Driver refuses 10 year old on a bus

[Simon75]

Girl, 10, abandoned in dark by bus driver left waiting in cold for 40 minutes

Girl, 10, abandoned in dark by bus driver left waiting in cold for 40 minutes

Daiva Paskeviciene's young daughter had to wait alone for another bus to take her home

www.stokesentinel.co.uk

A young schoolgirl was abandoned in the dark after a bus driver wouldn't allow her on board due to a faulty ticket machine.

Her raging mum has told how her "frightened" 10-year-old daughter is now scared to use public transport to get to school.

Daiva Paskeviciene says her daughter was not allowed on the bus because her pass did not work, and claimed it was a fault with the machine.

The first alleged incident happened on January 6 when schools had just gone back after the Christmas break, reported EdinburghLive.

Ms Paskeviciene said she received a call from her terrified daughter after she was left alone waiting in the cold for 40 minutes for another bus home.

The 10-year-old is claimed to have presented her junior ridacard, that had been topped up that morning, to the machine on the bus.

The driver told her it wasn't working so she could not get on and would have to leave the bus.

Ms Paskeviciene told EdinburghLive: "My daughter is 10-years-old, it happened after Christmas when schools went back.

"Usually she gets the bus, on that day at around 3.30pm. She went to the bus with her bus card that I topped up that morning. The machine wasn't working so the driver told her she couldn't get on the bus. He then got angry and was shouting at her. She got really scared.

"She had to wait 40 minutes for the next one it got dark and very cold. She called me and eventually a stranger had to give her money to be able to get home. Next time I made sure she had spare change just in case.

"I couldn't believe a driver would act like that to a little girl and then it happened again. The driver said, 'your card doesn't work, you aren't coming on' my daughter called me crying, and is now afraid to catch the bus to school."

A spokesman for the bus company said: "We are committed to delivering safe, reliable public transport for all of our customers.

"We would always ask that our customers contact our customer services team if they have concerns regarding their travel experience and would encourage this customer to contact us directly with more information to allow us to investigate the matter."

 

[jon0844]

The article implies the ticket machine was deemed to be at fault, but surely a driver would pass anyone for free if that was the case?

Then it also says the pass didn't work (and I know from someone who worked for Arriva Buses that kids often showed invalid barcode passes that were screen shots, not an actual live ticket in an app, and then insisted it was a ticket machine problem), which perhaps makes more sense - but still leads to the whole duty of care argument. However, while it might have been dark, it was also 3.30pm, not midnight.

Seems like this is another one of those three-sided stories?

Is the pass in this case a smartcard?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Public transport isn't a childcare service. If the child isn't mature enough to cope with the various challenges that might occur along the way without it bringing huge fear, then perhaps they're not old enough to use public transport alone and need to practice with an adult first. Shouting about this sort of thing too much is likely to result in bus companies applying a minimum age, which would be far worse. (GNER tried to do this at one point and had to backtrack). 10 is pretty borderline - some 10 year olds will be mature enough to cope, but many won't.

I'd say one exception - if this is a dedicated school service intended for primary-age children (i.e. tendered for that purpose) there should be a process in place to deal with this.

There is a definite problem with schoolkids falsifying passes e.g. as @jon0844 says by screenshotting them. So unfortunately operators do need to be a bit strict on this, and often do display signage accordingly.

 

[GusB]

One thing that puzzled me was why the Stoke Sentinel is getting so worked up about an incident that actually occured in Edinburgh. I was initially puzzled by their link to Edinburgh live, until I actually clicked on it. It would appear that the company is Lothian Buses.

The Sentinel article repeats all the key "facts", but removes any reference to the location or the company involved.

 

[jon0844]

Invalid/fake barcodes (Aztec codes) are a problem for the railway too. Seems people rely on being waved through if the ticket doesn't scan, by blaming the reader/equipment.

I assume it's a big problem because they ARE waved through more often than not, or else the trick would end right there and then.

This may of course be a smartcard, in which case there needs to be a check of whether the ticket was topped up etc.

One thing that puzzled me was why the Stoke Sentinel is getting so worked up about an incident that actually occured in Edinburgh. I was initially puzzled by their link to Edinburgh live, until I actually clicked on it. It would appear that the company is Lothian Buses.

The Sentinel article repeats all the key "facts", but removes any reference to the location or the company involved.

So many 'local' sites are now part of one big media organisation that they commonly share stories, and editing details to make them more generic is a great trick to allowing a local, non-story, become a national big-story.

They are nice easy shareable stories by people who will use it to match their own personal beliefs and agendas.

The 'local' reporter might work on stories all over the UK.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing that puzzled me was why the Stoke Sentinel is getting so worked up about an incident that actually occured in Edinburgh. I was initially puzzled by their link to Edinburgh live, until I actually clicked on it. It would appear that the company is Lothian Buses.

The Sentinel article repeats all the key "facts", but removes any reference to the location or the company involved.

