Following on from my other post about her using our railway system.

Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

So I was not surprised when I saw this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-44910639

Although why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me as
neither York or Darlington are near Norfolk.


--
Adam

On Sunday, 22 July 2018 13:48:47 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Following on from my other post about her using our railway system.
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

They aren't, and a lot of effort goes into the Travel Assistance system, but it obviously doesn't always work.

Although why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me as
neither York or Darlington are near Norfolk.

She's from Norwich.

Owain

ARW wrote:

why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me

"Ms Davis, of Norwich"

On 22/07/2018 14:11, wrote:
On Sunday, 22 July 2018 13:48:47 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Following on from my other post about her using our railway system.
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

They aren't, and a lot of effort goes into the Travel Assistance system, but it obviously doesn't always work.

Although why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me as
neither York or Darlington are near Norfolk.

She's from Norwich.


Norwich Canada?


--
Adam

On 22/07/2018 14:22, Andy Burns wrote:
ARW wrote:

why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me

"Ms Davis, of Norwich"


On a train no where near Norwich.

--
Adam

ARW wrote
Andy Burns wrote
ARW wrote

why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me

"Ms Davis, of Norwich"

On a train no where near Norwich.

Still likely to be of interest to those in Norwich
who read about the original stupidity tho.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 04:21:33 +1000, cantankerous senile geezer Rot Speed
blabbered, again:


"Ms Davis, of Norwich"

On a train no where near Norwich.

Still likely to be of interest to those in Norwich
who read about the original stupidity tho.

Will YOU ever learn, you lonely forsaken endlessly prattling senile
Ozzietard? Everyone here doubts it! BG

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

In message , at
06:11:59 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018, remarked:
On Sunday, 22 July 2018 13:48:47 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Following on from my other post about her using our railway system.
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

They aren't, and a lot of effort goes into the Travel Assistance system,
but it obviously doesn't always work.

What particularly doesn't work is:

(a) when people arrive with a buggy that apparently doesn't comply with
the Travel Assistance scheme.

It's not a wheelchair, it's not a folding buggy (which like folding
bikes are treated as luggage), and it's unlikely it has the
necessary permit for a non-folding buggy.

(b) when people are not in the correct carriage [with the wheelchair
space]. The platform staff apparently helped *someone* off the train
(presumably from the correct carriage) and at that point no doubt
thought their job was done.
--
Roland Perry

Its fragmentation of the railways that is the cause of problems with
disabled use of them. Non standard procedures and trains and the lack of
communication across companies.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 22 July 2018 13:48:47 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Following on from my other post about her using our railway system.
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

They aren't, and a lot of effort goes into the Travel Assistance system,
but it obviously doesn't always work.

Although why this is in the BBC's Norfolk section is beyond me as
neither York or Darlington are near Norfolk.

She's from Norwich.

Owain

In message , at 10:02:24 on Mon, 23 Jul
2018, Brian Gaff remarked:

Its fragmentation of the railways that is the cause of problems with
disabled use of them.

In the case of East Coast, the problem is the old trains they inherited
(built in the 70's/80's). The new fleet is in the wings.

One of the main reasons they are being withdrawn is the lack of
provision for wheelchair users.

Non standard procedures

I'd expect most train companies to have very similar mobility scooter
rules.

and trains and the lack of communication across companies.

In both of the cases this lady was involved in, just one company was
implicated.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
ARW wrote:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.

--
*No hand signals. Driver on Viagra*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, 23 July 2018 14:29:22 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.

Far more likely to arrive at all, given the road and rail fatality statistics.

Owain

On 23/07/2018 10:02, Brian Gaff wrote:
Its fragmentation of the railways that is the cause of problems with
disabled use of them.

It was far worse when BR rolling stock was mostly slam-door.
Disabled and buggies had to go in the grotty guards van.

On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.


Not if you use Southern or Thameslink since May 20th

On 23/07/2018 22:14, Andrew wrote:
On 23/07/2018 10:02, Brian Gaff wrote:
Its fragmentation of the railways that is the cause of problems with
disabled use of them.

It was far worse when BR rolling stock was mostly slam-door.
Disabled and buggies had to go in the grotty guards van.

