Flixbus Discussion

[Bletchleyite]

Ok, but given the average life of a coach I'm surprised anyone would buy one, accessibility is only going to become more important

For private hire, not really. Most people hiring a coach do not require wheelchair access as most people are not in wheelchairs and there is no particular reason why that would increase, if anything it should probably slowly decrease over time as medical treatments improve.

 

[M803UYA]

For private hire, not really. Most people hiring a coach do not require wheelchair access as most people are not in wheelchairs and there is no particular reason why that would increase, if anything it should probably slowly decrease over time as medical treatments improve.

It is possible to retrofit a wheelchair lift to a coach and there now are firms offering such conversions. I'm sure people will take advantage of it, especially when the vehicle is young enough to justify the cost. Problem then is where do you put the seats that you have to take out? If you know you need to before the coach leaves the yard, that's all well and good.

Flixbus aren't the only operator running non accessible coaches on scheduled domestic work, Berrys of Taunton frequently use single decker coaches designed for touring and private hire when the loadings do not justify using a double decker (indeed I've driven single deck coaches on their superfast services), snap used several operators who don't have PSVAR compliant vehicles - they however have not come under the microscope in the same way flixbus have.

I still cannot get my head around how it's impossible to incorporate this at the booking stage, as it's something that is well known about. Doug when he travelled had a valid booking, he didn't just turn up at the stop and try to board, he had a valid booking. Therefore Flixbus knew Doug was travelling before the coach ran and they'd have had time to remove any seats on an accessible coach. From what I've read, they transported him to his destination via an alternative means, so they'll say in court they've acted in line with their terms and conditions which do comply with EU regulation 181/2011. It is however a situation you don't want happening, given the negative PR damage that can come from this.

There are photos on flickr of the same BM Van Hool coach in use on Eurolines work, so the coach has previously operated on scheduled work. Would be interested to know how mainland Europe handles the issue of accessible coaches - something that Flixbus does have extensive knowledge of!

 

[Bletchleyite]

From what I've read, they transported him to his destination via an alternative means, so they'll say in court they've acted in line with their terms and conditions which do comply with EU regulation 181/2011

But then if this is a valid argument, can't the railway argue that for RRBs as well, i.e. that they've got an accessible taxi so there's no need for the coaches to be accessible? That's to some extent a valid argument, but it doesn't, so far as I understand it, comply with UK law (which is stricter than EU law on this matter).

 

[M803UYA]

But then if this is a valid argument, can't the railway argue that for RRBs as well, i.e. that they've got an accessible taxi so there's no need for the coaches to be accessible? That's to some extent a valid argument, but it doesn't, so far as I understand it, comply with UK law (which is stricter than EU law on this matter).

It doesn't help them comply with UK laws - it creates an unhelpful conflict which will lead to lots of lovely legal costs as it's worked out in court. Flixbus UK O licence application hasn't been granted (or if it has, DVSA Operator Search hasn't updated) so I'm sure the Eastern TC will have their own views to add. Flixbus intends to operate in the same way National Express does, as a centrally planned operation procuring operators and coaches to operate the services.

Easiest solution is to use Levante coaches, which is what Turners have done on the Bristol-London service from day 1.

I don't understand why a new start operator wants to have the legal fight with the attendant bad publicity and costs, but then Flixbus don't seem frightened of that as their French Eurolines experiences prove.

 

[RT4038]

But then if this is a valid argument, can't the railway argue that for RRBs as well, i.e. that they've got an accessible taxi so there's no need for the coaches to be accessible? That's to some extent a valid argument, but it doesn't, so far as I understand it, comply with UK law (which is stricter than EU law on this matter).

This is no valid argument - our law states that all vehicles operating schedued services (and Flixbus are not arguing that their service is not scheduled) have to be operated by PSVAR vehicles (except for the minor exception catering for preserved vehicles already stated) . For International services they may well have a valid argument, as EU law applies, but on domestic services(and this is what we are talking about) it is not.

