"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 13:59:40
on Fri, 23 Nov 2012, Portsmouth Rider
remarked:

In short: the rail replacement service is NOT a Local Bus Service and does
not operate under the licences issued by the Traffic Commissioners as a
Local Bus Service, and a driver who takes it upon himself to provide such
a service without lawful excuse is breaking the law.

That's a new excuse. Up to now I'd been trying to debunk the concept that
their insurance would be invalid because they were dropping people off at
highly dangerous bus stops that apparently only regular buses can safely
drop people at. Or that stopping to do so will trash their schedule.

As for running a faux-local-bus-service, I doubt if anyone on such buses
wants to be there. They'd rather be on the train that was cancelled.

It's ridiculous to expect someone might be hovering at the railway station
on the off-chance of a bustitution that might go past their house.
--
Roland Perry

It seems to me that you have missed the point (as well as your stop).

The passengers, as explained upthread, are on the bus by virtue of being
rail passengers whose train is not running. The faux-bus-service, as you put
it, is the bit where the driver is expected to make irregular stops to set
down some of those passengers who are unable to plan their journey from
their destination station, to their home, adequately. I don't think anyone
has countenanced the possibility of someone hovering at the railway
station on the off-chance of a bustitution that might go past their house.

You have had the law stated to you; you have had other factors, as to why
the bus should not drop people off as and when they wish, stated to you as
well. These reasons are not mutually exclusive.

If you buy a ticket to X railway station, you get conveyed to X railway
station. What next..... a demand for a refund because your journey was
actually shorter???