"Michael R N Dolbear" wrote in message
news:01c5d767$ac7550a0$LocalHost@default...

Paul Corfield wrote
[...]

I don't think anyone asserts that there is or has ever been an act of
parliament requiring change to be given,

That would be because there isn't one.

Case law has established that there is *no* requirement to give
change to money proffered for payment of a debt (the case in
question was a taxi fare). But commercial realisties are such that
change usually has to be offered when a customer is 'negotiating'
payment before purchase.
Of course bus drivers don't (usually) live the commercial
world and it is of no concern to them that the pax's choices are
no change or walk.

though ISTR an assertion that
one ? railway comapny before WW1 had notices "booking clerks are
neither required to provide change nor authorised to refuse".

A workable rule might be that drivers could accept cheques

doesn't sound very workable to me. The bus waits whilst
someone writes out a cheque.

if they had
no change for the next note up or otherwise give a receipt for
reimbursement by post . Foreigners and those who have no bank accounts
would still be stuck however.

And those who don't habitually walk around with their cheque
book, I suspect this is the majority in this era of debit cards.

tim