I believe the word is "clickbait". The Milton Keynes Citizen is terrible for reporting clickbait-style stories that didn't take place in or indeed anywhere near the South East, let alone MK itself.

The more clicks, the more advertising revenue they get.

 

[jon0844]

The Daily Mail now searches for a lot of 'local' stories like this, so don't be surprised to see this story (and others like it) sprout new legs in the national press, sometimes weeks or months later.

 

[mb88]

There’s almost always more to these kind of stories than what gets reported.

 

[Gloster]

Or it could be that this month’s campaign by the Stoke Sentinel is against the local buses. (Possibly because they are part of a large national company, not a local one that their readers would think cares about them, unlike the paper...) So an anti-bus company story, even if it has nothing to do with their area, is just another thing to use on the campaign.

 

[GusB]

Or it could be that this month’s campaign by the Stoke Sentinel is against the local buses. (Possibly because they are part of a large national company, not a local one that their readers would think cares about them, unlike the paper...) So an anti-bus company story, even if it has nothing to do with their area, is just another thing to use on the campaign.

I did wonder if any local bus companies in Stoke had received any negative feedback as a result of this, despite being wholly innocent of this "crime"!

 

[philthetube]

Public transport isn't a childcare service. If the child isn't mature enough to cope with the various challenges that might occur along the way without it bringing huge fear, then perhaps they're not old enough to use public transport alone and need to practice with an adult first. Shouting about this sort of thing too much is likely to result in bus companies applying a minimum age, which would be far worse. (GNER tried to do this at one point and had to backtrack). 10 is pretty borderline - some 10 year olds will be mature enough to cope, but many won't.

I'd say one exception - if this is a dedicated school service intended for primary-age children (i.e. tendered for that purpose) there should be a process in place to deal with this.

There is a definite problem with schoolkids falsifying passes e.g. as @jon0844 says by screenshotting them. So unfortunately operators do need to be a bit strict on this, and often do display signage accordingly.

You shouldn't be leaving a 15 your old girl alone in the dark either. The driver should be reporting this on and if it is happening regularly then the company should take action.

 

[Flange Squeal]

So many 'local' sites are now part of one big media organisation that they commonly share stories, and editing details to make them more generic is a great trick to allowing a local, non-story, become a national big-story.

They are nice easy shareable stories by people who will use it to match their own personal beliefs and agendas.

The 'local' reporter might work on stories all over the UK.

Exactly this. A lot of them are under the control of Reach PLC. Sometimes the recycled stories from hundreds of miles away will at least be edited with some tenuous link along the lines of '[Insert Name] starred as the rear half of a horse in a pantomime in [Insert Town] in 1997' to add some sort of reason why its worthy of being in the 'local' news. The websites are generally the same design, with the same positioned banners and pop-ups that make the page keep jumping up and down as you try and read them, before giving up as you can't tell what's a new paragraph, what's one you've read and what is an advert. Or they manage to make a story out of two actors apparently having a bitter feud, but when you read it it's actually a reference to their character's in a TV soap opera the previous night.

But I digress!

I notice the original story on the local Reach PLC site, Edinburgh Live, is only a couple of days older - published 1st Feb by a trainee reporter. It seems odd, given how traumatised the child was and angry the parents are, that they've gone to the papers after a nearly month long gap, and also the first the bus company has heard about it so quite possibly not complaint ever lodged? There's certainly no claim by the parents that they have lodged a complaint that received an unsatisfactory response, hence going to the paper, or no response at all.

 

[Mwanesh]

School kids should have passes with their faces on. I did school runs regularly and i knew each and every kid. If one was missing in the morning i would ask the others to check. There was always one who came running when it was past time to leave. Personally there should be dedicated school drivers

 

[LowLevel]

Public transport isn't a childcare service. If the child isn't mature enough to cope with the various challenges that might occur along the way without it bringing huge fear, then perhaps they're not old enough to use public transport alone and need to practice with an adult first. Shouting about this sort of thing too much is likely to result in bus companies applying a minimum age, which would be far worse. (GNER tried to do this at one point and had to backtrack). 10 is pretty borderline - some 10 year olds will be mature enough to cope, but many won't.

I'd say one exception - if this is a dedicated school service intended for primary-age children (i.e. tendered for that purpose) there should be a process in place to deal with this.

There is a definite problem with schoolkids falsifying passes e.g. as @jon0844 says by screenshotting them. So unfortunately operators do need to be a bit strict on this, and often do display signage accordingly.

Yes, schoolkids will be schoolkids and try and dodge, fiddle and sneak their way through the staff on any mode of transport.

However it is (in my case as a transport operator, albeit a train conductor rather than a bus driver) a written rule that you don't refuse entry to children unless they're being violent or aggressive, whether they have the fare or not. If they're regular offenders it is easy enough to take up the matter with the school (or as has been seen many times before, the operator may choose to make a point by withdrawing the bus for a bit).

