|
Post by borneobus on Aug 20, 2024 9:57:37 GMT
An update on the temporary service arrangements on Sullivan bus routes as of 16/08/24: Route 217 is currently amended to run every 18 minutes during the daytime on Monday to Saturdays. The 12 minute Monday to Friday and 15 minute Saturday daytime service will be restored from Saturday 24 August. The service remains at every 20 minutes during the evenings and all day on Sundays. Route 217 is being run by Arriva London. From Saturday 17 August route 298 will be amended to run a special timetable with buses running every 30 minutes at all times on all days of the week. Route 298 is being run by Uno Bus using double deck buses. Route 299 is currently amended to run every 20 minutes during the daytime on Monday to Saturdays. The 15 minute Monday to Saturday daytime frequency will be restored from Saturday 31 August. The service remains at every 20 minutes during the evenings on Monday to Saturdays and every 30 minutes throughout the day on Sundays. Route 299 is being run by Go Ahead London. Route W9 is running an amended timetable with buses every 20 minutes on all days of the week. Route W9 is being run by Stagecoach. Might be alone with this but personally I think the response to the Sullivan closure by TfL and the operators has been excellent. It’ll be interesting to see if the 217 and W9 stay with their respective operators in the longer term. In full agreement with your sentiments in the first sentence; I posted the following on 5th August: "All things considered, that's a swift and effective recovery by the operators that have stepped in." in that post I should have also referenced TfL as indeed you did.
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Aug 20, 2024 11:17:09 GMT
An update on the temporary service arrangements on Sullivan bus routes as of 16/08/24: Route 217 is currently amended to run every 18 minutes during the daytime on Monday to Saturdays. The 12 minute Monday to Friday and 15 minute Saturday daytime service will be restored from Saturday 24 August. The service remains at every 20 minutes during the evenings and all day on Sundays. Route 217 is being run by Arriva London. From Saturday 17 August route 298 will be amended to run a special timetable with buses running every 30 minutes at all times on all days of the week. Route 298 is being run by Uno Bus using double deck buses. Route 299 is currently amended to run every 20 minutes during the daytime on Monday to Saturdays. The 15 minute Monday to Saturday daytime frequency will be restored from Saturday 31 August. The service remains at every 20 minutes during the evenings on Monday to Saturdays and every 30 minutes throughout the day on Sundays. Route 299 is being run by Go Ahead London. Route W9 is running an amended timetable with buses every 20 minutes on all days of the week. Route W9 is being run by Stagecoach. Might be alone with this but personally I think the response to the Sullivan closure by TfL and the operators has been excellent. It’ll be interesting to see if the 217 and W9 stay with their respective operators in the longer term. I'd say 217 probably, W9 pretty unlikely. I see W9 going to GAL or Metroline, leaning towards GAL.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Aug 20, 2024 11:47:28 GMT
An update on the temporary service arrangements on Sullivan bus routes as of 16/08/24: Route 217 is currently amended to run every 18 minutes during the daytime on Monday to Saturdays. The 12 minute Monday to Friday and 15 minute Saturday daytime service will be restored from Saturday 24 August. The service remains at every 20 minutes during the evenings and all day on Sundays. Route 217 is being run by Arriva London. From Saturday 17 August route 298 will be amended to run a special timetable with buses running every 30 minutes at all times on all days of the week. Route 298 is being run by Uno Bus using double deck buses. Route 299 is currently amended to run every 20 minutes during the daytime on Monday to Saturdays. The 15 minute Monday to Saturday daytime frequency will be restored from Saturday 31 August. The service remains at every 20 minutes during the evenings on Monday to Saturdays and every 30 minutes throughout the day on Sundays. Route 299 is being run by Go Ahead London. Route W9 is running an amended timetable with buses every 20 minutes on all days of the week. Route W9 is being run by Stagecoach. Might be alone with this but personally I think the response to the Sullivan closure by TfL and the operators has been excellent. It’ll be interesting to see if the 217 and W9 stay with their respective operators in the longer term. It kinda makes you think; TfL has been dynamic to the collapse of Sullivan's but weren't as pragmatic when they owed Sullivan's money. This is a real chicken and egg situation. Was the company hemorrhaging money before their drastic lapse in performance post Covid or TfL genuinely withheld money for Sullivan's after standards dropped? Some won't agree, but I'm more inclined to think Dean Sullivan gave a d*mn about running buses properly, whereas TfL's treatment of buses for the past 8 years has been questionable since the Peter Hendy days.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Aug 20, 2024 17:17:16 GMT
