Arriva Buses (including Greenline)

[A0]

Thank you for this. I have checked with the Arriva website, nothing, 'no service updates for your region'. (That says a lot, although putting back the implementation period does help - I just hope the staff in Sheerness are being kept up-to-date).

The 367 is a KCC route, previously operated by Chalkwell so news will presumably come later. It might even be considered for one of KCCs taxibus schemes.

To be fair to Arriva, depending on the date they finish that's either 6 weeks or 10 weeks away, they may well put their announcement up closer to the end date to avoid confusion now.

I'd expect them to put something up a couple of weeks beforehand. I think Centrebus only announced details of their Stevenage depot closure once Herts CC had the details of the new operators of the contract routes which Centrebus were surrendering as that was part of the press release Centrebus produced.

 

[Typhoon]

To be fair to Arriva, depending on the date they finish that's either 6 weeks or 10 weeks away, they may well put their announcement up closer to the end date to avoid confusion now.

I'd expect them to put something up a couple of weeks beforehand. I think Centrebus only announced details of their Stevenage depot closure once Herts CC had the details of the new operators of the contract routes which Centrebus were surrendering as that was part of the press release Centrebus produced.

I accept there is no need for Arriva to do so, but surely out of common courtesy it would be helpful if they had indicated something. There have been rumours circulating for much of the month, causing concern, so some sort of holding statement that they were in talks with another provider with a view to taking over routes on the Isle of Sheppey and that, although there might be minor alterations it is expected that the services will continue much as now. Lack of information hardly does Arriva's reputation much good, especially as Chalkwell have made their statement (passengers on Sheppey are not likely to be checking the Chalkwell website for information on Arriva buses. Arriva and, before them, M&D have served Sheppey for as long as most people can remember.

A difference is that Hertfordshire are particularly well organised and produce excellent publicity material when it comes to public transport so residents would have confidence that something would be done and that I don't think Centrebus were the principal provider of services in Stevenage.

It may be the way things are but if the Prime Minister is going to get people back on the buses, they need to have confidence in their services. This isn't a dig at you, you are reporting the facts, it is a dig at the way a provider is treating loyal passengers.

 

[A0]

I accept there is no need for Arriva to do so, but surely out of common courtesy it would be helpful if they had indicated something. There have been rumours circulating for much of the month, causing concern, so some sort of holding statement that they were in talks with another provider with a view to taking over routes on the Isle of Sheppey and that, although there might be minor alterations it is expected that the services will continue much as now. Lack of information hardly does Arriva's reputation much good, especially as Chalkwell have made their statement (passengers on Sheppey are not likely to be checking the Chalkwell website for information on Arriva buses. Arriva and, before them, M&D have served Sheppey for as long as most people can remember.

A difference is that Hertfordshire are particularly well organised and produce excellent publicity material when it comes to public transport so residents would have confidence that something would be done and that I don't think Centrebus were the principal provider of services in Stevenage.

It may be the way things are but if the Prime Minister is going to get people back on the buses, they need to have confidence in their services. This isn't a dig at you, you are reporting the facts, it is a dig at the way a provider is treating loyal passengers.

I disagree - far better to communicate when the deal is done and from Arriva's point of view, close to the time of cessation of service.

Communicating with the public is something which has to be done very carefully otherwise it ends up causing other problems. Speculation, on boards such as this, is absolutely fine, because your average member of the public doesn't frequent such boards - instead such speculation can usually be dismissed as enthusiast wibble.

Whilst Centrebus weren't the principle provider in Stevenage in terms of town services they were, and to an extent still are, a major provider of the rural services across north and mid Herts - a market which Arriva does relatively little in and other providers tend to cover specific geographic areas e.g. Richmonds who tend to focus on North East Herts close to their base near Royston, Uno tend towards the mid-Herts ones, obvious given their Hatfield base.

