|
|
Post by ServerKing on Aug 4, 2024 14:50:23 GMT
capitalomnibus You seem like the best person to ask, do you think any of the big operators will take up the South Mimms base Sullivan is vacating or do you think it won't be worth the hassle and lacks potential of gaining local routes? No chance. I cannot see any operator taking it up. It is not worth it for a small handful of routes and the lifespan of current tenders and not much work. It would not be feasible. Unless they have some grand plan to spend a few millions there. I used to go to South Mimms a lot for work (parts depot nearby in Welham Green), it's a pig to get to when the A1 / M25 is playing up, surrounded by lots of lorries at the Services nearby, limits you to country lanes and dead running it must have been a nightmare if a 217 packed up further away like Turnpike Lane... then how many staff would deal with such an awkward journey to the garage? Also may be hard to electrify. I think a logistics or freight firm may like the land so Dean will be quids in if he sold up. Lots of buses for Ensignbus commercial ops now, saw a picture of them all parked up in SM, taken yesterday (Londoner FB group). Those MMCs both the single and double decks will sell, the likes of Rotala (Diamond) may want the Streetlites  |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Aug 4, 2024 15:35:04 GMT
Although Sullivan had 2 stints running London Buses, in 2003-09 and 2012-24, they are not unique in this way. Stagecoach are on their 3rd stint running London buses! They gained a toehold when they acquired East Midland in 1989, who owned Frontrunner South East, then operating routes 248 & 252, which they quickly sold to EnsignBus. Then Stagecoach purchased East London & Selkent from LBL in 1994, plus Docklands Transit in 1997, and sold it to Macquarie in 2006 but reacquired that operation in 2010.
|
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Aug 4, 2024 16:02:01 GMT
The latest email from TfL
Following the operator of bus routes 389 and 399 withdrawing from running TfL bus services in London, I am pleased to inform you that we have arranged for another operator to provide these services from Monday 5 August.
We expect to operate the normal timetable for both routes.
Please note that real time information will not be available for these routes until further notice.
A previous email said "we will be unable to operate these services from Saturday 3 August until further notice", so this is the follow-up. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Aug 4, 2024 16:13:45 GMT
I wonder how long it will take to get the ex-Sullivan routes transferred over from on iBus over to the other operators. Without iBus telling you when the live time of the bus is and especially the 298 running a skeleton schedule, must be a bit of a lottery waiting at the stop to see if your bus will ever turn up!
|
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 4, 2024 16:23:29 GMT
The latest email from TfL
Following the operator of bus routes 389 and 399 withdrawing from running TfL bus services in London, I am pleased to inform you that we have arranged for another operator to provide these services from Monday 5 August.
We expect to operate the normal timetable for both routes.
Please note that real time information will not be available for these routes until further notice.
A previous email said "we will be unable to operate these services from Saturday 3 August until further notice", so this is the follow-up. So thankfully only one day's service lost, as these routes do not run on a Sunday. I wonder who has them (Go-Ahead I guess) and whether they will have a regular driver? |
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Aug 4, 2024 16:46:44 GMT
Although Sullivan had 2 stints running London Buses, in 2003-09 and 2012-24, they are not unique in this way. Stagecoach are on their 3rd stint running London buses! They gained a toehold when they acquired East Midland in 1989, who owned Frontrunner South East, then operating routes 248 & 252, which they quickly sold to EnsignBus. Then Stagecoach purchased East London & Selkent from LBL in 1994, plus Docklands Transit in 1997, and sold it to Macquarie in 2006 but reacquired that operation in 2010. What routes did they operate in the first stint? |
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Aug 4, 2024 17:05:14 GMT
Although Sullivan had 2 stints running London Buses, in 2003-09 and 2012-24, they are not unique in this way. Stagecoach are on their 3rd stint running London buses! They gained a toehold when they acquired East Midland in 1989, who owned Frontrunner South East, then operating routes 248 & 252, which they quickly sold to EnsignBus. Then Stagecoach purchased East London & Selkent from LBL in 1994, plus Docklands Transit in 1997, and sold it to Macquarie in 2006 but reacquired that operation in 2010. What routes did they operate in the first stint? There was the 383. Don’t remember if they operated any other routes back then |
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Aug 4, 2024 18:13:04 GMT
What routes did they operate in the first stint? There was the 383. Don’t remember if they operated any other routes back then I was just the 383, then a short break from TfL work until they won the 298. From what I remember, their 383 was one of the best performing routes in London at the time |
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Aug 4, 2024 19:47:29 GMT
ℹ️ Following an operator ceasing bus services in London, we have arranged for other operators to provide services on the affected routes.
Full service is now planned from Monday 5 August on 327, 389, 399, 549 and W9. Reduced service on routes 217, 298 and 299.