Our domestic law is very clear that it is the vehicle that must be PSVAR and not that the disabled customer has been taken from A to B.

 

[philthetube]

If Flixbus were able to pick and choose which legislation to follow this would open a huge can of worms in many cases, not just public transport.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Are accesible coaches legally required for schedule coach operation? I recall that, although most NatEx coaches are Levantes, there were some Plaxtons and other coaches floating around, probably not accessible, but have they now ceased?

The Plaxton Elites at National Express are all wheelchair accessible, as I remember seeing one on the 315 in Chichester with the wheelchair lift in action.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

UK are ahead of the game compared to the rest of Europe?

Of course we are! Not only for coaches, but especially for local buses that MUST be low floor and wheelchair accessible! Why is low floor important, in case you ask? Well, easy access for not only wheelchair people, but for the elderly too, where they have difficulties of negotiating 3-4 steps of a typical coach / step entrance bus!!!

Look at quite a few EU countries such as France, Italy and Spain. Currently running step-entrance coaches (albeit recent ones are being delivered with wheelchair lifts so there's at least one good thing) on local services!!! As if, for them, fully accessible buses are only important on city or town services. Don't they realise that the elderly and wheelchair people live in rural areas too and not just urban areas?

By step-entrance coaches that Italy/Spain/France tend to use on local routes I mean these, for example:




To be back on topic, Flixbus (or BM Coaches or YJIP or whatever) should be ashamed of themselves of putting a non-accessible coach on a public service route. Especially for a country that is so developed on accessibility (and is even the leader in accessible transport!), this is outrageous. And surprising for Flixbus themselves too, a company owned by a country (in this case Germany) that has accessibility standards on nearly the same levels as the UK.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Local buses do NOT have to be low floor. An accessible coach (i.e. with a lift) is acceptable too; the requirement is that they must carry at least one wheelchair user in their chair and that being carried in a wheelchair does not require any advance notice. The Oxford-Cambridge X5 is registered as a string of local bus services and uses high floor lift-fitted coaches, the MK-Luton Airport 99 similarly.

Buses are generally used because they are cheaper. Coaches are expensive, particularly accessible ones.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Local buses do NOT have to be low floor. An accessible coach (i.e. with a lift) is acceptable too; the requirement is that they must carry at least one wheelchair user in their chair and that being carried in a wheelchair does not require any advance notice. The Oxford-Cambridge X5 is registered as a string of local bus services and uses high floor lift-fitted coaches, the MK-Luton Airport 99 similarly.

Buses are generally used because they are cheaper. Coaches are expensive, particularly accessible ones.

Ok but I prefer low floor buses (and bus/coach hybrids like the Panther LE) because it makes it easier for the elderly to get on (without the need to negotiate the step), and also because it cuts dwell times and therefore improves journey times too. And the problem about the lift is that it takes too long to be used, whilst the ramp is really quick.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Local buses do NOT have to be low floor. An accessible coach (i.e. with a lift) is acceptable too; the requirement is that they must carry at least one wheelchair user in their chair and that being carried in a wheelchair does not require any advance notice. The Oxford-Cambridge X5 is registered as a string of local bus services and uses high floor lift-fitted coaches, the MK-Luton Airport 99 similarly.

Buses are generally used because they are cheaper. Coaches are expensive, particularly accessible ones.

Except the X5 isn't really a local bus service, more like a regional express route.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ok but I prefer low floor buses (and bus/coach hybrids like the Panther LE) because it makes it easier for the elderly to get on (without the need to negotiate the step), and also because it cuts dwell times and therefore improves journey times too. And the problem about the lift is that it takes too long to be used, whilst the ramp is really quick.

Yes, there are other advantages than cost of using bus-type vehicles.

Except the X5 isn't really a local bus service, more like a regional express route.

It is, but it is legally a string of about 4 registered local bus services, so the legal framework applying to it is exactly the same as a city bus.

