09 Feb 2016, 5:18 pm
#132
(09 Feb 2016, 8:38 am)Adrian I'm neutral at whether people decide to report issues or not. I personally see no harm in dropping the operator an email and letting them know about it.
In my opinion, the only people justified to make a complaint to the operator are those genuinely inconvenienced by the PSVAR violation. Other than that its an issue to be left between VOSA/the TC and the operator. Anything else is pointless busy-bodying.
Further to the point made by Greg in Weardale, if so much responsibility has been placed on operators, local authorities should up their responsibility to make bus stop infrastructure more accessible. I would propose this would to be ensure time information is at every stop, and a universal style to be adopted. I second the point about DCC's timetables being God-awful. Nexus style is much more informative. Raised pavements should be also required; there's many around where I live where a simple flag on a lampost suffices, with a 'both sides' label to indicate buses also pick up passengers on the patch of grass opposite. What is the point on forcing PSVAR buses if the stops are inaccessible?
Andreos1 brings an interesting comparison to DDA building regs. Would a better solution have been for the PSVAR regulation to only apply to vehicles built after a certain date? Based on an average service life of 15 years, most non accessible buses are naturally being withdrawn around now. I fear having the system of having withdrawal dates for non-complying vehicles hits smaller operators even harder as undoubtably PSVAR compliant buses have been for sale at inflated prices in the run up to Jan 2016 as dealers would be aware operators are being forced to purchase. Equally, non PSVAR buses on the way out would have had their value plummet in comparasion to what could have been if they were allowed to be withdrawn at a more natural rate.
With regards to the process of lawmaking; particularly the research and industry expert aspect. I wonder just how this panel was made up? The cynic in me wonders if this was more weighted towards 'the big 3' operators and bus manufacturers rather than small operators and community groups. I also wonder if the public was asked 'Should all buses be fully accessible'? (a clear yes vote) OR 'Should all buses be even more accessible to these exact standards even at the risk of some bus services having to be withdrawn as a result?'. requires a bit more thought.
Finally, a little anecdotal experience regarding PSVAR. I was enjoying a ride out on one of Routemaster Buses' Leyland Olympian's last week on their fully commercial c84 service which links many villages with Chester and Crewe; replacing a service Arriva abandoned. A elderly lady hailed the bus in a remote area and she was had a shopping trolly-come-walking aid. What ever was she going to do when she faced those steps at the entrance?! Well, common sense prevailed and the friendly driver hopped the of the cab, swiftly lifted her walker into the luggage rack and helped the lady to her seat. I heard her say to another passenger 'I do prefer these
new buses than the Arriva one'. So goes to show, in some situations common sense and friendliness previals over modern kit. I do worry if the c84 will still be profitable in 2017 when a less reliable, greater fuel consuming PSVAR compliant bus is needed. Our little old lady may have no way at all to get out and about.