Please note that real time information will not be available for these routes until further notice.
|
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Aug 4, 2024 20:04:32 GMT
ℹ️ Following an operator ceasing bus services in London, we have arranged for other operators to provide services on the affected routes.
Full service is now planned from Monday 5 August on 327, 389, 399, 549 and W9. Reduced service on routes 217, 298 and 299.
Please note that real time information will not be available for these routes until further notice.
Have to give credit when it is due to Stagecoach for being able to provide a full service on route W9 from Monday. Also, well done to all the operators involved for being able to provide some sort of service from Saturday. Hopefully, the situation eases from Monday onwards. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Aug 4, 2024 20:24:59 GMT
What routes did they operate in the first stint? There was the 383. Don’t remember if they operated any other routes back then Although I don't follow schoolday routes as such, I know they ran route 606. On its last day, Sullivan rewrote the history books by putting out a Titan on it.  |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 4, 2024 20:57:40 GMT
There was the 383. Don’t remember if they operated any other routes back then I was just the 383, then a short break from TfL work until they won the 298. From what I remember, their 383 was one of the best performing routes in London at the time It was - it was top three performing routes in London off the top of my head and why I had sympathy with them when they lost it. They also had the 606 as MetrolineGA1511 mentioned - remember seeing a pic of either the Lolyne or Vyking blinded for it. Here's the 2004 timetable - londonbusesbyadam.zenfolio.com/route-606-oct-2004.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Aug 4, 2024 20:59:10 GMT
Now I think that the dust has settled following the excitement yesterday and on Friday evening, TfL is likely to move towards the next stage of dealing with what's happened. There's some good posts earlier on this thread, but the bottom line is at least the W9, 217 and 327 are likely to need to go out to tender again. While I think Arriva and Metroline are probably going to go for the routes I'm doubtful Stagecoach have any plan to run the W9 out of HK for a long term period so ITTs will need to be issued and tenders awarded. Obviously you have the short contract option, but you could potentially just spec the routes as 7 year contracts too with brand new electrics. I'm expecting to see a tendering programme update at least this coming week or the next where the remaining Sullivan routes are all added. You also have the next question as to who will be paying for all of this fallout. If you don't tap into a bus and don't fork over £1.80 and then an inspector catches you you're slapped with a fine, and TfL will make sure you pay that fine and will take you to court and through the legal system just because you initially didn't pay £1.80. So as a result I can't see this all just being TfL accepting that they lost an operator, lost fare revenue on a load of routes and also had to pay for emergency contracts out of their own pocket. I'd be very surprised if they don't go full steam ahead dragging Sullivan through the legal system and quite possible trying to sue for all the money they've spent on this with the intention on at least getting some of it back. I know Dean Sullivan mentioned some withheld payments but I think the bottom line also is that TfL are not a broke company at the moment and could very well pay the money if they wanted to, they're not going to decide to just withhold payments for no reason, especially if other operators are being paid. I'm not sure why they've decided so but there's every chance that the cumulative amount of fines could be close to reaching the value of payments. TfL also did mention that they're happy to pay in instalments, again when they're paying millions to other operators it's not breaking their bank to just pay Sullivan a couple thousand so the instalment suggestion probably had some sort of justification behind it, potentially even based on performance improvements. I think this is only the start of what could be a very long journey for both TfL and Sullivan over the next couple of months. But I'm sure law firms will be rubbing their hands with glee with the prospect of being approached for such a case. I was under the impression that the conclusion was that both Sullivan and TfL mutually agreed that the remaining TfL contracts would terminate at the end of the day. If so there is no legal case. I would not have thought Sullivan's would terminate unilaterally without TfL agreement and leave themselves open to legal action. Equally I don't expect there would be much mileage for TfL to launch legal action against Sullivan's even if they could. Time for both TfL and Sullivan's to move on. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 4, 2024 21:11:54 GMT
Now I think that the dust has settled following the excitement yesterday and on Friday evening, TfL is likely to move towards the next stage of dealing with what's happened. There's some good posts earlier on this thread, but the bottom line is at least the W9, 217 and 327 are likely to need to go out to tender again. While I think Arriva and Metroline are probably going to go for the routes I'm doubtful Stagecoach have any plan to run the W9 out of HK for a long term period so ITTs will need to be issued and tenders awarded. Obviously you have the short contract option, but you could potentially just spec the routes as 7 year contracts too with brand new electrics. I'm expecting to see a tendering programme update at least this coming week or the next where the remaining Sullivan routes are all added. You also have the next question as to who will be paying for all of this fallout. If you don't tap into a bus and don't fork over £1.80 and then an inspector catches you you're slapped with a fine, and TfL will make sure you pay that fine and will take you to court and through the legal system just because you initially didn't pay £1.80. So as a result I can't see this all just being TfL accepting that they lost an operator, lost fare revenue on a load of