Of all the horrors of the early years of tendering in London, something
which really bugged me (out of all proportion if I'm honest!) was the taking
away of our red buses. This was particularly true where I lived at the time
as even the route London Buses retained were transformed into the horrendous
Bexlybus operation. It really felt like they were taking some of our London
heritage away, which is all the more sensitive when the Royal Mail tells
everybody you live in Kent.

So, I was delighted when Ken reversed the livery requirement and was
wondering...

1) What percentage of routes are now red liveried?
2) How long until they are all red? If an existing non-red operator, such as
Metrobus on the 161, has modern low-floor buses and retains the route with
existing vehicles, do they have to repaint or is it only on new bus orders?

Thanks

Tony Wilson wrote:
Of all the horrors of the early years of tendering in London,
something which really bugged me (out of all proportion if I'm
honest!) was the taking away of our red buses. This was particularly
true where I lived at the time as even the route London Buses
retained were transformed into the horrendous Bexlybus operation. It
really felt like they were taking some of our London heritage away,
which is all the more sensitive when the Royal Mail tells everybody
you live in Kent.


Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


It is the same all around London.

Bromley, Croydon, Mitcham, Sutton and Kingston coming to immediate mind as
examples in South London.

"Henry" wrote in message
...
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley
has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


It is the same all around London.

Bromley, Croydon, Mitcham, Sutton and Kingston coming to immediate mind as
examples in South London.

What about Dartford, Watford? It is a pity people (ie the media, mostly)
cannot differentiate between administrative and strategic areas without
using every opportunity to brand things as "London" and calling residents
"Londoners". It is somewhat ironic that the London branding lobby that try
so hard to persuade Bexley that it's in south London actually harm the
expansion of the Greater London administrative are by doing so.

A significant area around London can be sensibly co-ordinated from London,
but that does't mean for a moment that it then automatically becomes London
or those areas lose their cherished identity.

Nick
Bexley, Kent

"Nick" wrote in message
...

"Henry" wrote in message
...
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley
has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


It is the same all around London.

Bromley, Croydon, Mitcham, Sutton and Kingston coming to immediate mind
as
examples in South London.

What about Dartford, Watford?

What indeed? I did say these were examples - there's probably a couple of
dozen in all.

cheers

Henry (Man of Kent)

"Henry" wrote in message
...
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley
has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


It is the same all around London.

Bromley, Croydon, Mitcham, Sutton and Kingston coming to immediate mind as
examples in South London.


Quite, and Uxbridge, Rickmansworth, Ruislip, Enfield etc. I suspect that
anything inside the M25 will soon be "London" and anything outside will be
out in the sticks

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Tony Wilson wrote:
Of all the horrors of the early years of tendering in London,
something which really bugged me (out of all proportion if I'm
honest!) was the taking away of our red buses. This was particularly
true where I lived at the time as even the route London Buses
retained were transformed into the horrendous Bexlybus operation. It
really felt like they were taking some of our London heritage away,
which is all the more sensitive when the Royal Mail tells everybody
you live in Kent.


Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


1. If you live in Bexley, how much of your council tax goes to Kent County
Council?

2. The Royal Mail dropped the requirement for county names in addresses many
years ago.
Type your postcode into their address finder.

Peter.

"Peter Goodland" wrote in message
...
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Tony Wilson wrote:
Of all the horrors of the early years of tendering in London,
something which really bugged me (out of all proportion if I'm
honest!) was the taking away of our red buses. This was particularly
true where I lived at the time as even the route London Buses
retained were transformed into the horrendous Bexlybus operation. It
really felt like they were taking some of our London heritage away,
which is all the more sensitive when the Royal Mail tells everybody
you live in Kent.


Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley
has always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that
has caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


1. If you live in Bexley, how much of your council tax goes to Kent County
Council?

As much as those who live in Medway pay. So? Kent the "entity" is more
than just the administrative KCC area.

2. The Royal Mail dropped the requirement for county names in addresses
many years ago.
Type your postcode into their address finder.

And most post still uses the county field.

Nick

Peter Goodland wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote...
Tony Wilson wrote:
Of all the horrors of the early years of tendering in London,
something which really bugged me (out of all proportion if I'm
honest!) was the taking away of our red buses. This was particularly
true where I lived at the time as even the route London Buses
retained were transformed into the horrendous Bexlybus operation. It
really felt like they were taking some of our London heritage away,
which is all the more sensitive when the Royal Mail tells everybody
you live in Kent.


Are you suggesting the Royal Mail is wrong? As far as I'm aware Bexley has
always been in Kent, it's only the grasping of London suburbia that has
caused Bexley to become attached to the metropolis.


1. If you live in Bexley, how much of your council tax goes to Kent County
Council?

None now, but AIUI some did before the GLA was created, as KCC were
responsible for some of the roads.

2. The Royal Mail dropped the requirement for county names in addresses many
years ago.
Type your postcode into their address finder.

A significant proportion of mail is still hand sorted, and that is still
done by county.

"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message
...
1. If you live in Bexley, how much of your council tax goes to Kent
County
Council?

None now, but AIUI some did before the GLA was created, as KCC were
responsible for some of the roads.

2. The Royal Mail dropped the requirement for county names in addresses
many
years ago.
Type your postcode into their address finder.

A significant proportion of mail is still hand sorted, and that is still
done by county.


Are you sure ?

The last time I was in a medium-sized sorting office, all manual sorting was
based on the PostTown and the first half of the Postcode only.

That, plus the fact that counties are now not part of the recommended postal
address, makes me doubt your statement.


--
Richard