Grrr. Dealing with London Buses call centre is giving me a headache.
Over such an easy thing too, but I feel like I am banging my head
against a brick wall. I'm posting the conversations here mainly as
therapy.

Basically, there was a burst water main on a bus route near my house.
All the traffic, and four bus routes (2, 196, 432 and 468) were
diverted along the road I live on. This road is normally served by
just one route (417). Every 15 minutes (Officially a higher
frequency...!).

The road is currently choked with traffic due to the diversions, so my
usual bus is subject to severe delays.
The good news is that London Buses website said that because of the
diversion 'drivers have been asked to observe bus stops on the
diversionary route'. 'Drivers have been asked...' is such a vague
statement, because in reality drivers have NOT observed the stops. So
not only is my journey to work taking longer because of the extra
traffic, I now have four buses whizzing past which could have picked
up passengers.

So, I decided to call London Buses to enquire as to what was actually
happening.

1st call.
ME: 'I'm calling about the diversions to route 468 '
LB: 'Yes, there are diversions. What road are you on?'
ME: 'xxx xxx Road'
LB: 'Route 468doesn't go along that road.'
ME: 'But it's on diversion, because two of them have just gone past'
LB: 'Your road is served by route 417 and that's not diverted'.
ME: 'I'm not calling about that route I am calling because the
diverted buses aren't stopping on my road and London Buses website
says...'
LB: 'No mate, diverted buses don't stop'
ME: 'But your website says they will stop.'
LB: 'All I can do is put you through to complaints'.

The phrase 'All I can do' should be banned!

London Buses Complaints kind of understood the problem, and said that
they would contact the garages to tell them to stop.

Of course, that didn't happen.

2nd call, two days later.

ME: 'I'm waiting for a 468 bus'
LB: 'That's been diverted'
ME: 'I know. It's just driven past my stop'
LB: 'Where are you?'
ME: 'XXX Road'
LB: 'That's bus route 417 and that's not diverted'
ME: 'I know that. But London Buses website said that route 468 would
stop on the diversion. It's just that there is now so much traffic on
this road it's taking me longer to travel, and it's annoying when
these empty buses go past, when your website says that they should
stop'
LB: 'What road are you on now?'
ME: 'xxx Road. It's parallel to the original route.'
LB: 'I don't know that part of London. All I can do is put you
throught to London Buses Customer Services where you can make a
complaint'.
ME: 'I spoke to them already'.
LB: 'Well that's all I can do'

'All I can do...' again!

Four days later, buses are still diverted and still driving by without
stopping. (One driver at least shrugged his shoulders at me...)

ME: 'I'm calling about your website. It says that bus route 468 should
pick up passengers on diversion'.
LB: 'No, diverted buses don't pick up passengers.'
ME: 'But your website says they will in this case'
LB: 'Well you need to speak to London Buses Customer Services then and
tell them'.
ME: 'Why can't you tell them?'
LB: 'It's your responsibility'
ME: 'How is it my responsibility?
LB: 'Because you've found incorrect information and it's your
responsibility to tell someone.'
ME: 'I'm telling you! Why can't you tell London Buses that an error
has been reported?
LB: 'That's not my responsibility'
ME: 'It's not mine either, I didn't put the information on the
website!'
LB: 'Neither did I. Goodbye'.

On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist
wrote:

Grrr. Dealing with London Buses call centre is giving me a headache.
Over such an easy thing too, but I feel like I am banging my head
against a brick wall. I'm posting the conversations here mainly as
therapy.

Basically, there was a burst water main on a bus route near my house.
All the traffic, and four bus routes (2, 196, 432 and 468) were
diverted along the road I live on. This road is normally served by
just one route (417). Every 15 minutes (Officially a higher
frequency...!).

The road is currently choked with traffic due to the diversions, so my
usual bus is subject to severe delays.
The good news is that London Buses website said that because of the
diversion 'drivers have been asked to observe bus stops on the
diversionary route'. 'Drivers have been asked...' is such a vague
statement, because in reality drivers have NOT observed the stops. So
not only is my journey to work taking longer because of the extra
traffic, I now have four buses whizzing past which could have picked
up passengers.