 

[duncombec]

I accept there is no need for Arriva to do so, but surely out of common courtesy it would be helpful if they had indicated something. There have been rumours circulating for much of the month, causing concern, so some sort of holding statement that they were in talks with another provider with a view to taking over routes on the Isle of Sheppey and that, although there might be minor alterations it is expected that the services will continue much as now. Lack of information hardly does Arriva's reputation much good, especially as Chalkwell have made their statement (passengers on Sheppey are not likely to be checking the Chalkwell website for information on Arriva buses. Arriva and, before them, M&D have served Sheppey for as long as most people can remember.

I wouldn't expect Arriva to announce anything until they have formally concluded their consultation with drivers. Even if that consultation merely a "pro-forma because we have to but we've already decided" affair, it would be good etiquette to wait until the closing date!

I would be surprised if Arriva had been in talks with Chalkwell directly. I don't know so, but I would think this is more likely to be KCC [Kent County Council] have gone through the usual pre-tendering procedure of asking if any operator would be willing to take on the work commercially or with de minimis funding, and Chalkwell have put their hand up.

In any case, all Chalkwell have done so far is put a link on their website inviting you to sign up for more information (and give permission to be on their mailing list). As yet, there is hardly anything worth worrying about other than "the bus service will continue in some form".

 

[markymark2000]

The issue is, it has been announced by Arriva and it causes a lot of upset with people thinking that their local bus may not run. It's only then with subsequent announcements that you find out if your local bus remains. The only people that closure notices with no takeover information benefit, are councillors and MPs who use it for their political gain to say that they have personally saved a bus and/or to push an anti dereg arguement.

 

[duncombec]

The issue is, it has been announced by Arriva [...]

Has it? The only comment I've seen from them is in response to a request for one from the local paper. I'm not aware that Arriva have made any public announcement on the depot yet.

The paper doesn't say whether they picked up the information from KCC, or (more likely) from their reader who 'heard the information from a driver'.

 

[markymark2000]

Has it? The only comment I've seen from them is in response to a request for one from the local paper. I'm not aware that Arriva have made any public announcement on the depot yet.

The paper doesn't say whether they picked up the information from KCC, or (more likely) from their reader who 'heard the information from a driver'.

Arriva hasn't got anything live on their website but it has been announced via the local press about their intentions stating

'Bus services are at risk after Arriva announced it was looking to close the Sheerness hub and axe its Island-only routes.

The company has told Kent County Council (KCC) it intends to stop running the 360, 361 and 367 from June 16.

Clearly Arriva has given out some information else it wouldn't be in the news. Nothing should have got to the papers until it was confirmed the depot was closing and any replacements were put into place. It took Chalkwell what... 6 days to take up the services. If the news had waited 6 days, a lot of public upset would have been saved. Similarly if the situation on the 367 was explained, that would have sorted things out but the half information and half statement which went out to the press has just caused public upset and confusion.

 

[Megafuss]

Arriva will still be in the "consultation with the council" stage of the bus registration excercise, hence no official announcement yet.

42 days before 16th June is 5th May, so it wont be long

 

[duncombec]

Arriva hasn't got anything live on their website but it has been announced via the local press about their intentions stating

[...]

Clearly Arriva has given out some information else it wouldn't be in the news. Nothing should have got to the papers until it was confirmed the depot was closing and any replacements were put into place. It took Chalkwell what... 6 days to take up the services. If the news had waited 6 days, a lot of public upset would have been saved. Similarly if the situation on the 367 was explained, that would have sorted things out but the half information and half statement which went out to the press has just caused public upset and confusion.

I think you have the order of things mixed up. Arriva didn't announce anything publicly themselves, as the story makes clear further down from the bit you have quoted. Nor should the fact they have (appropriately) told Kent County Council (KCC) anything mean they should be the public eye now, for something that won't be happening until July.

If a driver tells a customer, a customer goes to the local press... what is supposed to happen next? Ride roughshod over the consultation, such as it is? The paper say nothing until the consultation is complete? Leave it all to Facebook? What are Arriva meant to do when contacted? Lie?

