Oyster & London Buses Turning Short

[Temple Meads]

Been pondering this since an experience a while back:

If a London bus is stopped short of its intended destination do you have to tap in your oyster again on the next bus (thereby meaning you pay twice for the inconvenience), or is there some kind of easement?

I've heard of some kind of voucher being issued.. if so, how good is driver knowledge of these?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Hophead]

It's only happened to me once (but I'm sure others have it regularly). The driver had no hesitation in issuing the continuation ticket (not sure of the exact name). I don't recall I-bus telling me to get the ticket (but I can't really remember with any certainty). You just show this to the driver of the second bus, in lieu of a tap-in.

As it happened, I'd already hit the daily cap, but wasn't aware of that till I got home and checked my account.

 

[Busaholic]

Been pondering this since an experience a while back:

If a London bus is stopped short of its intended destination do you have to tap in your oyster again on the next bus (thereby meaning you pay twice for the inconvenience), or is there some kind of easement?

I've heard of some kind of voucher being issued.. if so, how good is driver knowledge of these?

Thanks in advance.

I can't speak from personal experience as my travel on London buses costs me nothing (one of the few advantages of old age) but you SHOULD be able to get some sort of ticket from the driver to use on a following bus. TfL like to keep this under wraps (I have just been through all 48 pages of their latest Conditions of Service dated 11th Jan and there is no mention of it anywhere). In practice, I'd imagine a lot depends on the individual driver. The last time I was on a bus that got curtailed it was only about three stops from the terminus, and I was going to change to another bus anyway which I was still able to do, and I didn't see anyone asking the driver for such a ticket, but I'm sure it's not very well-known about. Anyway, in short you don't have to pay again IN THEORY: perhaps I should add that if the bus started its journey with the short-turn destination showing, then I believe you would have to pay again.

 

[Bishopstone]

I believe it's called a transfer ticket in official parlance. In my experience never offered proactively, but always issued without fuss upon request.

 

[EM2]

I believe it's called a transfer ticket in official parlance. In my experience never offered proactively, but always issued without fuss upon request.

Not in my experience, in the one instance it was required. The driver absolutely flatly refused to issue transfer tickets, and I had to get a form from the information desk at Walthamstow Central to claim a refund.

 

[Robertj21a]

Not in my experience, in the one instance it was required. The driver absolutely flatly refused to issue transfer tickets, and I had to get a form from the information desk at Walthamstow Central to claim a refund.

A transfer ticket should be issued by the driver if the bus is turned short after you got on - they're usually less than enthusiastic about it.

 

[Busaholic]

A transfer ticket should be issued by the driver if the bus is turned short after you got on - they're usually less than enthusiastic about it.

This is one of the unintentional consequences of drivers in London not engaging so much with passengers since the abolition of cash fares. The lazy or anti-social driver can't be arsed to issue a transfer ticket and then what happens? The age-old practice of visible running numbers on the side of buses, now unfortunately only perpetuated by a minority of operators, should be insisted upon by TfL so that passengers could report miscreants.

 

[Be3G]

'Round my part of the world we get loads of buses turning short. Not too much of a problem when the service is every few minutes, but more of a pain when it's the only route along a long road, the next bus isn't for half an hour, and the odds are it may well be cancelled as well owing to such a dire service…

…but I digress. The first thing to mention is that when the bus is given a new terminating point after it's begun its journey, a pre-recorded announcement will actually tell passengers who've used an Oyster/CPC to get a voucher, so I wouldn't quite agree with an earlier comment that TfL try to hide the facility.

However, I have found that drivers aren't always very helpful. It is indeed the case that one isn't entitled to a voucher if the bus is already showing as terminating short when boarding (although I feel this policy is unfair, because if you want to travel the whole route and aren't capped, you have to wait for another bus in goodness-knows-how-long). Yet I have had a case when a driver refused to issue me with a voucher despite the fact the bus was showing as running the whole route when boarding.

So to answer the OP, yes there is an ‘easement’, although it's not always easy.

 

[Busaholic]

…but I digress. The first thing to mention is that when the bus is given a new terminating point after it's begun its journey, a pre-recorded announcement will actually tell passengers who've used an Oyster/CPC to get a voucher, so I wouldn't quite agree with an earlier comment that TfL try to hide the facility.

.