 

[carlberry]

It wouldn't be the first time there has been a conflict between an EU regulation and UK legislation, it does seem like Flixbus complies with EU provisions, that raises a few questions about PSVAR and how they deal with it. They appear to have coaches that comply with EU regulations, and operate as such, but don't comply with UK domestic legislation as they're not accessible.

I guess some legal people are going to have some work from this?! Far from being naive it does seem like some thought has been put into their UK operations, and perhaps they're content to have a legal fight over this? Given the high profile of the case and the fact it will go to court, some clarity will be forthcoming as to the approach flixbus needs to take. Probably easier for them to find a fleet of Levantes and run them, as Turners have done from day 1.

The conflicts have usually been people trying to avoid EU law where it's better than UK law. In instances where national law is better (i.e. it provides better or improved protection) then EU law can't be used to reduce the national laws. In this case the individual that was inconvenienced (by a delay) is one issue however the other issue is operating a coach that dosent confirm to the law (PSVAR) and if operators think that's acceptable then why wouldn't it be acceptable to operate one without an MOT?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The conflicts have usually been people trying to avoid EU law where it's better than UK law. In instances where national law is better (i.e. it provides better or improved protection) then EU law can't be used to reduce the national laws. In this case the individual that was inconvenienced (by a delay) is one issue however the other issue is operating a coach that dosent confirm to the law (PSVAR) and if operators think that's acceptable then why wouldn't it be acceptable to operate one without an MOT?

There are sort of equivalences in other areas, e.g. "one way" to pass building control for wiring regulations in the UK is to follow the current Edition of the IEE Regulations, but you're also allowed to follow the prevailing standard of any other EU country. This isn't common, but I have a feeling Motel One hotels, which are basically a little bit of Germany in the UK, probably follow the German standard, and indeed have some Schuko sockets in the bedrooms!

I don't believe this applies to PSVAR but it's sort of understandable that people might think it did. But not Flix

 

[markymark2000]

NatEx and Megabus register their routes with the TC because they have stops which are so close together and all registered services have to be PSVAR complaint.

Currently, Flixbus services are unregistered and thus aren't normally bound by the same regulations. As Flixbus stops are so far apart and passengers can't make local journeys of 15 miles or less, they aren't registered and I would argue come under different regulations meaning that they don't have to be PSVAR compliant.

A local bus service is where a PSV is used to carry passengers at separate fares. The route can be of any overall length as long as a passenger can alight within 15 miles, (measured in a straight line) of the point where they boarded. Section 2 of the Transport Act 1985 defines local bus services and Section 6 sets out the requirements for the registration of those services.
If on a long distance service there are some parts of the route where passengers can make local journeys of 15 miles or less, then those parts of the route should be registered as local services. However, it should be noted that long distance services do not need to be registered.

Quote is from page 6:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/705081/PSV353A_local_service_registrations_-_England__except_London__and_Wales.pdf

 

[awsnews]

NatEx and Megabus register their routes with the TC because they have stops which are so close together and all registered services have to be PSVAR complaint.

Currently, Flixbus services are unregistered and thus aren't normally bound by the same regulations. As Flixbus stops are so far apart and passengers can't make local journeys of 15 miles or less, they aren't registered and I would argue come under different regulations meaning that they don't have to be PSVAR compliant.




Quote is from page 6:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/705081/PSV353A_local_service_registrations_-_England__except_London__and_Wales.pdf

The term used in the PSVAR regulations is scheduled services, it doesn't make a distinction if they are registered or not.

 

[GusB]

NatEx and Megabus register their routes with the TC because they have stops which are so close together and all registered services have to be PSVAR complaint.

Currently, Flixbus services are unregistered and thus aren't normally bound by the same regulations. As Flixbus stops are so far apart and passengers can't make local journeys of 15 miles or less, they aren't registered and I would argue come under different regulations meaning that they don't have to be PSVAR compliant.




