Crosville Motor Services - Weston-Super-Mare Cutting Routes

[THarris123]

S17 is finance and repute,
S26 is failure to operate registered services
S28 is the section that gives the TC the right to revoke, suspend or disqualify for breach of any of the other sections,

They're in very deep doo doo then.

 

[richw]

They're in very deep doo doo then.

Possibly. Depends on the level of failings.

A look on their Facebook page is only 2-3 people moaning about no showing buses, so doesn't sound like much of a S26 breach from social media where people normally moan.
These cuts we have been discussing Were for financial reasoning, which may explain S17.

 

[the101]

I think your statement that ' those that are revoked INVARIABLY deserve it' betrays an uncritical mindset. In any case, if an operator is in trouble for failing to run scheduled services, or late running or a combination of the two, in an area like what I shall call Avon, then how come the large operators, with one dominating the area like no other, are not brought to book too, because their services can no more avoid the traffic chaos than the chastised small bus company?

Like I have already, said, TCs do not revoke O-Licences willy-nilly because if they did, their decisions are guaranteed to be overturned on appeal. Those who do get revoked are the serially non-compliant and those who have ignored many opportunities to right their ways. They are much better off out of the way where they can do no further damage to the industry as a whole.

As for your other point, I would have thought the answer to be obvious. If other companies have, as you suggest, not been summoned to explain themselves for unreliability, it is no doubt a result of their timetables more accurately reflecting operating conditions and fewer/no complaints having been received from the public about unreliability.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

They're in very deep doo doo then.

First of all, innocent til proven otherwise.

Secondly, previous record is taken into consideration.

Thirdly, the seriousness of any failings, as stated. That will then define if they're in the clart, by how much, and the extent of any sanction.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Possibly. Depends on the level of failings.

A look on their Facebook page is only 2-3 people moaning about no showing buses, so doesn't sound like much of a S26 breach from social media where people normally moan.
These cuts we have been discussing Were for financial reasoning, which may explain S17.

It did strike me in the first instance to be a very provocative and risky strategy to introduce the 107 and I'd have been surprised if they were making much on the 103 - can routes in Weston really sustain a bus war?

I don't wish any ill on Mr Pratt but he's made some intriguing decisions. Perhaps a reduction of CMS and taking the stable long term HP3 work with SPS might be the best thing all round.

 

[the101]

What transpired at the Crosville PI has been published in Route One, as below.

I heard a rumble that it was going to be a bad one, but I can hardly believe what I read in this report. If this guy loses his license (as he should do, beyond any question if the report is correct) it will be little surprise.

Particularly worrisome for Jones-Pratt may be the TC's comment that it was "the clearest failure in maintenance" that he had ever seen. Rooney has been around for a while and is tipped to be Beverley Bell's replacement as Senior TC, and if he is saying something like that, it looks bad.

I cannot make sense of Jones-Pratt's comment about when one of the hybrids has a problem it should be put into diesel mode. If he is referring to the Wrights integral 'deckers that came out of Arriva London and hung around Ensign for ages, there is no such thing on one as putting it into diesel mode. They are series hybrids and there is no link between the engine and the wheels. Rooney is an engineer by trade and he may well know this...

http://www.route-one.net/articles/Crosville_in_trouble_over_vehicle_repairs

The standard of vehicle maintenance at Weston-Super-Mare based Crosville Motor Services was criticised by its former maintenance contractors when it appeared at a Public Inquiry (PI) before Traffic Commissioner (TC) Kevin Rooney.

The company, of Unit 2, Westland Distribution Park, Weston-Super Mare, which holds a 35-vehicle international licence, had been called before the TC because of concerns over vehicle maintenance and bus service compliance issues.

Jonathan Jones Pratt operates modern and historic vehicles on 35-vehicle O-Licence. Danny Lister, former MD of Flintshire Truck & Bus, said that he was approached by Jonathan Jones-Pratt, Crosville’s MD, in October 2015 to carry out a full maintenance programme on Crosville’s fleet.

Crosville is a subsidiary of JJP Transport Holdings South West Ltd, owned by Mr Jones-Pratt. Other subsidiary companies include Southern National and Somerset Passenger Solutions, which operates a contract to service EDF’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power station construction project.

‘Very poor condition’

The fleet was in a very poor condition and wanted quite a lot of money spending on it. He had been told of a wheel loss incident on a vehicle that Flintshire had previously declared as unroadworthy because of corrosion, with a recommendation that it be taken out of service and disposed of.

For Crosville, Scott Bell said that there was a commercial dispute with Mr Lister alleging that Crosville owed Flintshire money and Crosville counter-claiming that Flintshire owed it money.

Mr Lister denied that he had made up allegations about financial difficulties, saying that they had struggled to get parts and at times they were told to take parts off other buses to get buses on the road. He denied he was sore that Flintshire had lost the Crosville work to Paul Clark Services (PCS).

Self-employed fitter Stuart George, who worked for Flintshire, said that they found it more and more difficult to order and receive parts.

There was a serious lack of equipment in the Crosville workshop and they visited Weston-Super-Mare based Coombs Coaches to use its brake tester.