The only "public upset" caused is by half-stories in the local press, where they have immediately jumped to conclusions that were unlikely to ever happen, and commenters who still think Arriva have a "contract" to run the buses should have it taken away from them waffle on for paragraphs that make no sense. The "Save our Buses" campaign is, and always was, totally unnecessary - the classic thing a local paper comes out with. If KentOnline had done their research and presented the actual situation differently (namely that KCC would likely ask operators to step in, or provide some sort of tendered replacement, and that the chances of there being no bus service at all, in any shape or form, would be very slim), no "upset" would have been caused!

The situation with the 367 is different, as that is a tendered service anyway. No announcement could possibly be made on that yet: as KentOnline would also know if their reporters had done a modicum of research!

42 days before 16th June is 5th May, so it wont be long

As Chalkwell have announced not starting until 12th July, might that period now be extended? I'm not sure what the rules are about the local authority consultation stage in a situation such as this, where the local council are already involved.

 

[markymark2000]

KentOnline would also know if their reporters had done a modicum of research!

I agree with this fully and it's the case for most local newspapers. However, if it is true, the council and Arriva should have explained the process in their statement to try and keep the public more at ease. By explaining the 367 is a contract and should Arriva hand it back, it will be put back out as part of a normal retendering process, it shows that there is a plan should Arriva close. For commercial routes, they can say that they are in discussions with other operators to get the services taken over (even if it is Arriva talking to the council who are then going to operators). So yes, while I agree the paper was mainly at fault, Arriva/Kent Council didn't help the matter.

 

[duncombec]

A batch more accounts were posted to Companies House yesterday, it seems, although some are still outstanding (including Kent & Surrey, Midlands, and Yorkshire Tiger). (As always, available via searching at https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/).

Headline figures:
Cymru: Profit 1m (down nearly half, increase in maintenance and staff costs, increase in depreciation costs following capital expenditure)
Durham County: Profit 1.8m (Down by more than half, reduction in turnover, driver strikes, and increase in costs)
North West: Loss 1.5m (loss halved, reduction in admin expenses)
Northumbria: Profit 2.1m (up, reduction in admin and increase in other operating income)
the Shires: Profit 2.4m (down a third, despite growth in revenue, increase commission payments, higher agency costs related to driver turnover and vacancies)
Yorkshire: Profit 2m (down by half, increased pension costs)

In all cases, I've just taken these from the "Review of Business" section on page 4 of the respective PDFs without further comment.

 

[markymark2000]

North West: Loss 1.5m (loss halved, reduction in admin expenses)

I'm interested to know how the North West makes a 1.5m loss when it has such highly profitable routes. I think there must be some accounting stuff going on here to push the profits into somewhere else. Either that or they are paying silly amounts for some areas as there is surely no way that the North West division should make such a loss and if it is running at a loss, the way to solve it could be for Arriva to cut frequencies, they have a number of very high frequency routes which they keep running. If things are that bad, you could drop services slightly and still provide a turn up and go service and save a lot of money.

If it's not routes, depot costs must be bonkers. Fair sized loss that for an operation which shouldn't be so loss making.

 

[L401CJF]

I'm interested to know how the North West makes a 1.5m loss when it has such highly profitable routes. I think there must be some accounting stuff going on here to push the profits into somewhere else. Either that or they are paying silly amounts for some areas as there is surely no way that the North West division should make such a loss and if it is running at a loss, the way to solve it could be for Arriva to cut frequencies, they have a number of very high frequency routes which they keep running. If things are that bad, you could drop services slightly and still provide a turn up and go service and save a lot of money.

If it's not routes, depot costs must be bonkers. Fair sized loss that for an operation which shouldn't be so loss making.

The enormous cost of keeping the Volvo B5LH Geminis on the road is probably not helping. They're becoming very problematic and very expensive .

 

[markymark2000]

The enormous cost of keeping the Volvo B5LH Geminis on the road is probably not helping. They're becoming very problematic and very expensive .

Really? I didn't know that. That will not help things then. Is this the Cross River B5s, Kent B5s or the Gemini 3s (or all of them)?

 

[L401CJF]

Really? I didn't know that. That will not help things then. Is this the Cross River B5s, Kent B5s or the Gemini 3s (or all of them)?