In BR days on our local line, many passengers had to stand in the
luggage cage in the guards compartment every day - usually so packed
that they were in danger of passing out. Even then, the class 108 and
101 DMUs, while old, noisy and rough running were far more reliable and
comfortable than the class 142s that replaced them.

SteveW

In message , at 22:15:41 on Mon, 23 Jul
2018, Andrew remarked:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily
basis, so also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far
more likely to arrive at your destination at the said time than going
by road.

Not if you use Southern or Thameslink since May 20th

I think you'll find that although there was a lot of chaos initially,
the subsequent 'another new timetable' introduced on 15th July is
working reasonably well.
--
Roland Perry

On Monday, 23 July 2018 22:14:43 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
It was far worse when BR rolling stock was mostly slam-door.
Disabled and buggies had to go in the grotty guards van.

The rest of the train was usually rather grotty too.

Owain

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.


Not if you use Southern or Thameslink since May 20th

Doesn't make a great deal of difference in my case. As I'm not aiming to
catch the 07.30 etc from a country station.

--
*The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 24/07/2018 10:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.


Not if you use Southern or Thameslink since May 20th

Doesn't make a great deal of difference in my case. As I'm not aiming to
catch the 07.30 etc from a country station.


There's a world of difference between a 15 minute service from
Tooting to Waterloo and a rural (and even not-so-rural) service
that starts and sometimes finishes a long way from LOndon.

You also have massively subsidised tube, bus and Overground
rail alternatives.

On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.



Totally disagree.

I might manage up to 30 train journeys a year.

At least 20% of them are late.

No matter where I drive, if the journey greater than 20 minutes I always
expect to beat Google maps ETA by a least 5 minutes.





--
Adam

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Doesn't make a great deal of difference in my case. As I'm not aiming to
catch the 07.30 etc from a country station.


There's a world of difference between a 15 minute service from
Tooting to Waterloo

There certainly is, as such a thing doesn't exist.

and a rural (and even not-so-rural) service
that starts and sometimes finishes a long way from LOndon.

You also have massively subsidised tube, bus and Overground
rail alternatives.

Think you'll find the subsidy per passenger mile rather less than on many
rural lines.

--
*Taxation WITH representation ain't much fun, either.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
ARW wrote:
Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.



Totally disagree.

I might manage up to 30 train journeys a year.

At least 20% of them are late.

No matter where I drive, if the journey greater than 20 minutes I always
expect to beat Google maps ETA by a least 5 minutes.

You must be very lucky. I had the journey time to Basingstoke doubled the
other day due to an accident. Didn't come as a surprise either.

--
*It doesn't take a genius to spot a goat in a flock of sheep *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 24/07/2018 19:39, ARW wrote:
On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No matter where I drive, if the journey greater than 20 minutes I always
expect to beat Google maps ETA by a least 5 minutes.

I assume you don't have to use the M25 too often


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

"Andrew" wrote in message
news

You also have massively subsidised tube, bus and Overground
rail alternatives.

Massive subsidies ?

quote

Transport for London (TfL) had been told in 2013 it
would eventually have to be self-sufficient with its
operating costs.

Today it was told by when.

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

What it means is by 2018 London will be the only city in Europe where
there is no day-to-day transport subsidy.

/quote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34923879

quote

Gwyn Topham
Wed 25 Nov 2015

Transport has been dealt the deepest cut to its day-to-day spending of
any government department, with the subsidy for London services to be
removed entirely.


/quote


https://www.theguardian.com/politics...est-budget-cut

The only reason there are "subsidies" in London at all is because
these are recouped from taxes on employers and their employees
for whom Public Transport is a necessity, and from tourists who
spend their money around the Capital.

All removing the subsidy will do is shift the burden onto employers
and employees by fair rises and similarly make London less attractive
to tourists.

Given the state of rush hour tubes and buses its fairly obvious no
one would want to use them were there any possible alternative.
It's not their being "subsidised" up to now at least that made
them attractive. And so removing the subsidy won't achieve
anything - there's no "nudge" potential in this, all its doing is
rearranging the deckchairs for purely ideological reasons.


michael adams

....

On 25/07/18 07:56, alan_m wrote:
On 24/07/2018 19:39, ARW wrote:
On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No matter where I drive, if the journey greater than 20 minutes I
always expect to beat Google maps ETA by a least 5 minutes.