Quote is from page 6:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/705081/PSV353A_local_service_registrations_-_England__except_London__and_Wales.pdf

Is this really the case?

www.gov.uk/government/publications/accessible-buses-and-coaches/bus-and-coach-accessibility-and-the-public-service-vehicle-accessibility-regulations-2000

Vehicles covered
The Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (PSVAR) applies to all new public service vehicles (buses or coaches):

• introduced since 31 December 2000
• with a capacity exceeding 22 passengers
• used to provide a local or scheduled service

Surely the key here is that while not registered as a local service, Flixbus services are scheduled and therefore subject to PSVAR?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The term used in the PSVAR regulations is scheduled services, it doesn't make a distinction if they are registered or not.

Indeed, and RRBs aren't registered local bus services either (which is why they're only allowed to serve railway stations or relevant specified locations rather than all bus stops, as to serve all bus stops would render them liable to registration). However PSVAR still applies (give or take the temporary exemption).

 

[markymark2000]

The term used in the PSVAR regulations is scheduled services, it doesn't make a distinction if they are registered or not.

Is this really the case?

www.gov.uk/government/publications/accessible-buses-and-coaches/bus-and-coach-accessibility-and-the-public-service-vehicle-accessibility-regulations-2000


Surely the key here is that while not registered as a local service, Flixbus services are scheduled and therefore subject to PSVAR?

Based on these two comments though, there are plenty of non PSVAR scheduled coaches running. Thandi, New Bharat, Snap (partly debatable as it depends on the vehicle sent), Zeelo.Berrys has been mentioned a few times. There has to be a workaround with all routes being unregistered and operating under EU rules for long distance services (With zero passengers making trips of less than 15 miles). IF there is no workaround, these other companies would have been pulled in for it by now. There will also be paid corporate services out there which are non compliant.

There must be something to do with the 'separate fares' thing, which is what defines a scheduled service, and how it is being interpreted. Are they classing it as a private hire of a vehicle so trying to claim that the operator isn't taking fares, instead a 3rd party is (in this case, Flixbus is taking the money for fares and then hiring a bus off YJIP to convey the passengers). While it is scheduled, if not enough people use the bus it won't run and times are flexible depending on demand.
Of course I don't know how they are getting around it but I thought it only applied to registered services, none of the above companies services are registered so it was the only logical link that I could make.

Indeed, and RRBs aren't registered local bus services either (which is why they're only allowed to serve railway stations or relevant specified locations rather than all bus stops, as to serve all bus stops would render them liable to registration). However PSVAR still applies (give or take the temporary exemption).

I thought RRBs were done under separate legislation.

 

[carlberry]

NatEx and Megabus register their routes with the TC because they have stops which are so close together and all registered services have to be PSVAR complaint.

Currently, Flixbus services are unregistered and thus aren't normally bound by the same regulations. As Flixbus stops are so far apart and passengers can't make local journeys of 15 miles or less, they aren't registered and I would argue come under different regulations meaning that they don't have to be PSVAR compliant.




Quote is from page 6:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/705081/PSV353A_local_service_registrations_-_England__except_London__and_Wales.pdf

Natex and Megabus register SOME services as they're under the relevant mileage rules. Where the stops are further apart they dont have to and dont. However PSVAR still applies from the end of last year.

 

[carlberry]

Based on these two comments though, there are plenty of non PSVAR scheduled coaches running. Thandi, New Bharat, Snap (partly debatable as it depends on the vehicle sent), Zeelo.Berrys has been mentioned a few times. There has to be a workaround with all routes being unregistered and operating under EU rules for long distance services (With zero passengers making trips of less than 15 miles). IF there is no workaround, these other companies would have been pulled in for it by now. There will also be paid corporate services out there which are non compliant.