I don't have enough recent experience of travelling on London buses to know how widespread this is. I can only say that on about four buses I've been on over the last couple of years where a short turn has been announced there has been no mention of getting a voucher. On the last occasion, last month, the announcement did mention 'seeing the driver' or words to that effect. The trouble is that the automated information system doesn't cope well with such terminations. From 'this is a 417 to Clapham Common' intoned once per stop the destination of the bus is no longer mentioned after the 'the destination of this bus has altered' dread message has been uttered. It doesn't say where it's been altered to - Las Vegas? The old pre-tech system where the driver came on his microphone to say 'this bus is now terminating at Wormwood Scrubs' did at least give everyone an immediate idea of what was happening. Given the importance of i-bus to visually impaired passengers, it is more than a minor failing.

 

[Temple Meads]

Thanks for the replies, pretty much confirmed what I thought, but good to hear that some people have had the vouchers issued.

 

[thebigcheese]

Perhaps this is the cynic in me but I do wonder how official some stopping short buses are? Does the driver just want a longer lunch? I suspect the the issuing of transfer vouchers is the only way this is registered on the system hence the reluctance to issue them occasionally. But hey that's just me being a cynic.

 

[Busaholic]

Perhaps this is the cynic in me but I do wonder how official some stopping short buses are? Does the driver just want a longer lunch? I suspect the the issuing of transfer vouchers is the only way this is registered on the system hence the reluctance to issue them occasionally. But hey that's just me being a cynic.

I think this could be a can of worms! Assuming that the order has come from 'on high' how high has it come from, and why? I believe that ordinarily (i.e. excluding things like terrorist actions) it is the control room of the bus operator that issues these instructions. Does such information get imparted to TfL's bus division? I've no idea: I suspect it should do so, but if, say, an operator was a year or three into its contract on a particular route and was aware there were issues/concerns about its performance, might there not be a temptation to sidestep processes to skew punctuality targets? I've no idea, but, if such a scenario is feasible, doubtless someone somewhere will be exploiting it.

I do know that waiting at a bus stop equipped with real-time information buses can appear on there that never actually materialise.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Perhaps this is the cynic in me but I do wonder how official some stopping short buses are? Does the driver just want a longer lunch? I suspect the the issuing of transfer vouchers is the only way this is registered on the system hence the reluctance to issue them occasionally. But hey that's just me being a cynic.

Surely based on GPS and the live info etc then a bus stopping early would be pretty obvious to control and the higher ups? I don't see how it is something you can hide tbh. Not anymore anyway.

 

[PermitToTravel]

If iBus announces that the destination has changed but then doesn't make further announcements, it's because the driver has, rather than pressing the button to acknowledge the change, just shut the thing up

There's nothing to stop a driver from issuing transfer tickets if not curtailed, though. I was proactively offered one before while the driver waited for a while on a high frequency route for the police to remove a fare evader. This would suggest that their use isn't monitored too closely, so if a driver were trying to sneak a larger lunch break in it would probably be in their interest to issue such tickets to avoid complaints.

 

[Feathers44]

I've only done this once in the last two or three years. I don't remember an announcement about 'seeing the driver' but the voucher was issued with no questions asked.

 

[AB93]

I believe that ordinarily (i.e. excluding things like terrorist actions) it is the control room of the bus operator that issues these instructions. Does such information get imparted to TfL's bus division? I've no idea: I suspect it should do so, but if, say, an operator was a year or three into its contract on a particular route and was aware there were issues/concerns about its performance, might there not be a temptation to sidestep processes to skew punctuality targets?

Don't forget it's the punctuality targets that TfL monitor chiefly - this is what is linked to the bonus/penalty payments for the operators.

Curtailing buses is all about meeting those targets, by turning short, you can get the bus back on time to meet its next 'target' point. Obviously, sod the passengers - but that's how it works in London. TfL is the operators' master, not the passenger.

 

[plcd1]

TfL issue the "Big Red Book" to bus drivers. This sets out what is expected of them in a range of situations including bus breakdowns / curtailments.

Big Red Book download pdf

See page 31 of the document / page 16 of the pdf which is where the quote below is from.

3. Issue a transfer voucher to each passenger who used Oyster pay as you go or a contactless payment card and needs to transfer to another bus. Remind those passengers not to touch in on the next bus.