routes and also had to pay for emergency contracts out of their own pocket. I'd be very surprised if they don't go full steam ahead dragging Sullivan through the legal system and quite possible trying to sue for all the money they've spent on this with the intention on at least getting some of it back. I know Dean Sullivan mentioned some withheld payments but I think the bottom line also is that TfL are not a broke company at the moment and could very well pay the money if they wanted to, they're not going to decide to just withhold payments for no reason, especially if other operators are being paid. I'm not sure why they've decided so but there's every chance that the cumulative amount of fines could be close to reaching the value of payments. TfL also did mention that they're happy to pay in instalments, again when they're paying millions to other operators it's not breaking their bank to just pay Sullivan a couple thousand so the instalment suggestion probably had some sort of justification behind it, potentially even based on performance improvements. I think this is only the start of what could be a very long journey for both TfL and Sullivan over the next couple of months. But I'm sure law firms will be rubbing their hands with glee with the prospect of being approached for such a case. I was under the impression that the conclusion was that both Sullivan and TfL mutually agreed that the remaining TfL contracts would terminate at the end of the day. If so there is no legal case. I would not have thought Sullivan's would terminate unilaterally without TfL agreement and leave themselves open to legal action. Equally I don't expect there would be much mileage for TfL to launch legal action against Sullivan's even if they could. Time for both TfL and Sullivan's to move on. I don't believe that was the case, I believe it was that TfL would like a future date to be given to them when they could expect services to be terminated. Notably Sullivans has been sent into receivership now which is often a form of legal protection when you owe someone a lot of money, the fact they're now heading into this direction certainly suggests they're protecting themselves from any legal action. All remaining routes have been transferred onto the engineering license too which is effectively a different company meaning that they won't be affected by any legal fallout. |
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Aug 4, 2024 22:54:50 GMT
Now I think that the dust has settled following the excitement yesterday and on Friday evening, TfL is likely to move towards the next stage of dealing with what's happened. There's some good posts earlier on this thread, but the bottom line is at least the W9, 217 and 327 are likely to need to go out to tender again. While I think Arriva and Metroline are probably going to go for the routes I'm doubtful Stagecoach have any plan to run the W9 out of HK for a long term period so ITTs will need to be issued and tenders awarded. Obviously you have the short contract option, but you could potentially just spec the routes as 7 year contracts too with brand new electrics. I'm expecting to see a tendering programme update at least this coming week or the next where the remaining Sullivan routes are all added. You also have the next question as to who will be paying for all of this fallout. If you don't tap into a bus and don't fork over £1.80 and then an inspector catches you you're slapped with a fine, and TfL will make sure you pay that fine and will take you to court and through the legal system just because you initially didn't pay £1.80. So as a result I can't see this all just being TfL accepting that they lost an operator, lost fare revenue on a load of routes and also had to pay for emergency contracts out of their own pocket. I'd be very surprised if they don't go full steam ahead dragging Sullivan through the legal system and quite possible trying to sue for all the money they've spent on this with the intention on at least getting some of it back. I know Dean Sullivan mentioned some withheld payments but I think the bottom line also is that TfL are not a broke company at the moment and could very well pay the money if they wanted to, they're not going to decide to just withhold payments for no reason, especially if other operators are being paid. I'm not sure why they've decided so but there's every chance that the cumulative amount of fines could be close to reaching the value of payments. TfL also did mention that they're happy to pay in instalments, again when they're paying millions to other operators it's not breaking their bank to just pay Sullivan a couple thousand so the instalment suggestion probably had some sort of justification behind it, potentially even based on performance improvements. I think this is only the start of what could be a very long journey for both TfL and Sullivan over the next couple of months. But I'm sure law firms will be rubbing their hands with glee with the prospect of being approached for such a case. I was under the impression that the conclusion was that both Sullivan and TfL mutually agreed that the remaining TfL contracts would terminate at the end of the day. If so there is no legal case. I would not have thought Sullivan's would terminate unilaterally without TfL agreement and leave themselves open to legal action. Equally I don't expect there would be much mileage for TfL to launch legal action against Sullivan's even if they could. Time for both TfL and Sullivan's to move on. From what Dean said it seemed like TfL had requested they inform TfL of a handing back date for the services but that went nowhere (4th paragraph, mentioning the June meeting). At the Friday meeting Sullivan Buses seems to have offered an alternative solution ("during our discussion today we have offered TfL a solution that would alleviate travel disruption for many thousands of bus users") -- so perhaps still resisting the idea of handing over routes? we know they've had meany meetings from FOIs where TfL and Sullivans have been discussing the various issues and there were indeed some (modest) improvements between the two documents in that FOI, so perhaps once again promising TfL a plan to redress the level of service? -- but no agreement hence why they pulled out immediately. |
|
