On 26/11/2012 11:12, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:07:37 on Mon, 26
Nov 2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
I don't mind debating, but only about the words I put in my mouth, not
the ones you do.

It is what you do to others.

Even if I did (which I dispute - the problems I have with your postings
are they are often vague and ambiguous, leading to misunderstandings)
then two wrongs don't make a right.

Nothing vague or ambiguous about the facts of operating a rail
replacement bus service and the contractual restrictions thereof.

What particular words are you saying I put into mouths in this thread?

The ludicrous claim that various people were stating that alighting in
an unlit country lane, muddy verges, optional, was safer than at a well
lit bus stop in a random high street.


And if you will trim posts to the point that all context is lost then
I can't be bothered to trace back through the thread(s) to find what
the devil you are rabbiting on about this time.

The legality of non-buses stopping at bus stops.

Not legal, end of discussion.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail