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?

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.

But it's been a bit confusing because different people have been giving
different reasons for the non-stopping of rail replacement buses at bus
stops; ranging from competition with local buses, to lack of a safety
case for getting off a bus at a bus stop, to delaying the journey, to
delaying the journey of a service bus right behind, to the contract
being A-B (both of them stations only) for both the bus driver and the
passenger, to it being illegal for them to stop at bus stops at all.

Whacking all those moles (each of them has a good answer) is bound to
give some of us a headache.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at
09:29:26 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Portsmouth Rider
remarked:

I KNOW (and I rather suspect you do, too) that the MUST NOT is
qualified by the concept of "except in an emergency" - and it is THAT
qualified requirement that I was (and still am, since you have declined
to answer it) questioning on how loosely you interpret "emergency" if
it can be defined to suit YOU.

Oh, I see. The goalposts are moving a bit fast for me this time of the
morning. If you want to start a debate about "what is an emergency", and
my interpretation of that (rather than the "Do Not" paragraphs of the
HC, which is what I was taking about) then go ahead.

My own definition is "car has broken down/struck an object in the road
etc, or the road has become impassable; (so as to reach an emergency
phone). And for completeness - if instructed by emergency services".
Even then, I'd be very wary of walking *along* a motorway, rather than
away from it.
--
Roland Perry

In message
.
net, at 10:24:29 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Neil Williams
remarked:
work from station forecourts, which presumably means they can stop
wherever they like. But not always; the frequent ones at Nottingham station
line up in the taxi rank over-flow down the side of the station.

I wonder how legal that is? (The signs say "No Waiting, except Taxis",
and those buses are definitely waiting, rather than stopping.)

Is the forecourt private land?

Yes, but at Nottingham they don't use the forecourt (the entrances and
exits are a bit tight, as well as being full of cars and taxis all the
time). They wait in the overflow taxi-rank down the side of the station.
Which is an ordinary public road.

If so its owners have the right to waive or change the restrictions if
they wish.

They can't waive no-waiting zones on public roads.
--
Roland Perry

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

In message , at 11:33:40 on Mon, 26 Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
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.

That's my response to a claim that the muddy verge has been approved as
a drop-off point whereas the bus stop hasn't. I'm glad you agree with me
that the bus stop is in practice safer (even if the lack of formal
approval by the ToC's inspector brings other potential issues).

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.

You said "the RRS bus is not authorised to use them", and someone else
then says the Highway Code prohibits unauthorised users stopping at bus
stops.

But I agree with you that it's not a "legal" [MUST NOT] prohibition,
unless we go with your comment about it invalidating the bus's
insurance, meaning it's operating without insurance and therefore
illegally.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
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?

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.

But it's been a bit confusing because different people have been giving
different reasons for the non-stopping of rail replacement buses at bus
stops; ranging from competition with local buses, to lack of a safety case
for getting off a bus at a bus stop, to delaying the journey, to delaying
the journey of a service bus right behind, to the contract being A-B (both
of them stations only) for both the bus driver and the passenger, to it
being illegal for them to stop at bus stops at all.

Whacking all those moles (each of them has a good answer) is bound to give
some of us a headache.
--
Roland Perry

I don't suppose it has occurred to you that there is more than one single
reason why you cannot alight from a RSS other than at a place designated by
the contract? Hint: The contract is drawn up in accordance with other rules.

Whack your moles as much as you like. You still are not getting off at the
end of your road!

(Now answer the other post. )

On 26/11/2012 11:47, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:33:40 on Mon, 26 Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:
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.

That's my response to a claim that the muddy verge has been approved as
a drop-off point whereas the bus stop hasn't. I'm glad you agree with me
that the bus stop is in practice safer (even if the lack of formal
approval by the ToC's inspector brings other potential issues).

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.

You said "the RRS bus is not authorised to use them", and someone else
then says the Highway Code prohibits unauthorised users stopping at bus
stops.

I make a point of never quoting the Highway Code.


But I agree with you that it's not a "legal" [MUST NOT] prohibition,
unless we go with your comment about it invalidating the bus's
insurance, meaning it's operating without insurance and therefore
illegally.

IANAL but I suspect that would be the case.

Anecdote time. I was on a tram in Brussels stopped in a traffic queue
and a passenger pursuaded the driver to let him off only to step
straight into the path of a car passing on the inside being in a
right-turn lane that had got the green light. The hazards of letting
people off willy nilly are real.

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

In message , at 12:34:02 on Mon, 26 Nov
2012, Graeme Wall remarked:

Anecdote time. I was on a tram in Brussels stopped in a traffic queue
and a passenger pursuaded the driver to let him off only to step
straight into the path of a car passing on the inside being in a
right-turn lane that had got the green light. The hazards of letting
people off willy nilly are real.

Agreed, which is why I suggested using only existing bus stops (or even
a subset of them).

--
Roland Perry

In message , at
12:27:59 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Portsmouth Rider
remarked:

I don't suppose it has occurred to you that there is more than one single
reason why you cannot alight from a RSS other than at a place designated by
the contract? Hint: The contract is drawn up in accordance with other rules.

Quite possibly, but all the rules/reasons can be addressed individually,
until common sense prevails.

Whack your moles as much as you like. You still are not getting off at the
end of your road!

At the bus stop that's at the end of my road. Sorry if that wasn't
sufficiently clear.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
12:27:59 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Portsmouth Rider
remarked:

I don't suppose it has occurred to you that there is more than one single
reason why you cannot alight from a RSS other than at a place
designated by
the contract? Hint: The contract is drawn up in accordance with other
rules.

Quite possibly, but all the rules/reasons can be addressed individually,
until common sense prevails.

Your version being common sense in your opinion, but not in the opinion
of anyone actually involved in running these services.

The rules are the rules, and are not, in general, negotiable.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.