Might be alone with this but personally I think the response to the Sullivan closure by TfL and the operators has been excellent. It’ll be interesting to see if the 217 and W9 stay with their respective operators in the longer term. In full agreement with your sentiments in the first sentence; I posted the following on 5th August: "All things considered, that's a swift and effective recovery by the operators that have stepped in." in that post I should have also referenced TfL as indeed you did. They have done well but I suspect some contingency plans were in place?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 20, 2024 21:28:09 GMT
Might be alone with this but personally I think the response to the Sullivan closure by TfL and the operators has been excellent. It’ll be interesting to see if the 217 and W9 stay with their respective operators in the longer term. It kinda makes you think; TfL has been dynamic to the collapse of Sullivan's but weren't as pragmatic when they owed Sullivan's money. This is a real chicken and egg situation. Was the company hemorrhaging money before their drastic lapse in performance post Covid or TfL genuinely withheld money for Sullivan's after standards dropped? Some won't agree, but I'm more inclined to think Dean Sullivan gave a d*mn about running buses properly, whereas TfL's treatment of buses for the past 8 years has been questionable since the Peter Hendy days. However it's very clearly stipulated in contracts where if standards start slipping that they would fine operators. TfL wouldn't hold back money otherwise just because they felt like it, they have access to lawyers and legal teams and would have checked before withholding payments. The fact they would only offer to pay Sullivans in instalments suggests there was a conditional agreement to the repayment of funds.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Aug 20, 2024 23:53:33 GMT
It kinda makes you think; TfL has been dynamic to the collapse of Sullivan's but weren't as pragmatic when they owed Sullivan's money. This is a real chicken and egg situation. Was the company hemorrhaging money before their drastic lapse in performance post Covid or TfL genuinely withheld money for Sullivan's after standards dropped? Some won't agree, but I'm more inclined to think Dean Sullivan gave a d*mn about running buses properly, whereas TfL's treatment of buses for the past 8 years has been questionable since the Peter Hendy days. However it's very clearly stipulated in contracts where if standards start slipping that they would fine operators. TfL wouldn't hold back money otherwise just because they felt like it, they have access to lawyers and legal teams and would have checked before withholding payments. The fact they would only offer to pay Sullivans in instalments suggests there was a conditional agreement to the repayment of funds. Did standards start slipping first or was payment withheld first? That's what I'm seeking out for a better understanding. Granted Dean made no reference to slipping standards in his notice on August 2nd, but he has said in the past where TfL has refused to work with the company on certain issues. Route 549 withdrawal being one of them. It's rather unheard of to propose making changes to the route and the operator finds out the same time everyone else does when the consultation drops. No similar reports from Stagecoach faring the same fate. Oh well, what's done is done. I just wonder if a small business like David Sullivan's even had a lawyer in their firm like the dozens Goliath TfL likely have. 🤔
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Aug 21, 2024 5:30:58 GMT
However it's very clearly stipulated in contracts where if standards start slipping that they would fine operators. TfL wouldn't hold back money otherwise just because they felt like it, they have access to lawyers and legal teams and would have checked before withholding payments. The fact they would only offer to pay Sullivans in instalments suggests there was a conditional agreement to the repayment of funds. Did standards start slipping first or was payment withheld first? That's what I'm seeking out for a better understanding. Granted Dean made no reference to slipping standards in his notice on August 2nd, but he has said in the past where TfL has refused to work with the company on certain issues. Route 549 withdrawal being one of them. It's rather unheard of to propose making changes to the route and the operator finds out the same time everyone else does when the consultation drops. No similar reports from Stagecoach faring the same fate. Oh well, what's done is done. I just wonder if a small business like David Sullivan's even had a lawyer in their firm like the dozens Goliath TfL likely have. 🤔 I think standards started to drop, some say around 2018... everyone suffered during Covid, not sure the arrangements made with operators to get by with zero revenue to people using back doors when it kicked off. Perhaps returning to the London market with so many routes, new vehicles to pay for, staff to recruit and retain meant Sullivans bit off more than they could chew. I noticed none of their buses had Global ad boards which would have brought in money, only an ad for recruiting drivers. As a user of the 217, the service got worse than usual in the run up to August, so there was something going on. Drivers were either deliberately sitting at quiet stops like Enfield Cemetery for ages, at least 5 minutes in one instance with no attempt to tell pax why. Then when driving, were doing 15 to 20 in a 40 to the next stop. Protest against the company? Drivers trying to bring it down from the inside? Protest against TfL so some sort of sabotage? Who knows?! All the MMCs seemed to be replaced with much older buses, but it did become hit and miss for passengers.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2024 7:06:58 GMT
