Last night, a 28 bus that I had boarded in Kensington Church Street,
with the destination "Wandsworth" got turned short at North End Road/
Lillie Road. I asked the driver for a transfer ticket so that I would
not to pay twice on my Oyster Pay-as-you-go when boarding the next
bus. The driver gave me a print-out from his ticket machine. I was
the only person to ask for this, and then about a dozen other (some of
whom had already got off the bus) went and asked the driver for the
same. The driver refused, stating that he had given me a transfer
ticket "for everyone".

Those passengers then came up to me and asked whether this was so, and
I declined, stating that I was given a ticket for me, and was not
responsible for anyone other than myself. They went back to the driver
who shouted out at me that the ticket he had given me was for
everyone. I disagreed, and replied that this ticket was for me, and
since there was nothing obliging me to stay and have anything to do
with the other passengers, they should each be given a ticket
separately.

The driver persisted, and eventually asked for the ticket back,
stating that he would wait with us, and show the ticket to the next
bus. About 20 minutes later, the next bus arrived, and the original
driver showed the ticket and we were all allowed on without paying/
swiping again.

Now call me pedantic if you want, but why should I, as a passenger, be
taking responsibility for other passengers (some of whom were drunk)
and trying to convince a driver of another bus that people with whom I
have had nothing to do, and a group which by when may have been joined
by all sorts of other hangers-on, trying to hitch a free ride. that
none of us should have to pay?

Are not the rules that the driver/conductor of a bus turning short
either has to enure (as the driver eventually did) that he has
communicated with the following bus so that the transferring
passengers do not have to pay twice, or give EACH passenger that asks
for it a transfer ticket?

Marc.

On 29 Mar, 13:02, " wrote:
Last night, a 28 bus that I had boarded in Kensington Church Street,
with the destination "Wandsworth" got turned short at North End Road/
Lillie Road. I asked the driver for a transfer ticket so that I would
not to pay twice on my Oyster Pay-as-you-go when boarding the next
bus. The driver gave me a print-out from his ticket machine. *I was
the only person to ask for this, and then about a dozen other (some of
whom had already got off the bus) went and asked the driver for the
same. The driver refused, stating that he had given me a transfer
ticket "for everyone".

Those passengers then came up to me and asked whether this was so, and
I declined, stating that I was given a ticket for me, and was not
responsible for anyone other than myself. They went back to the driver
who shouted out at me that the ticket he had given me was for
everyone. I disagreed, and replied that this ticket was for me, and
since there was nothing obliging me to stay and have anything to do
with the other passengers, they should each be given a ticket
separately.

The driver persisted, and eventually asked for the ticket back,
stating that he would wait with us, and show the ticket to the next
bus. About 20 minutes later, the next bus arrived, and the original
driver showed the ticket and we were all allowed on without paying/
swiping again.

Now call me pedantic if you want, but why should I, as a passenger, be
taking responsibility for other passengers (some of whom were drunk)
and trying to convince a driver of another bus that people with whom I
have had nothing to do, and a group which by when may have been joined
by all sorts of other hangers-on, trying to hitch a free ride. that
none of us should have to pay?

Are not the rules that the driver/conductor of *a bus turning short
either has to enure (as the driver eventually did) that he has
communicated with the following bus so that the transferring
passengers do not have to pay twice, or give EACH passenger that asks
for it a transfer ticket?

Marc.

Well, two things come to mind. Three even.
1. It was wrong for the driver to assume that you'd be responsible for
the group.
2. Was it really such a big issue since you'd all be at the same stop
anyway?
3. You might have made some nice new friends. I met my wife this way.

I lied about meeting my wife.

On 29 Mar, 13:07, Railist wrote:

Well, two things come to mind. Three even.
1. It was wrong for the driver to assume that you'd be responsible for
the group.
2. Was it really such a big issue since you'd all be at the same stop
anyway?
3. You might have made some nice new friends. I met my wife this way.

Also:
4. The first driver's decision to wait 20 minutes in order to
"shepherd" the passengers onto the bus behind probably negated any
purpose to the bus being short turned in the first place.

5. Drivers when confronted by a gaggle of passengers claiming to be
refugees from a short-turner will not waste much time quibbling about
the need for one transfer ticket (let alone one per passenger). If the
odd "waif or stray" manages to blag a free journey on the back of the
legit transferees its just like anyone else travelling without a
ticket who would be liable to prosecution if caught by an inspector at
a later point on the journey.

6. The original poster's sole responsibility, if any, was surely just
to hand the transfer slip to the driver of the next bus in the
expectation that others in the same boat would board the same vehicle
from the same stop at (virtually) the same time.

7. Sounds a bit like a drama was constructed out of a bit of a non-
event?

--
gordon

In message
,
" writes

The driver refused, stating that he had given me a transfer
ticket "for everyone".

I can't see how that could possibly work. Even if the ticket showed the
number of passengers (which I doubt), there would be nothing to stop new
arrivals at the bus stop joining the group of people who had been
transferred.
--
Paul Terry

On Mar 29, 2:42�pm, " wrote:
On 29 Mar, 13:07, Railist wrote:

Well, two things come to mind. Three even.
1. It was wrong for the driver to assume that you'd be responsible for
the group.
2. Was it really such a big issue since you'd all be at the same stop
anyway?
3. You might have made some nice new friends. I met my wife this way.

