instead of going it alone.

Is there any exemption if something unusual happens - the bus station
burns down, the bus conks out, a mad axe-murderer gets on-board?

The owner's public liability insurance is liable, it depends on what the
breakdown is and whether the passengers are delivered to their
destination, and the last is a matter for the police.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 19:23, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
I realise a replacement bus company isn't paid to think about
passengers, but the railway companies might consider what passengers
are trying to achieve with their travel.

Then contact the TOCs and let them know your opinion. Then they may
change the rules.

I don't think you've quite understood the concept of discussion groups...


I understand the concept. I am also aware of the limitations of Usenet
groups. If you want things to change, you need to contact those who
organise them.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 23/11/2012 19:42, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 15:35, John Williamson wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:22:06 on Fri, 23 Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I believe bus replacement services have designated "bus stops",

No, they just stop on a country road somewhere near the station.

They stop at the point designated by the Train operating Company. This
is the only point approved by the insurance company.

Is the insurance thing really true, or is it like the common idea that
you should never clear snow off a path or give someone first aid? ISTR
that the often quoted idea that if a someone who hasn't bought a
ticket is killed then the transport company and/or its insurers can
have no liability is not actually true.

I've been told by many managers over the years that it is true.

That's not quite the answer to the question

Clearing snow can leave you responsible for the consequences if you do
it and don't leave a safe surface.

Even the Daily Mail has admitted that this is a myth:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...on-winter.html

Met Office:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning.../the-snow-code
(deliberately making the path *less* safe is a different issue, of course).

First aid is a legal minefield and a
number of people have been successfully sued, especially if they have
professional training. An example would be a nurse or doctor, or even a
vet doing the best they could at the time, but still leaving the patient
with a problem that could have been cured if they had called an
ambulance instead of going it alone.

How many people have been successfully sued for doing the best they
could at the time, rather than for something like negligence?

Is there any exemption if something unusual happens - the bus station
burns down, the bus conks out, a mad axe-murderer gets on-board?

The owner's public liability insurance is liable, it depends on what the
breakdown is and whether the passengers are delivered to their
destination, and the last is a matter for the police.

So if you stay on and die, your family get a refund on your ticket (or
whatever), but if you escape while not at a scheduled stop you are on
your own?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In article ,
Arthur Figgis wrote:
If 10 people for the centre save a few minutes each, is that always
worse than the people staying on the bus losing the minute?

It probably depends on the numbers of people in each group.

But yes, I'm quite prepared to believe that it would be better to
have a "set down only" stop in the middle of a village and then a
"set down and pick up" stop at the station in the outskirts.

But only if a lot of people are going use the former compared to the
number of people who are going to use the bus for the rest of it's
journey - and that means that it's only likely if the "village" is
actually a town, or it's the penultimate stop (or nearly penultimate).

In addition to all that, there may be some H&S issues about where
a driver may allow passengers to disenbark; I can imagine that a
risk assesment may be required for any potential drop off/pick up
site; this means that ad-hoc drop offs will be discouraged; this
will affect "emergency" bus replacement services (e.g. a "one under")
rather than planned ones (e.g. engineering work) more, as there's
less time to perform those assesments.

In the current world we live in, I can't blame bus drivers for
being risk averse.

I realise a replacement bus company isn't paid to think about
passengers, but the railway companies might consider what passengers are
trying to achieve with their travel.

Yes; but as Boltar said: Public transport is about doing the bestest
for the mostest; a door-to-door service is something you get from your
car or a taxi.

OMG, I just agreed with Boltar! I must have had too much ale!


--
Mike Bristow

In article ,
John Williamson wrote:
Clearing snow can leave you responsible for the consequences if you do
it and don't leave a safe surface.

To a first aproximation, this is ********.

To refute that, please provide a reference to someone who has
actually been succesfully sued for it, rather than the scaremongering
of a tabloid.

--
Mike Bristow

Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 19:42, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 15:35, John Williamson wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:22:06 on Fri, 23 Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I believe bus replacement services have designated "bus stops",

No, they just stop on a country road somewhere near the station.

They stop at the point designated by the Train operating Company. This
is the only point approved by the insurance company.

Is the insurance thing really true, or is it like the common idea that
you should never clear snow off a path or give someone first aid? ISTR
that the often quoted idea that if a someone who hasn't bought a
ticket is killed then the transport company and/or its insurers can
have no liability is not actually true.

I've been told by many managers over the years that it is true.

That's not quite the answer to the question

Clearing snow can leave you responsible for the consequences if you do
it and don't leave a safe surface.