Although I've never had to request a transfer ticket I agree with the various comments that real life experience is highly variable. Some drivers are excellent, others deny they exist and I've seen passengers have to go into a complete strop in order to get one issued. That really should not be necessary.

In terms of curtailing buses there are a load of reasons why it can happen - accidents, road works, delays to the service, need to get the driver off duty for a break or to remain within their hours, planned events, emergencies.

Ordinarily it is the operator's "I-Bus" room and the route controller that will intervene. All of the instructions are tracked via the I-Bus system. Drivers should change the vehicle status when they go oos due to a curtailment. This removes the bus from displays to the passengers at stops / on their phones. It also shows the bus is not in service.

TfL use I-Bus data to determine the payments to operators. Previously it was done on a sample basis with people standing on street corners at defined points watching what was happening and entering each bus that went past and at what time. I-Bus gives a close to 100% sample over multiple points along every route every day of the week and at night. Clearly there are all sorts of things that can go wrong with the data, equipment etc so no one is saying it is perfect. I expect operators challenge the calculations and will provide evidence, for example, if a bus has run but its I-Bus kit is defective. It is not unusual for buses to "disappear" if drivers haven't logged on properly or the ETM goes wrong.

In certain circumstances Centrecomm (TfL's network control centre) can override the operator's control room and instruct buses to divert or curtail. This will usually be because of a major incident or severe accident where they can see via CCTV what is going on or the emergency services have asked that buses don't come into an area.

 

[Romilly]

I have never had a problem getting a transfer ticket when I have had to ask for one.

And on the 53 bus, which is being turned round at Lambeth North instead of Whitehall for about a year (except between about midnight and 5am), it is policy to issue transfer tickets to anyone travelling to Lambeth North on a 53 so that they can continue their journey into central London (but no similar easement for passengers travelling to Lambeth North from central London in order to pick up a Plumstead-bound 53).

 

[Be3G]

Don't forget it's the punctuality targets that TfL monitor chiefly - this is what is linked to the bonus/penalty payments for the operators.

TfL also measure (and I therefore assume, judge operators on) miles operated too. That would obviously show up any regular curtailment-related issues.

 

[Antman]

This is one of the unintentional consequences of drivers in London not engaging so much with passengers since the abolition of cash fares. The lazy or anti-social driver can't be arsed to issue a transfer ticket and then what happens? The age-old practice of visible running numbers on the side of buses, now unfortunately only perpetuated by a minority of operators, should be insisted upon by TfL so that passengers could report miscreants.

That's it exactly, it all comes down to the attitude of the driver. Some are only too happy to assist passengers whilst some just can't be bothered. Passengers can of course take the registration number to report such instances although whether anything will actually be done about it is another matter.

 

[Goldfish62]

Don't forget it's the punctuality targets that TfL monitor chiefly - this is what is linked to the bonus/penalty payments for the operators.

Curtailing buses is all about meeting those targets, by turning short, you can get the bus back on time to meet its next 'target' point. Obviously, sod the passengers - but that's how it works in London. TfL is the operators' master, not the passenger.

I don't think that is fair. Curtailments have always been part of service control in London. I can assure you that chaos would ensue if every bus was required to operate the full route irrespective of how ever severe delay were.

iBus automatically records each bus and curtailing a bus causes a gap which ultimately adversely affects the performance of a route, so it's a balance. Maybe one of the operators could let you see one of their iBus control rooms in action. I think you'd find it illuminating.

 

[Antman]

I don't think that is fair. Curtailments have always been part of service control in London. I can assure you that chaos would ensue if every bus was required to operate the full route irrespective of how ever severe delay were.

iBus automatically records each bus and curtailing a bus causes a gap which ultimately adversely affects the performance of a route, so it's a balance. Maybe one of the operators could let you see one of their iBus control rooms in action. I think you'd find it illuminating.

And curtailments have become far more commonplace since i-bus was introduced, you might argue that it helps run a more efficient service but that is likely to be little consolation to passengers who have been turfed off and left at the roadside.

I think some controllers might find it 'illuminating' to be turfed off a night bus in the small hours in a dodgy part of London. Some drivers, to their credit, care about the safety of their passengers and refuse to accept turns in such circumstances and obviously risk ending up on a disciplinary as a result.

 

[mark-h]

Could iBus be linked to the Oyster/contactless system to allow customers a free transfer if the bus they are on is turned short?