Can't comment on the rest but the Crossrivers definitely are

 

[DMORGAN]

Really? I didn't know that. That will not help things then. Is this the Cross River B5s, Kent B5s or the Gemini 3s (or all of them)?

From memory, 'North West' is the Bolton, Wythenshawe, Winsford/Macc, Runcorn and Bootle operations as a statutory company. The Merseyside company is significantly more profitable.

 

[markymark2000]

From memory, 'North West' is the Bolton, Wythenshawe, Winsford/Macc, Runcorn and Bootle operations as a statutory company. The Merseyside company is significantly more profitable.

So we are awaiting the Merseyside accounts then as well.

Winsford/Macc I can understand maybe being a bit loss making. Wythenshawe and Bolton feel like they are hanging on for franchising when TFGM will buy the depots off them. I thought Runcorn and Bootle would be under Merseyside as Runcorn comes under Merseysides pay deal.

 

[DMORGAN]

So we are awaiting the Merseyside accounts then as well.

Winsford/Macc I can understand maybe being a bit loss making. Wythenshawe and Bolton feel like they are hanging on for franchising when TFGM will buy the depots off them. I thought Runcorn and Bootle would be under Merseyside as Runcorn comes under Merseysides pay deal.

I can't remember why they kept with this particular setup, although I seem to remember it made sense at the time many, many years ago. For the purpose of the statutory accounts in Arriva North West & Wales try to forget the area management structure as it stands in current times, as it does not match up to the statutory areas!

Since the 'Manchester' division was disbanded a year or two back, Arriva Wales manages the Welsh depots and also those in Cheshire and Greater Manchester. The Merseyside division manages everything else in the region. Each Area MD (based in Bangor and Bootle respectively) is then supported by the regional support centre in Aintree, which provides commercial, marketing, scheduling, HR, IT and finance functions. Aintree is also a national hub for HR support, whereas it lost it's payroll centre, purchasing and off-bus revenue services to other hubs established in some of Arriva's other regional head offices, such as Sunderland, Wakefield, Thurmaston and Luton. Arriva Group functions are split between Sunderland and Holborn in the main, e.g. group finance and company secretary functions are in Sunderland, but many central UK Bus and Rail functions are in Lacon House (Holborn).

 

[A0]

The enormous cost of keeping the Volvo B5LH Geminis on the road is probably not helping. They're becoming very problematic and very expensive .

A few unreliable vehicles won't account for a £1.5m loss.

The main costs wil be staff and fuel.

There may also be 'one off' costs such as restructuring (redundancies, disposals) which pushed it into the red.

 

[L401CJF]

A few unreliable vehicles won't account for a £1.5m loss.

The main costs wil be staff and fuel.

There may also be 'one off' costs such as restructuring (redundancies, disposals) which pushed it into the red.

I'm not saying the buses are the cause of the whole £1.5m loss, as mentioned above the depots they operate from are actually classed as Merseyside rather than North West so not relevant now anyway.

The hybrids are at a stage were theyre requiring so much maintenance and the parts/volvo call outs are so expensive they won't be profitable to run soon if they carry on. One big issue being the life expired batteries which come somewhere near £1million to replace all the crossriver ones alone.

 

[A0]

I'm not saying the buses are the cause of the whole £1.5m loss, as mentioned above the depots they operate from are actually classed as Merseyside rather than North West so not relevant now anyway.

The hybrids are at a stage were theyre requiring so much maintenance and the parts/volvo call outs are so expensive they won't be profitable to run soon if they carry on. One big issue being the life expired batteries which come somewhere near £1million to replace all the crossriver ones alone.

BIB - you've seen the figures or you're speculating ?

 

[Robertj21a]

I'm not saying the buses are the cause of the whole £1.5m loss, as mentioned above the depots they operate from are actually classed as Merseyside rather than North West so not relevant now anyway.

The hybrids are at a stage were theyre requiring so much maintenance and the parts/volvo call outs are so expensive they won't be profitable to run soon if they carry on. One big issue being the life expired batteries which come somewhere near £1million to replace all the crossriver ones alone.

