|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Dec 8, 2015 12:37:39 GMT
Just sent this email off to them
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Dec 9, 2015 14:32:51 GMT
I'm shaking my head when I read this
Maybe I should send them a picture
|
|
|
Route 192
Dec 9, 2015 14:49:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by abc on Dec 9, 2015 14:49:08 GMT
As long as the stop name is visible in the picture.
|
|
|
Route 192
Dec 9, 2015 17:31:35 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Dec 9, 2015 17:31:35 GMT
As long as the stop name is visible in the picture. I think they also need a pic of a 15 reg Streetlite to remind them what actually runs on the 192.....
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Dec 9, 2015 17:45:13 GMT
As long as the stop name is visible in the picture. I think they also need a pic of a 15 reg Streetlite to remind them what actually runs on the 192..... I googled it and found pics of the 192 as Streetlites, albeit the first version (64reg) but the bus is the same pretty much. I also advised them of their fleetnames. I sent pictures of me on board and of pictures of said bus. They are being retards now. Time for me to get on to Travelwatch
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon on Dec 9, 2015 18:33:32 GMT
I'm shaking my head when I read this Maybe I should send them a picture Take it to TravelWatch. Please.
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Dec 9, 2015 22:16:37 GMT
I might have to take this to Travelwatch as I'm not getting any further with tfl. Although it does say that the operator of the incident, in this case tfl, have no timescale in which to answer Travelwatch's challenge!
I don't think I've asked anything difficult, but feel fobbed off with standard replies and bullshit inaccurate information.
|
|
|
Route 192
Dec 11, 2015 11:30:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Dec 11, 2015 11:30:04 GMT
So I've decided to submit a FOI regarding route 192.
Questions I've asked are
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 11, 2015 13:34:18 GMT
So I've decided to submit a FOI regarding route 192. Questions I've asked are From TfL's own stats Annual Ridership on route 1922010/11 - 2,761,373 -0.2% 2011/12 - 2,823,161 +5.7% 2012/13 - 2,926,313 +3.7% 2013/14 - 3,068,916 +4.9% 2014/15 - 2,951,095 -3.8% Obviously these numbers are not 100% accurate. The declines are in line with general trends in those years - especially last year. Kilometres Operated 2010/11 - 980,993 2011/12 - 998,405 2012/13 - 981,664 2013/14 - 982,765 2014/15 - 968,222 You will note the progression fall in kms operated to a new low last year. I dare say the works at T Hale had an effect on that but it's not good. I wonder if the FOI response will have different numbers in it?
|
|
|
Post by ibus246 on Dec 11, 2015 14:36:19 GMT
So I've decided to submit a FOI regarding route 192. Questions I've asked are Sounds Ok, however I find with TfL and any other large organisation you need to really get straight to the point and only have them reply once with all the info instead of them replying asking for clarification thus open ended questions do the trick. An example the question about the surveys seems very vague. Are you simply asking have they completed any surveys (yes/no answer), the results of the surveys, what measures have been implemented as a result... As you can see one can come up with many different "questions" from your original question. Forgot to add the "number of complaints" you may be asked to clarify with a timescale I.e number received in 2015 or in the last 10 years. Don't forget that "human nature" makes us complain about everything!!! Things that you and I would think Petty but others not so. Perhaps ask for complaints specific to overcrowding/unreliability
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 11, 2015 16:34:46 GMT
So I've decided to submit a FOI regarding route 192. Questions I've asked are Sounds Ok, however I find with TfL and any other large organisation you need to really get straight to the point and only have them reply once with all the info instead of them replying asking for clarification thus open ended questions do the trick. An example the question about the surveys seems very vague. Are you simply asking have they completed any surveys (yes/no answer), the results of the surveys, what measures have been implemented as a result... As you can see one can come up with many different "questions" from your original question. Forgot to add the "number of complaints" you may be asked to clarify with a timescale I.e number received in 2015 or in the last 10 years. Don't forget that "human nature" makes us complain about everything!!! Things that you and I would think Petty but others not so. Perhaps ask for complaints specific to overcrowding/unreliability I agree. What will happen is that TfL will argue they can't respond within the cost limit of £450 per request because some of the questions are open ended. Your comment re surveys is pertinent. What surveys? Over what time period? Do you want copies of every survey, all the data and the results or just the results? Do you want detailed results or a summary? Worth considering how to narrow down and focus the requirement so TfL can't wriggle out of answering the request.