Even the Daily Mail has admitted that this is a myth:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...on-winter.html

An article from 2010 spouting about the *proposed* introduction of a
"Snow Code"

Further digging reveals a copy of the Snow Code which says, in part
"There’s no law stopping you from clearing snow and ice on the pavement
outside your home or from public spaces. It’s unlikely you’ll be sued or
held legally responsible for any injuries on the path if you have
cleared it carefully. Follow the snow code when clearing snow and ice
safely."

"Unlikely to be sued" does *not* mean that if someone slips on a bit
you've cleared, you're not going to get sued.

First aid is a legal minefield and a
number of people have been successfully sued, especially if they have
professional training. An example would be a nurse or doctor, or even a
vet doing the best they could at the time, but still leaving the patient
with a problem that could have been cured if they had called an
ambulance instead of going it alone.

How many people have been successfully sued for doing the best they
could at the time, rather than for something like negligence?

In this country, not many. In the USA, it has been reported that doctors
have either refused to help or have not admitted to any knowledge for
fear of being sued.

Is there any exemption if something unusual happens - the bus station
burns down, the bus conks out, a mad axe-murderer gets on-board?

The owner's public liability insurance is liable, it depends on what the
breakdown is and whether the passengers are delivered to their
destination, and the last is a matter for the police.

So if you stay on and die, your family get a refund on your ticket (or
whatever), but if you escape while not at a scheduled stop you are on
your own?

Pretty much, yes. It's your choice. Then again, how often do axe
murderers get onto a bus and start hacking people at random?

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 23/11/2012 21:55, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 19:42, John Williamson wrote:
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/11/2012 15:35, John Williamson wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:22:06 on Fri, 23
Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I believe bus replacement services have designated "bus stops",

No, they just stop on a country road somewhere near the station.

They stop at the point designated by the Train operating Company. This
is the only point approved by the insurance company.

Is the insurance thing really true, or is it like the common idea that
you should never clear snow off a path or give someone first aid? ISTR
that the often quoted idea that if a someone who hasn't bought a
ticket is killed then the transport company and/or its insurers can
have no liability is not actually true.

I've been told by many managers over the years that it is true.

That's not quite the answer to the question

Clearing snow can leave you responsible for the consequences if you do
it and don't leave a safe surface.

Even the Daily Mail has admitted that this is a myth:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...on-winter.html

An article from 2010 spouting about the *proposed* introduction of a
"Snow Code"

Because the authorities realised the urban myth was taking firm root, so
they decided to make clear what the real position is. There was no need
to introduce anything new.

Further digging reveals a copy of the Snow Code which says, in part
"There’s no law stopping you from clearing snow and ice on the pavement
outside your home or from public spaces. It’s unlikely you’ll be sued or
held legally responsible for any injuries on the path if you have
cleared it carefully. Follow the snow code when clearing snow and ice
safely."

"Unlikely to be sued" does *not* mean that if someone slips on a bit
you've cleared, you're not going to get sued.

Just as there is no guarantee that you won't get attacked by a unicorn.

First aid is a legal minefield and a
number of people have been successfully sued, especially if they have
professional training. An example would be a nurse or doctor, or even a
vet doing the best they could at the time, but still leaving the patient
with a problem that could have been cured if they had called an
ambulance instead of going it alone.

How many people have been successfully sued for doing the best they
could at the time, rather than for something like negligence?

In this country, not many.

Quite.

In the USA, it has been reported that doctors
have either refused to help or have not admitted to any knowledge for
fear of being sued.

And in Cambodia they had doctors killed for being doctors - it's of
about equal relevance in this country. I've read that in some countries
people can in theory get in trouble for _not_ helping someone in need of
help (presumably this is subject to various limitations, and a quick
Google suggests that phoning for professional help is probably
sufficient these days).

Is there any exemption if something unusual happens - the bus station
burns down, the bus conks out, a mad axe-murderer gets on-board?

The owner's public liability insurance is liable, it depends on what the
breakdown is and whether the passengers are delivered to their
destination, and the last is a matter for the police.

So if you stay on and die, your family get a refund on your ticket (or
whatever), but if you escape while not at a scheduled stop you are on
your own?

Pretty much, yes. It's your choice. Then again, how often do axe
murderers get onto a bus and start hacking people at random?

I think I'll take my chances with getting off at the wrong stop if one
ever does.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In message , at 17:10:42 on Fri, 23
Nov 2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I've been on replacement buses where the driver has asked if anyone
does actually wants to go to a particular station itself, or can the
bus drop off on the main road/village centre/etc to save a slow trip
along a narrow dead-end lane to the station and back.

Hopefully on a set down only service, or the driver knew by other means
no-one was waiting at the station?

It's one in the middle of the closed section so the only rail related
access is by the replacement bus.

Someone living nearby could have walked to the station in order to catch
the 'train' somewhere.
--
Roland Perry