How many hybrids are we talking about?

 

[F262YTJ]

How many hybrids are we talking about?

There are 44 incumbent hybrids (4492-4535) and 11 that up from Maidstone (4851-4862) which came up in 2017 in exchange for 11 Wright Gemini 2DLs. These 55 all days from 2013 so will be at the age for replacement batteries.
There later ones (4800-4850) were new late 2016/ early 2017.

 

[L401CJF]

BIB - you've seen the figures or you're speculating ?

Seen the figures. One of them (4511) has not long returned from Volvo having been there since last autumn to try and pinpoint a number of ongoing issues regarding throttle and gear loss which is affecting the majority of the Crossriver fleet. Id have to double check the exact figure, but it came back with a bill of around £50,000 if I remember correctly which included a change of batteries.

Volvo did state when new that after 5 years they would require a full overhaul with new clutches, batteries etc. They're now over 7 years old so overdue. A number of them have had replacement gearboxes and engines already.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I bet Maidstone were glad to get shot of those hybrids when they did. They were never brilliant when they were down there according to various friends who live in the area.

 

[MotCO]

Route One has announced that Chalkwell are taking over routes 360 and 361 from 12th July, the day after the Arriva registration expires.

Chalkwell acts after Arriva confirms Sheerness closure plans - routeone

Chalkwell has moved to save two services that would otherwise be lost after Arriva confirmed proposals for the closure of Sheerness depot.

www.route-one.net

Kent operator Chalkwell has moved quickly to save two services that it says would otherwise be withdrawn after Arriva confirmed proposals for the closure of its depot in Sheerness.

While Arriva has not publicly said when the closure is likely to happen, Chalkwell has registered routes 360 and 361 that serve Sheerness from 12 July, which it adds is the day after Arriva will deregister them.

Arriva comments that it is currently discussing the closure of Sheerness depot in consultation with trade union representatives and Kent County Council.

It adds that it “remains committed to serving Kent, as well as providing continuity of bus services across the region by ensuring that the majority of routes are operated out of our Gillingham and Maidstone depots.” Further updates on the proposed closure will be provided in due course, the group adds.

Chalkwell Managing Director Roland Eglinton (pictured) notes that the family business was formed in Sheerness 90 years ago in 1931. It already operates there on school services and Mr Eglinton says that addition of the 360 and 361 to that is “a natural evolution” for the company. The two routes will replicate the existing Arriva services wherever possible, he adds.

 

[M803UYA]

Route One has announced that Chalkwell are taking over routes 360 and 361 from 12th July, the day after the Arriva registration expires.

Chalkwell acts after Arriva confirms Sheerness closure plans - routeone

Chalkwell has moved to save two services that would otherwise be lost after Arriva confirmed proposals for the closure of Sheerness depot.

www.route-one.net

Mods: I posted this earlier but you deleted it for not providing a source. I gave the web link - is that not sufficient?

Some Routeone content requires you to log in, so unless you've copied and pasted the article not everyone may be able to see it.

 

[GusB]

If you're referencing an external source we require a link to the source, and a relevant quote from the source in quote tags.

 

[MotCO]

If you're referencing an external source we require a link to the source, and a relevant quote from the source in quote tags.

Ah, that's what I forgot. Apols.

 

[A0]

I notice on Herts CC Intalink site Arriva have registered a couple of new / changed services using Better Buses Funding.

Sunday services on the 97 & 98 between Hitchin & Stotfold / Baldock which makes some sense.

And a new route 324 (using an old number) between Ware / Hertford and Welwyn GC, which is nuts. That's already got the hourly (2 hourly on Sunday) 724 - there really isn't *that much* demand for travel between Welwyn & Hertford. Between Hertford & Hatfield there is demand because of the UoH campuses, so bemused about this one.

If I was looking at better uses for such funding I'd be more inclined to look at some of the other services which have been reduced in recent years e.g. St Albans - Colney Heath / Brookmans Park, St Albans - Redbourn - Dunstable or possibly some of the town networks - Stevenage, St Albans or Watford.