matacaster
On Moderation
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,604
Unhappily many TOC's, such as Virgin, have embraced bustitution when, with a little forethought, they could have put in place effective rail alternatives via diversionary routes. This is doubtless because they don't have to worry about route knowledge, complex timetabling etc and above all its very cheap. However one look sat it though unless there is no practical rail alternative, the passenger is being well short changed.
In view of this I propose that for each proposed bustitution, the cost of providing that bus service should be established and the cost of any realistic rail alternative. The rail operator should then be given the option of using a bus, in which case they will be fined the difference less the cost of a suitable refund to each passenger. Should they instead use a reasonable rail alternative, then they would neither pay the fine nor the passenger reimbursement (as passenger is still travelling by chosen method).
What, apart from howls of protest from the ever-greedy bearded one, is not to like with this proposal?
In view of this I propose that for each proposed bustitution, the cost of providing that bus service should be established and the cost of any realistic rail alternative. The rail operator should then be given the option of using a bus, in which case they will be fined the difference less the cost of a suitable refund to each passenger. Should they instead use a reasonable rail alternative, then they would neither pay the fine nor the passenger reimbursement (as passenger is still travelling by chosen method).
What, apart from howls of protest from the ever-greedy bearded one, is not to like with this proposal?