I assume you don't have to use the M25 too often


Or there are no speed cams


--
I would rather have questions that cannot be answered...
....than to have answers that cannot be questioned

Richard Feynman

On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 01:01:43 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Doesn't make a great deal of difference in my case. As I'm not aiming
to catch the 07.30 etc from a country station.


There's a world of difference between a 15 minute service from Tooting
to Waterloo

There certainly is, as such a thing doesn't exist.

Northern Line.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 25/07/2018 08:42, michael adams wrote:
snip


The only reason there are "subsidies" in London at all is because
these are recouped from taxes on employers and their employees
for whom Public Transport is a necessity, and from tourists who
spend their money around the Capital.

All removing the subsidy will do is shift the burden onto employers
and employees by fair rises and similarly make London less attractive
to tourists.

Grants by _central_ government for TfL's operations[1] are being phased
out. TfL will still get grants from _local_ government. The Greater
London Authority makes them - so far, out of taxes (business rates) paid
in London. Some might see that as a good example of devolution of
decision-taking to Londoners and their elected representatives. Some -
including the Mayor - ask for more devolved powers.

And as a London resident I'd find it hard to explain to people outside
London why central government should give TfL more of their taxes to
subsidise travel in London while Londoners' enjoy a fares freeze. The
current Mayor campaigned on, and implemented, a 4 year freeze that was
expected to cost £1.9 billion.


[1] it still gets grants for capital projects: only yesterday there was
the news of extra money from DfT for Crossrail

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-44942322

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In article ,
alan_m wrote:
On 24/07/2018 19:39, ARW wrote:
On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No matter where I drive, if the journey greater than 20 minutes I
always expect to beat Google maps ETA by a least 5 minutes.

I assume you don't have to use the M25 too often

I'd guess the difference is the pretty comprehensive PT system in the SE -
and much denser traffic. Which would tip the balance of journey
reliability.

Leaving out the blip caused by those unrealistic new timetables on some
routes. The 'something must be done' syndrome.

--
*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 01:01:43 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Doesn't make a great deal of difference in my case. As I'm not aiming
to catch the 07.30 etc from a country station.


There's a world of difference between a 15 minute service from Tooting
to Waterloo

There certainly is, as such a thing doesn't exist.

Northern Line.

Tooting station isn't on the northern line.

But the discussion was about rail, not tube.

--
*Go the extra mile. It makes your boss look like an incompetent slacker *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , at
08:42:01 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018, michael adams
remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at
09:49:50 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Robin remarked:

The current Mayor campaigned on, and implemented, a 4 year freeze that
was expected to cost £1.9 billion.

And overnight turned out to be a much weaker freeze than he had
promised.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
08:42:01 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018, michael adams
remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

That's to pay for the "Free if you are over 60" fare

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
08:42:01 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018, michael adams
remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

Given most will have workers and or customers using PT, why not? It is
simply a facility of use to them. Same as police, etc.

--
*Many people quit looking for work when they find a job *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
08:42:01 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018, michael adams
remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

That's to pay for the "Free if you are over 60" fare

Be very interesting to know its true cost. Ie, if removed, how much the
increase in fares take would be. My guess is not vast, as many use the
free travel for journeys they might not make if having to pay. I certainly
do.

--
*To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated, but not be able to say it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 25/07/2018 15:29, charles wrote:
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
08:42:01 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018, michael adams
remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

That's to pay for the "Free if you are over 60" fare


Free travel for "over 60 but not State pension..." is funded by the
Mayor and TfL. I don't know if that can be attributed to a particular
source of funds.

The much bigger amount is to pay for the free travel for people over
state pension age for women ("Freedom Pass"). That's based on fares
foregone. The cost (£325 million a year) is apportioned to London
*boroughs* - not the GLA - and boroughs get most of their income from
council tax. But I wouldn't call it a subsidy given it's designed only
to compensate TfL for the fares they would have got if the passes didn't
exist.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In message , at 16:03:15 on Wed, 25 Jul
2018, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

Given most will have workers and or customers using PT, why not?

I suspect you are confusing commercial rates payers, and residents
paying council tax.

It is simply a facility of use to them. Same as police, etc.