Also:
4. The first driver's decision to wait 20 minutes in order to
"shepherd" the passengers onto the bus behind probably negated any
purpose to the bus being short turned in the first place.

5. Drivers when confronted by a gaggle of passengers claiming to be
refugees from a short-turner will not waste much time quibbling about
the need for one transfer ticket (let alone one per passenger). If the
odd "waif or stray" manages to blag a free journey on the back of the
legit transferees its just like anyone else travelling without a
ticket who would be liable to prosecution if caught by an inspector at
a later point on the journey.

6. The original poster's sole responsibility, if any, was surely just
to hand the transfer slip to the driver of the next bus in the
expectation that others in the same boat would board the same vehicle
from the same stop at (virtually) the same time.

7. Sounds a bit like a drama was constructed out of a bit of a non-
event?

--
gordon

No drama, I can assure you. I lost nothing whatsoever.

It's just that I like things to be done the CORRECT way. And, if the
driver was just too lazy to print out transfer tickets for every one,
as I suspect he was obliged, then him waiting there for 20 minutes, at
possibly his incovenience (since he could not go up to the Lillie
Bridge turning point for coffee or a smoke) is no skin off my nose. He
got no abuse from me, but several of the other passengers gave him an
earful for making us wait on a freezing cold night for another bus at
all! Although I would never abuse a bus driver, that he was made to
feel uncomfortable by the other passengers, sharing our misery in
waiting on a freezing night, is fine with me.

Marc.

On 2009-03-29, Paul Terry wrote:


In message
,
" writes

The driver refused, stating that he had given me a transfer
ticket "for everyone".

I can't see how that could possibly work. Even if the ticket showed the
number of passengers (which I doubt), there would be nothing to stop new
arrivals at the bus stop joining the group of people who had been
transferred.

AFAIK, it's not a ticket, it's some sort of status dump of the ticket
machine. So when an inspector sees that you have not touched in on the
bus you are on, he can check some number against one on the "transfer"
that the driver has given him, and see that you are travelling legally.
So it does cover everyone who gets on the same bus you do.

OTOH I have seen drivers issue more than one of these.

Still, there are an awful lot of grey areas in the whole "stopping
short" scenario.

E.

On 29 Mar, 15:01, " wrote:
It's just that I like things to be done the CORRECT way. And, if the
driver was just too lazy to print out transfer tickets for every one,
as I suspect he was obliged, then him waiting there for 20 minutes, at
possibly his incovenience (since he could not go up to the Lillie
Bridge turning point for coffee or a smoke) is no skin off my nose.

Yes but for every jobsworth, pedant, whatever, that wants things done
in what they perceive as the CORRECT fashion there tends to be another
dozen that just want to be on their way with the minimum of formality
to compound an already delayed journey. A much more common scenario is
for a bus to be turned short because another is "on its tail". Under
these circs is it still your preference that a separate ticket be
generated for maybe 30 transferees (by which time the other bus) will
potentially be heading off into the horizon?


He got no abuse from me, but several of the other passengers gave him an
earful for making us wait on a freezing cold night for another bus at
all! *Although I would never abuse a bus driver, that he was made to
feel uncomfortable by the other passengers, sharing our misery in
waiting on a freezing night, is fine with me.

The decision to turn the bus short would not have been a unilateral
one made by the driver. The reaction he got directly or tacitly is a
good example of the sort of reason why fewer and fewer people are
prepared to do bus driving long-term.

--
gordon

Gordon,

Of course I understand the decision to terminate early was not the
driver's unilateral decision, but the decision not to issue individual
tickets was.

Obviously, there was no bus on his tail - if there were, the scenario
I described would not have arisen. It is precisely because there was
no 28 bus behind that the issue arose. If there was, as has often
happened, we would all just have traipsed onto it, pointing dejectedly
to the bus we had just been ejected from.

Eric,

I appreciate what you say, but supposing I only wanted to travel one
more stop, so got onto a 391 (several of which were following)
together with my "ticket", where would that have left the other dozen
passengers who had to wait, as it turns out, a further 20 minutes for
another 28?

Marc.

wrote:

The decision to turn the bus short would not have been a unilateral
one made by the driver. The reaction he got directly or tacitly is a
good example of the sort of reason why fewer and fewer people are
prepared to do bus driving long-term.

Unfortunately buses are terrible at handling these situations. I remember
one occasion when the bus I was on stopped short at my local stop, but this
wasn't announced to the passengers until what we thought was most of the way
through the stopping time. Another bus was at the stop and we (I was still
clambering out at this stage) were told to board that one instead. However
that bus's driver refused to open the doors again and instead just drove
off. And at not point in this was any announcement made as to *why* the bus
was stopping short. When passengers are suddenly ejected, especially on a
route where getting a seat is rare, and not even treated like adults who can
be given a reasonable explanation, it's understandable tempers are short.

In message
,
" writes

Of course I understand the decision to terminate early was not the
driver's unilateral decision, but the decision not to issue individual
tickets was.

I've now found what I was looking for on the TfL website:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/11105.aspx

"If a bus is curtailed short of its advertised destination and there are
passengers on board who wish to travel further, the driver should issue
a 'transfer ticket' to the driver of the next through bus."

That implies to me that the driver should have issued the ticket to the
next driver, not to a passenger.
--
Paul Terry