On one occasion Coombs wouldn’t release the vehicle due to an outstanding bill and he had to wait with the vehicle and contact Crosville to get it to make a payment.

He alleged that what was purported to be his signature on a roadworthy declaration on an inspection sheet, was a forgery.

Current Flintshire MD John Fitzpatrick said that Flintshire was brought in to help resolve issues found by a DVSA investigation.

Organisation lacking

The lack of organisation soon became apparent with no procedures for recording wheel torques or keeping track of vehicles-off-the-road (VOR). The level of PSV knowledge amongst Crosville staff was “questionable.”

In reply to Scott Bell, Mr Fitzpatrick said he could not say what Crosville’s business was like today. He agreed that on a personal level he had harassed Mr Jones-Pratt on social media.

Vehicle Examiner (VE) Gary Ford said that he made an unannounced visit to Crosville in January following the wheel loss, which had not been notified to DVSA by the company.

DVSA had been informed of the incident by the police and another operator. He examined eight vehicles issuing one immediate prohibition, one delayed prohibition and six defect notices.

In relation to the wheel loss he looked at the damage to the hub and axle. The brakes had been relined the day before the wheel loss. Whoever rebuilt the hub made the catastrophic error of not lubricating the wheel bearings and in not topping up the rear disc oil sufficiently.

The TC commented that it was the clearest failure in maintenance that he had ever seen.

The VE said that the fitter concerned did not have access to a manual.

Fractured outriggers

The delayed prohibition related to fractured chassis outriggers. A new gearbox had been fitted to the vehicle given the immediate prohibition. The half-shaft bolts had been left loose, one was missing and oil was coming from the gasket. That vehicle had just come in from service.

The defects found on three of the vehicles given advisory notices, including a compressor pump only held in place by cable ties, had not been noted on the inspection records.

Looking at the driver defect reports, a driver complained on 22 November that there was no power and the vehicle was dangerous.

There were 32 entries by different drivers of that vehicle up to March saying the same thing. The inspection sheets showed different DCP codes for the same vehicles on brake test.

He had seen audits by third parties. What was written was satisfactory but he did not agree with it. He agreed that Crosville had always been willing to take advice on board and that on occasions the company had been let down by its maintenance contractors.

‘Pretty shocking’

The TC commented that the last two prohibitions were due to a complete failure in maintenance and were really pretty shocking.

Director Raymond Lunney said that Crosville initially had its own maintenance team. There were some issues with their mechanics and it was decided it would be better to have a third-party provider.

The relationship with Flintshire deteriorated substantially last summer. The allegation that an inspection sheet was signed off by Crosville staff was ludicrous. PCS was doing a better job than any of the previous contractors used.

The TC commented that to continue to employ a contractor after the wheels came off due to incompetence was a funny way to run a business.

Hybrid’s ‘5mph max’

Mr Jones-Pratt said that the 32 driver defect reports related to a hybrid vehicle and the knowledge of hybrid technology in the UK was pretty sparse.

They were advised to put it in diesel mode when there was a problem. After he had said the vehicle was slow but not dangerous, the VE said drivers had said that it was down to 5mph.

When questioned about who moved a vehicle hired from Carmel Coaches after it was given an immediate prohibition signed for by Mr Lunney, Mr Jones-Pratt maintained it was Carmel staff. However, the VE said he had spoken to Michael Hazel of Carmel who had said it was moved by Crosville staff.

The TC said the vehicle should not have been released until it was repaired. He gave Crosville seven days to produce evidence of who had moved it.

Proposed new TM

Proposed Transport Manager (TM) Anthony Graham said he had only just passed his CPC and he was undertaking the TM’s role as the previous TM had transferred to the associated Southern National firm.

The TC indicated that he would announce his decision in writing and that the bus service compliance issues would be the subject of a separate PI.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

What transpired at the Crosville PI has been published in Route One, as below.

I heard a rumble that it was going to be a bad one, but I can hardly believe what I read in this report. If this guy loses his license (as he should do, beyond any question if the report is correct) it will be little surprise.

Particularly worrisome for Jones-Pratt may be the TC's comment that it was "the clearest failure in maintenance" that he had ever seen. Rooney has been around for a while and is tipped to be Beverley Bell's replacement as Senior TC, and if he is saying something like that, it looks bad.

I cannot make sense of Jones-Pratt's comment about when one of the hybrids has a problem it should be put into diesel mode. If he is referring to the Wrights integral 'deckers that came out of Arriva London and hung around Ensign for ages, there is no such thing on one as putting it into diesel mode. They are series hybrids and there is no link between the engine and the wheels. Rooney is an engineer by trade and he may well know this...

http://www.route-one.net/articles/Crosville_in_trouble_over_vehicle_repairs

Not withstanding the hybrid issue etc....that's frankly damning stuff.

Quite stunned. hock:

 

[the101]

It's big trouble, that's for sure, and I am sure that it's what Beverley used to describe as "a potential ultimate sanction" case.

Regardless of what decision Rooney reaches it will be interesting to see what it means for the Somerset Passenger Solutions JV with First.