There must be something to do with the 'separate fares' thing, which is what defines a scheduled service, and how it is being interpreted. Are they classing it as a private hire of a vehicle so trying to claim that the operator isn't taking fares, instead a 3rd party is (in this case, Flixbus is taking the money for fares and then hiring a bus off YJIP to convey the passengers). While it is scheduled, if not enough people use the bus it won't run and times are flexible depending on demand.
Of course I don't know how they are getting around it but I thought it only applied to registered services, none of the above companies services are registered so it was the only logical link that I could make.


I thought RRBs were done under separate legislation.

Just because some other companies may be ignoring the rules dosent mean that they are not breaking them.

 

[markymark2000]

Natex and Megabus register SOME services as they're under the relevant mileage rules. Where the stops are further apart they dont have to and dont. However PSVAR still applies from the end of last year.

The vast majority of NX buses come under the rules to be fair and I believed they were all registered

 

[freetoview33]

Berrys do show they have wheelchair spaces on the London Coaches.

 

[jammy36]

There must be something to do with the 'separate fares' thing, which is what defines a scheduled service, and how it is being interpreted.

The regulations clearly define what is a scheduled service:

“scheduled service” means a service, using one or more public service vehicles, for the
carriage of passengers at separate fares—
(a) along specified routes,
(b) at specified times, and
(c) with passengers being taken up and set down at pre-determined stopping points,
but does not include a tour service;

Based on that definition I can't see any wriggle-room for Flixbus. They are operating scheduled services and those services fall fully within scope of the regulations.

 

[cnjb8]

Ok but I prefer low floor buses (and bus/coach hybrids like the Panther LE) because it makes it easier for the elderly to get on (without the need to negotiate the step), and also because it cuts dwell times and therefore improves journey times too. And the problem about the lift is that it takes too long to be used, whilst the ramp is really quick.

I think we all want everyone to have an easy journey.
Also, you can't brush everything with the same paint. The Panther LE in most cases doesn't reach requirements for operators, probably because they either don't want a triaxle coach (I know Plaxton said they would make a twoaxle version) and the capacity for passengers and luggage isn't good enough for some routes (which would be worse on a twoaxle). This is why it's only purchase has been Stagecoach and the only other operator I can see purchasing it is TrentBarton for Red Arrow.
I'm not saying the Panther LE is bad, it just does a job a wheelchair lift coach can do with more capacity and capabilities.

 

[M803UYA]

Berrys do show they have wheelchair spaces on the London Coaches.

Correct that the double deckers have wheelchair spaces, but they don't always run the double deckers on superfast. I've driven a few journeys to London in non PSVAR coaches, and up until lockdown they continued to allocate them to journeys.

 

[M803UYA]

Is this really the case?

www.gov.uk/government/publications/accessible-buses-and-coaches/bus-and-coach-accessibility-and-the-public-service-vehicle-accessibility-regulations-2000


Surely the key here is that while not registered as a local service, Flixbus services are scheduled and therefore subject to PSVAR?

Reluctant to veer OT, but do megabus register their routes? I've never seen registrations lodged with the TC for their services. I can think they may do this in Scotland?

 

[GusB]

Reluctant to veer OT, but do megabus register their routes? I've never seen registrations lodged with the TC for their services. I can think they may do this in Scotland?

I honestly couldn't say - it has been so long since I had a journey with Megabus, or any other coach operator for that matter. Some of the "stopper" Scottish Citylink services will probably have been registered, though.

 

[freetoview33]

Correct that the double deckers have wheelchair spaces, but they don't always run the double deckers on superfast. I've driven a few journeys to London in non PSVAR coaches, and up until lockdown they continued to allocate them to journeys.

Should help with the shinny new Plaxton Panorama

 

[Jordan Adam]

Reluctant to veer OT, but do megabus register their routes? I've never seen registrations lodged with the TC for their services. I can think they may do this in Scotland?

Technically speaking Megabus don't operate anything within Scotland. The likes of the M8, M9, M90 & M92 etc are all Citylink services. I'm pretty sure they're all registered.