However it's very clearly stipulated in contracts where if standards start slipping that they would fine operators. TfL wouldn't hold back money otherwise just because they felt like it, they have access to lawyers and legal teams and would have checked before withholding payments. The fact they would only offer to pay Sullivans in instalments suggests there was a conditional agreement to the repayment of funds. Did standards start slipping first or was payment withheld first? That's what I'm seeking out for a better understanding. Granted Dean made no reference to slipping standards in his notice on August 2nd, but he has said in the past where TfL has refused to work with the company on certain issues. Route 549 withdrawal being one of them. It's rather unheard of to propose making changes to the route and the operator finds out the same time everyone else does when the consultation drops. No similar reports from Stagecoach faring the same fate. Oh well, what's done is done. I just wonder if a small business like David Sullivan's even had a lawyer in their firm like the dozens Goliath TfL likely have. 🤔 Not having a lawyer, or at least some form of legal advice as a company is just very silly business planning. Even the smallest companies should have a lawyer, or at least a company on their books providing such services. Also don't get the David ans Goliath reference? The biblical passage is a reference to years of Israelite torment despite innocence while I'm very doubtful in this situation that TfL woke up one day and decided to stop paying Sullivans just because they felt like it. There's been some posts on another group explaining that there is an extreme possibility that any lost mileage and accumulated fines can outstrip payments completely which can lead to TfL withholding payments as a result. Sullivans have been in the game long enough, they're not oblivious and should not receive constant handholding from TfL as that's a waste of their time and money. Even we as consumers to services in Asda or something know what the avenues are if we don't get what we pay for, Sullivans would have known what to do if they didn't get paid which is to go down the legal route, the fact they avoided it suggests something else was at play.
|
|
sw2
Cleaner
Posts: 47
|
Post by sw2 on Aug 21, 2024 11:28:28 GMT
Some ex Sullivan drivers now working the 299 again.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Aug 21, 2024 11:30:51 GMT
The TfL website is now reporting that the full service on the 217 will be restored from Saturday 24th August (12 min M-F daytime frequency, 15 min Sat daytimes).
Also on the 299 that a 15 min M-S daytime frequency will be restored from Saturday 31st August.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 21, 2024 11:46:07 GMT
Did standards start slipping first or was payment withheld first? That's what I'm seeking out for a better understanding. Granted Dean made no reference to slipping standards in his notice on August 2nd, but he has said in the past where TfL has refused to work with the company on certain issues. Route 549 withdrawal being one of them. It's rather unheard of to propose making changes to the route and the operator finds out the same time everyone else does when the consultation drops. No similar reports from Stagecoach faring the same fate. Oh well, what's done is done. I just wonder if a small business like David Sullivan's even had a lawyer in their firm like the dozens Goliath TfL likely have. 🤔 I think standards started to drop, some say around 2018... everyone suffered during Covid, not sure the arrangements made with operators to get by with zero revenue to people using back doors when it kicked off. Perhaps returning to the London market with so many routes, new vehicles to pay for, staff to recruit and retain meant Sullivans bit off more than they could chew. I noticed none of their buses had Global ad boards which would have brought in money, only an ad for recruiting drivers. As a user of the 217, the service got worse than usual in the run up to August, so there was something going on. Drivers were either deliberately sitting at quiet stops like Enfield Cemetery for ages, at least 5 minutes in one instance with no attempt to tell pax why. Then when driving, were doing 15 to 20 in a 40 to the next stop. Protest against the company? Drivers trying to bring it down from the inside? Protest against TfL so some sort of sabotage? Who knows? All the MMCs seemed to be replaced with much older buses, but it did become hit and miss for passengers. What you describe drivers doing on the 217 is just running to a padded schedule rather than any other reason. I’ve had it on many routes under practically every operator in London (I remember a 498 I was piddling along at 20mph along the 50mph section of the A12, stopping and waiting excessively at stops