We get regular emails from our managers reminding us that the company considers anyone up to the age of 18 to be potentially vulnerable and not generally subject to removal.

 

[Robertj21a]

School kids should have passes with their faces on. I did school runs regularly and i knew each and every kid. If one was missing in the morning i would ask the others to check. There was always one who came running when it was past time to leave. Personally there should be dedicated school drivers

Many contracted school runs already use a regular driver for each run where possible. Commercial services may well be a problem.

 

[Busaholic]

Yes, schoolkids will be schoolkids and try and dodge, fiddle and sneak their way through the staff on any mode of transport.

However it is (in my case as a transport operator, albeit a train conductor rather than a bus driver) a written rule that you don't refuse entry to children unless they're being violent or aggressive, whether they have the fare or not. If they're regular offenders it is easy enough to take up the matter with the school (or as has been seen many times before, the operator may choose to make a point by withdrawing the bus for a bit).

We get regular emails from our managers reminding us that the company considers anyone up to the age of 18 to be potentially vulnerable and not generally subject to removal.

Even if it wasn't a written rule the driver, or whoever is responsible for the decision, should err on the side of caution in those circumstances. A 'jobsworth' attitude is entirely inappropriate.

 

[Typhoon]

A couple of things about this. Firstly, Mrs Paskeviciene and any other parent should tell their child to return to the school (I am assuming it is nearby), initially for reassurance. A teacher might be prepared to lend them the money, certainly write a note (possibly to the next driver, but also to the parent), possibly find when the next bus was. Provided it was genuine, the pupil has nothing to lose.

I'm not sure I understand " her daughter was not allowed on the bus because her pass did not work". Presumably that means one of two things - the card is not valid (say damaged) or there is no credit. Hopefully, someone will have checked the former. Did it 'work' next day? If not, they can be replaced (according to the Lothian website). As there would be money on the card, it is worth doing. If there was no credit, how did the girl get to school in the morning? The bus route appears to be the 34 - every 20 minutes - so why did she have to wait 40 minutes. (If the following bus hadn't allowed her on then it is unlikely to be the machine at fault).

There is also "The first alleged incident happened on January 6 when schools had just gone back after the Christmas break, reported EdinburghLive." First? An alternative telling of the story occurs at
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-livid-frightened-girl-10-26124810 and includes

"I couldn't believe a driver would act like that to a little girl then it happened again. She got a new bus card the free Young Scot one, it worked in the morning on the bus but again when she was trying to get on the 34 after school, she tapped her card and it didn't work. The driver said, 'your card doesn't work, you aren't coming on' my daughter called me crying, and is now afraid to catch the bus to school.

Young Scot appears to be a scheme that started last Monday. I struggle to see how it 'worked' in the morning and not in the evening. Did the driver look at the card? Where I am in Kent, they sometimes do and if it looks OK they let them on but it can only be 3 days old. (Mirror story dated 03:53 on 3rd Feb).

I suspect we have no more than half the story in the Stoke Sentinel (they have filled the empty space, why bother with more), maybe three-quarters in the Mirror. Even together there are too many 'but...'s here, something does not seem right.

 

[M803UYA]

Yes, schoolkids will be schoolkids and try and dodge, fiddle and sneak their way through the staff on any mode of transport.

However it is (in my case as a transport operator, albeit a train conductor rather than a bus driver) a written rule that you don't refuse entry to children unless they're being violent or aggressive, whether they have the fare or not. If they're regular offenders it is easy enough to take up the matter with the school (or as has been seen many times before, the operator may choose to make a point by withdrawing the bus for a bit).

We get regular emails from our managers reminding us that the company considers anyone up to the age of 18 to be potentially vulnerable and not generally subject to removal.

In most of the operators I've worked the policy is simply to let children travel and never to refuse entry. You would get them to fill out a form which had name and address details and the company would deal with it after the event. It was never dumped on the driver to refuse travel.
In the case of one operator the position was 'we're not having the negative publicity from refusing children travel, just let them on'. It was clearly stated in the drivers' fare book that this was policy. On a public bus service, that's the safest course of action.
The only situation I'd entertain refusing a child travel would be in the afternoon, on school grounds on a closed door contract where it was enforced policy for all passes to be shown. There would then be a teacher on duty to resolve the issue. On any morning run, you'd simply take them in.
Devon County as far as I'm aware are the only council who strictly enforce a no pass, no travel policy.
But that's made clear to all parents before their children start using contracted vehicles that passes must be presented on boarding.

 

[GusB]

The consensus seems to be that drivers would not deny travel, unless the circumstances were exceptional. As we only have one side of the story and it's highly unlikely that we'll ever get the driver's point of view, I'll draw the thread to a close.

Thanks for keeping it civil (unlike some of the comments on the articles peddled by "ClickbaitLive"!) If any further information comes to light regarding this situation, please let us know by reporting this post and we can consider reopening.