I wasn't judging whether the subsidy was right or wrong, just that
there's a massive gap between the fares box for *paying* TfL users, and
what the cost of provision is.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:03:15 on Wed, 25 Jul
2018, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:

There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

Given most will have workers and or customers using PT, why not?

I suspect you are confusing commercial rates payers, and residents
paying council tax.

It is simply a facility of use to them. Same as police, etc.

I wasn't judging whether the subsidy was right or wrong, just that
there's a massive gap between the fares box for *paying* TfL users, and
what the cost of provision is.

Care to give the percentage? TFL is a vast operation so easy to get
confused by millions. My guess is there are plenty less used provincial
routes that get a far higher percentage subsidy.

--
*Succeed, in spite of management *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , at 18:01:13 on Wed, 25 Jul
2018, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
There will be no more general grants from the government for
day-to-day running of services from 2018 - earlier than TfL thought.

There will nevertheless continue to be a substantial subsidy from London
Council Tax payers.

Given most will have workers and or customers using PT, why not?

I suspect you are confusing commercial rates payers, and residents
paying council tax.

It is simply a facility of use to them. Same as police, etc.

I wasn't judging whether the subsidy was right or wrong, just that
there's a massive gap between the fares box for *paying* TfL users, and
what the cost of provision is.

Care to give the percentage? TFL is a vast operation so easy to get
confused by millions.

Fares 47% it says he

https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-t...-we-are-funded

My guess is there are plenty less used provincial routes that get a far
higher percentage subsidy.

I agree, but we weren't discussing that.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 19:39:35 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 23/07/2018 14:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
Will she ever learn that the trains and staff that run them in this
country are ****?

Because it's not true. I use trains on a regular (but not daily basis, so
also a variety of routes) and they're generally fine. Far more likely to
arrive at your destination at the said time than going by road.



Totally disagree.

I might manage up to 30 train journeys a year.

At least 20% of them are late.

No matter where I drive, if the journey greater than 20 minutes I always
expect to beat Google maps ETA by a least 5 minutes.

You must be indeed fortunate, there are parts of the UK where a
journey by car is predictable, but I dont use many of these routes.

As for the train service, trains in Britain are like the food, you
only have to go abroad to see why we have built up the reputation we
wallow in.

AB

"Robin" wrote in message
...

And as a London resident I'd find it hard to explain to people outside London why
central government should give TfL more of their taxes to subsidise travel in London
while Londoners' enjoy a fares freeze.

Well you could start by pointing out that London, followed by the South
East, and to a very small degree the East of England are the only
areas of the UK which actually make a positive contribution to the
UK economy

As the graph, half down this abstract from the ONS shows

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gover...2015to2016#toc
Country and regional public sector finances: Financial year ending March 2016


In short London contributes around 28 billion, The South East around 15
billion and the East of England around 2 billion. The North West of
England on the other hand produced a 22 billion deficit,
Yorkshire around a 14 million deficit, and Scotland around a
15 billion deficit.

Now I personally don't begrudge these regions this money as the wealth
of the UK was built on their labour in the past; their mines, their mills
and their shipyards. Just as London's wealth has always derived from
her geographical position in the SE and her relative proximity to
continental Europe. Unfair maybe, but that's geography for you.

So that before anyone starts bandying around loaded phrases such as
"subsidies" or "subsidising", I think it best to be determine who is
actually subsidising whom, and by exactly how much.

As to your other point about Londoners enjoying a fares freeze,
I'm rather astonished to learn that you weren't aware that this
freeze only applies to single journeys. There is no such freeze
on the cost of travel cards or on Oyster card daily and monthly
caps.

I assume the reason the freeze has been prioritised on single fares
is simply because this is the easiest way of helping poorer
people who might otherwise find such fares a burden. Unemployed
people travelling to job interviews or to visit a sick child
in a hospital on the other side of London.

The assumption being I suppose that people who travel most
regularly on public transport, by doing so have already
demonstrated their ability to pay, unlike those who may already
regard use of public transport, the tube certainly as a luxury
of sorts.

Now whether there's any evidential basis for such an assumption
I'm not sure, and short of means testing passengers in some way
I can't see how there ever could be. Nevertheless it seems
reasonable enough to me.



michael adams

....