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Aug 21, 2024 13:21:13 GMT
Did standards start slipping first or was payment withheld first? That's what I'm seeking out for a better understanding. Granted Dean made no reference to slipping standards in his notice on August 2nd, but he has said in the past where TfL has refused to work with the company on certain issues. Route 549 withdrawal being one of them. It's rather unheard of to propose making changes to the route and the operator finds out the same time everyone else does when the consultation drops. No similar reports from Stagecoach faring the same fate. Oh well, what's done is done. I just wonder if a small business like David Sullivan's even had a lawyer in their firm like the dozens Goliath TfL likely have. 🤔 I think standards started to drop, some say around 2018... everyone suffered during Covid, not sure the arrangements made with operators to get by with zero revenue to people using back doors when it kicked off. Perhaps returning to the London market with so many routes, new vehicles to pay for, staff to recruit and retain meant Sullivans bit off more than they could chew. I noticed none of their buses had Global ad boards which would have brought in money, only an ad for recruiting drivers. As a user of the 217, the service got worse than usual in the run up to August, so there was something going on. Drivers were either deliberately sitting at quiet stops like Enfield Cemetery for ages, at least 5 minutes in one instance with no attempt to tell pax why. Then when driving, were doing 15 to 20 in a 40 to the next stop. Protest against the company? Drivers trying to bring it down from the inside? Protest against TfL so some sort of sabotage? Who knows?! All the MMCs seemed to be replaced with much older buses, but it did become hit and miss for passengers. There was a lot of internal sabotage as you put it, by some agency drivers doing dirty tactics like parking the bus up and missing complete rounders, faking mechanical breakdowns etc. One thing I felt Sullivans should have done was put the logo on their buses. I know Dean said his reason for not doing it, was to direct everything towards TfL, but the name also acts as an advertisement for the company.
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Aug 21, 2024 18:39:50 GMT
I think standards started to drop, some say around 2018... everyone suffered during Covid, not sure the arrangements made with operators to get by with zero revenue to people using back doors when it kicked off. Perhaps returning to the London market with so many routes, new vehicles to pay for, staff to recruit and retain meant Sullivans bit off more than they could chew. I noticed none of their buses had Global ad boards which would have brought in money, only an ad for recruiting drivers. As a user of the 217, the service got worse than usual in the run up to August, so there was something going on. Drivers were either deliberately sitting at quiet stops like Enfield Cemetery for ages, at least 5 minutes in one instance with no attempt to tell pax why. Then when driving, were doing 15 to 20 in a 40 to the next stop. Protest against the company? Drivers trying to bring it down from the inside? Protest against TfL so some sort of sabotage? Who knows?! All the MMCs seemed to be replaced with much older buses, but it did become hit and miss for passengers. There was a lot of internal sabotage as you put it, by some agency drivers doing dirty tactics like parking the bus up and missing complete rounders, faking mechanical breakdowns etc. One thing I felt Sullivans should have done was put the logo on their buses. I know Dean said his reason for not doing it, was to direct everything towards TfL, but the name also acts as an advertisement for the company. They looked unfinished with just a roundel and a fleet number. They had quite a smart logo from what I remember (perhaps I'd seen it on the 51 plate B7TL / ELV's)
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Aug 21, 2024 19:07:27 GMT
There was a lot of internal sabotage as you put it, by some agency drivers doing dirty tactics like parking the bus up and missing complete rounders, faking mechanical breakdowns etc. One thing I felt Sullivans should have done was put the logo on their buses. I know Dean said his reason for not doing it, was to direct everything towards TfL, but the name also acts as an advertisement for the company. They looked unfinished with just a roundel and a fleet number. They had quite a smart logo from what I remember (perhaps I'd seen it on the 51 plate B7TL / ELV's) I believe their logo wasn’t approved by TfL which is why they kept their buses logoless instead of creating a new logo
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Aug 21, 2024 20:00:26 GMT
They looked unfinished with just a roundel and a fleet number. They had quite a smart logo from what I remember (perhaps I'd seen it on the 51 plate B7TL / ELV's) I believe their logo wasn’t approved by TfL which is why they kept their buses logoless instead of creating a new logo I heard that as well. The company could have created a new, compliant logo, but decided not to.
|
|