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Jan 14, 2016 20:28:55 GMT
FOI is back, here is what it said. I cannot include the attachments as its pdf based Thank you for your email received by us on 11 December 2015 asking for information about bus route 192 Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy. Please see the answers below: Current vehicles used and their legal capacities, i.e. Seating and standing capacities. Vehicle: 2014 Wrightbus Streetlite 8.8m Euro 6 Capacity: Seated 28, max standee 28. (note the manufacturer has 31 standing passengers, but this is to the Transport for London (TfL) specs we have on file). Annual passenger total for each year for the last 5 years. This information is published on our website: tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/buses#on-this-page-0 PVR for each year for the last 5 years. PVR starts at 12 with a new contract in November 2007. March 2010: reliability scheme - PVR increases to 13 May 2011: reliability scheme - PVR increases to 14 November 2014: new contract awarded with unchanged PVR of 14 December 2015: PVR = 14. Any surveys or customer feedback completed on the route in the last 5 years. We carry out 2 primary categories of surveys; Capacity & Quality. Please note that we do not hold the Equality surveys at route level. However, we hold the capacity surveys. Please see attached all the capacity survey data that we have conducted on the 192 over the last 5 years. The Excel file contains survey data for one day across the entire route and the PDF files are surveys taken at the busiest points on the route. Below is a table detailing annual usage on the 192 over the last 5 years. Unfortunately we do not have any data pertaining to the number of times that demand has exceeded capacity at Tottenham Hale cid:image001.png@01D14ECF.7D698840 Number of complaints regarding this route In the last five years we received 553 complains. Amount of times in the last 12 months Jan-Dec 2015 number of passengers boarding at Tottenham Hale towards Enfield have exceeded stated capacity We do not hold this information. The system we have records loadings but isn’t configured to cross reference it with the legal capacity limit, therefore we are unable to interrogating the system for specific times when the loading limit may have been exceed. However please note that drivers are instructed not to allow overloading to happen as it voids the warranty of the vehicle, which is why drivers sometimes won’t open the door on the bus. If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable to access it for any reason, please do not hesitate to contact me. Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed.
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jan 14, 2016 20:58:24 GMT
FOI is back, here is what it said. I cannot include the attachments as its pdf based Thank you for your email received by us on 11 December 2015 asking for information about bus route 192 Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy. Please see the answers below: Current vehicles used and their legal capacities, i.e. Seating and standing capacities. Vehicle: 2014 Wrightbus Streetlite 8.8m Euro 6 Capacity: Seated 28, max standee 28. (note the manufacturer has 31 standing passengers, but this is to the Transport for London (TfL) specs we have on file). Annual passenger total for each year for the last 5 years. This information is published on our website: tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/buses#on-this-page-0 PVR for each year for the last 5 years. PVR starts at 12 with a new contract in November 2007. March 2010: reliability scheme - PVR increases to 13 May 2011: reliability scheme - PVR increases to 14 November 2014: new contract awarded with unchanged PVR of 14 December 2015: PVR = 14. Any surveys or customer feedback completed on the route in the last 5 years. We carry out 2 primary categories of surveys; Capacity & Quality. Please note that we do not hold the Equality surveys at route level. However, we hold the capacity surveys. Please see attached all the capacity survey data that we have conducted on the 192 over the last 5 years. The Excel file contains survey data for one day across the entire route and the PDF files are surveys taken at the busiest points on the route. Below is a table detailing annual usage on the 192 over the last 5 years. Unfortunately we do not have any data pertaining to the number of times that demand has exceeded capacity at Tottenham Hale cid:image001.png@01D14ECF.7D698840 Number of complaints regarding this route In the last five years we received 553 complains. Amount of times in the last 12 months Jan-Dec 2015 number of passengers boarding at Tottenham Hale towards Enfield have exceeded stated capacity We do not hold this information. The system we have records loadings but isn’t configured to cross reference it with the legal capacity limit, therefore we are unable to interrogating the system for specific times when the loading limit may have been exceed. However please note that drivers are instructed not to allow overloading to happen as it voids the warranty of the vehicle, which is why drivers sometimes won’t open the door on the bus. If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable to access it for any reason, please do not hesitate to contact me. Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed. I rode the 192 on Boxing Day (Saturday), while most of the streets were deserted, the 192 was still packed to the rafters from Tottenham Hale to Edmonton - and only started to thin out on the backstreets of Bush Hill Park I think they will keep on giving you '"Cut & Paste" replies, I'm not sure what 'interrogating the system for specific times' means, but in plain English, surely they could check the Wayfarer data for how many passes and contactless cards scanned at initial journey start (i.e Tottenham Hale) and if the number exceeds the Legal Requirement for those seated PLUS Standees, then yes, the buses are overcrowded. I know there's no way to tell how many get off, but even a simple look thru the CCTV of a single bus would show the crowds on board. Perhaps that Seat Occupancy / Availability system they were so chuffed about that they were trialling on some deckers, should be rolled out to single deckers as well... Still, a drone in an office somewhere sending out a generic reply of 'what's the problem?' is always going to be easier than actually going on the bus route in question at certain times of the day I understand the vehicle size requirement for certain streets, but surely they could just add more of them to the route, unless that concept is too complex
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Jan 15, 2016 0:58:40 GMT
I guess it's just part of the long story and battle about the 192! I'm not normally this fickle or make any complaint about anything really, but having used the 192 for well over a year, and my experience with other routes, I felt that this route had issues that needed addressing, but I didn't think it would be this much hardwork trying to get anything out of them. In terms of reliability, the 192 most of the time turns up at the time it should, but other times there is some bad headway, and at times overcrowded.
It would seem my version of overcrowded (all seats and standing room filled) versus theirs seems to differ and they deny there is a problem.
I suppose I could go back with another query to breakdown the 500+ complaints to see what the topic of complaint is whether the trend of complaints has increased.
I got an email on the 31st December with the case reference being that of my original 192 complaint with no text in it. So I have messaged back saying I got an empty email but as yet had no reply
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 15, 2016 9:39:06 GMT
I guess it's just part of the long story and battle about the 192! I'm not normally this fickle or make any complaint about anything really, but having used the 192 for well over a year, and my experience with other routes, I felt that this route had issues that needed addressing, but I didn't think it would be this much hardwork trying to get anything out of them. In terms of reliability, the 192 most of the time turns up at the time it should, but other times there is some bad headway, and at times overcrowded. It would seem my version of overcrowded (all seats and standing room filled) versus theirs seems to differ and they deny there is a problem. I suppose I could go back with another query to breakdown the 500+ complaints to see what the topic of complaint is whether the trend of complaints has increased. I got an email on the 31st December with the case reference being that of my original 192 complaint with no text in it. So I have messaged back saying I got an empty email but as yet had no reply. Two things stand out to me. Firstly what is TfL's definition of "overcrowded" and is it an aggregated value across the route or does is it more finely recorded by location or by route section/corridor. Also what time of the year, day(s) of the week and times of the day does their survey cover? That might be in the spreadsheet you received. I'd certainly want to pick apart that data. Server King is quite right to point out that TfL have stop by stop Oyster validation data for every single journey. He's right that you don't know where people alight necessarily but TfL have publicly stated that they are "imputing" where people alight by looking at the reverse pattern of boardings that people make. In other words where you get on in the morning is assumed to be where you alight in the evening and vice versa. Regular journeys would certainly be identified from that process. My other point is the same as yours about the complaints trend - are things getting better or worse in terms of feedback from customers? I'd also be tempted to ask if there is a category breakdown to the complaints - reliability, driver behaviour, driving style, cleanliness etc. If there was a clear rising trend in complaints about reliability and punctuality then that would at least show you're not alone in your concerns.
|
|