 

[Feathers44]

Could iBus be linked to the Oyster/contactless system to allow customers a free transfer if the bus they are on is turned short?

I guess that may be easier once Oyster enters the back office world.

I've only been on one bus where the cancellation came through (X26 to Croydon in the middle of Sutton) and the driver overrode it and announced he was carrying on to the end of the route regardless of what Control wanted. It was a very packed bus.

 

[Busaholic]

Surely based on GPS and the live info etc then a bus stopping early would be pretty obvious to control and the higher ups? I don't see how it is something you can hide tbh. Not anymore anyway.

But which control? TfL or the bus company running the route? I genuinely don't know and would like to know. As with CCTV, it may be all on there but if nobody's monitoring it means s"d all.

 

[Robertj21a]

I don't think that is fair. Curtailments have always been part of service control in London. I can assure you that chaos would ensue if every bus was required to operate the full route irrespective of how ever severe delay were.

iBus automatically records each bus and curtailing a bus causes a gap which ultimately adversely affects the performance of a route, so it's a balance. Maybe one of the operators could let you see one of their iBus control rooms in action. I think you'd find it illuminating.

But there's much more short turning now than there used to be, I've been turfed off with annoying regularity. It now seems too skewed in favour of the operators/TfL/costs rather than the passenger who just want to get where he thought he was going when he got on.

 

[Antman]

I guess that may be easier once Oyster enters the back office world.

I've only been on one bus where the cancellation came through (X26 to Croydon in the middle of Sutton) and the driver overrode it and announced he was carrying on to the end of the route regardless of what Control wanted. It was a very packed bus.

Well done to that driver!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But there's much more short turning now than there used to be, I've been turfed off with annoying regularity. It now seems too skewed in favour of the operators/TfL/costs rather than the passenger who just want to get where he thought he was going when he got on.

Exactly the passenger is treated with total contempt despite TfL's 'every journey matters' slogan.

In most cases problems should be foreseen long before they happen and remedial action taken rather than turfing everyone off mid journey.

 

[Goldfish62]

But which control? TfL or the bus company running the route? I genuinely don't know and would like to know. As with CCTV, it may be all on there but if nobody's monitoring it means s"d all.

TfL doesn't control they buses, the operators do. TfL supplies the standard equipment in the operators' control rooms which shows the location of each bus. The control rooms are manned throughout the day by controllers whose job it is to regulate the service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well done to that driver!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Exactly the passenger is treated with total contempt despite TfL's 'every journey matters' slogan.

In most cases problems should be foreseen long before they happen and remedial action taken rather than turfing everyone off mid journey.

Well, if you know the answer why don't you contact your local operators and tell them how it's done.

I certainly agree that the amount of curtailment currently taking place is not in the passengers interest but it also won't have escaped anyone's attention the unprecedented current levels of traffic congestion. Operators are missing their performance targets, TfL is missing its own network performance targets. No one is winning. It is what becomes of having a mayor who does not belive in road hierarchy and removes capacity by building segregated cycleways.

 

[Antman]

TfL doesn't control they buses, the operators do. TfL supplies the standard equipment in the operators' control rooms which shows the location of each bus. The control rooms are manned throughout the day by controllers whose job it is to regulate the service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Well, if you know the answer why don't you contact your local operators and tell them how it's done.

I certainly agree that the amount of curtailment currently taking place is not in the passengers interest but it also won't have escaped anyone's attention the unprecedented current levels of traffic congestion. Operators are missing their performance targets, TfL is missing its own network performance targets. No one is winning. It is what becomes of having a mayor who does not belive in road hierarchy and removes capacity by building segregated cycleways.

Well imagine what the congestion would be like if all these cyclists left their bikes at home and decided to use the car instead!

I think it's great that the mayor is doing something positive to encourage cycling.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It is what becomes of having a mayor who does not belive in road hierarchy and removes capacity by building segregated cycleways.

Encouraging cycling for short journeys is an excellent way of reducing congestion. The work around Bow will do wonders, even if the roadworks are a nuisance whilst the infrastructure is being built. The trials of the secluded back streets around UCL and Bloomsbury are a great example of this.

The issue is mid-journey curtailments. If a bus starts its journey as a short working that's fine, everyone knows where they are. I think a lot of the mid-journey curtailments are avoidable.