So, I decided to call London Buses to enquire as to what was actually
happening.

1st call.
ME: 'I'm calling about the diversions to route 468 '
LB: 'Yes, there are diversions. What road are you on?'
ME: 'xxx xxx Road'
LB: 'Route 468doesn't go along that road.'
ME: 'But it's on diversion, because two of them have just gone past'
LB: 'Your road is served by route 417 and that's not diverted'.
ME: 'I'm not calling about that route I am calling because the
diverted buses aren't stopping on my road and London Buses website
says...'
LB: 'No mate, diverted buses don't stop'
ME: 'But your website says they will stop.'
LB: 'All I can do is put you through to complaints'.

The phrase 'All I can do' should be banned!

London Buses Complaints kind of understood the problem, and said that
they would contact the garages to tell them to stop.

Of course, that didn't happen.

2nd call, two days later.

ME: 'I'm waiting for a 468 bus'
LB: 'That's been diverted'
ME: 'I know. It's just driven past my stop'
LB: 'Where are you?'
ME: 'XXX Road'
LB: 'That's bus route 417 and that's not diverted'
ME: 'I know that. But London Buses website said that route 468 would
stop on the diversion. It's just that there is now so much traffic on
this road it's taking me longer to travel, and it's annoying when
these empty buses go past, when your website says that they should
stop'
LB: 'What road are you on now?'
ME: 'xxx Road. It's parallel to the original route.'
LB: 'I don't know that part of London. All I can do is put you
throught to London Buses Customer Services where you can make a
complaint'.
ME: 'I spoke to them already'.
LB: 'Well that's all I can do'

'All I can do...' again!

Four days later, buses are still diverted and still driving by without
stopping. (One driver at least shrugged his shoulders at me...)

ME: 'I'm calling about your website. It says that bus route 468 should
pick up passengers on diversion'.
LB: 'No, diverted buses don't pick up passengers.'
ME: 'But your website says they will in this case'
LB: 'Well you need to speak to London Buses Customer Services then and
tell them'.
ME: 'Why can't you tell them?'
LB: 'It's your responsibility'
ME: 'How is it my responsibility?
LB: 'Because you've found incorrect information and it's your
responsibility to tell someone.'
ME: 'I'm telling you! Why can't you tell London Buses that an error
has been reported?
LB: 'That's not my responsibility'
ME: 'It's not mine either, I didn't put the information on the
website!'
LB: 'Neither did I. Goodbye'.

I've had something similar happen to me in the past. However there is an
important distinction with diversions. If a diversion is "unplanned" -
i.e. a burst water main or such like then buses on the diversion do NOT
stop.

If a diversion is implemented due to planned works such as water main
replacement then buses DO stop on the diversion. I had a row with
London Buses when buses would not stop on a planned diversion in my
area. In one instance I was held hostage on a bus that refused to let me
off until it regained its line of route. I immediately complained by
phone and then by letter to London Buses and Arriva. The problem is
that there is no proper process in place to ensure that drivers read and
acknowledge route change notices that are sent to garages. It was
particularly telling in my case that First and Stagecoach drivers dealt
with the diversion perfectly well and Arriva were completely hopeless.

It won't help you to know that each of your phone calls was almost
certainly to the London Buses Customer Services Centre. Your latter
discussion is utterly appalling - I would write or use the contact form
on the TfL website to formally complain. You should never had that
treatment nor should you have had to ring 4 times - the issue of the (I
assume) incorrect web information should have been dealt with
immediately. I'd even insist that your complaint is referred to Beverly
Hall who is the head of the Buses CSC. She'll make sure lessons are
learnt.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Feb 2, 12:39*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist





wrote:
Grrr. Dealing with London Buses call centre is giving me a headache.
Over such an easy thing too, but I feel like I am banging my head
against a brick wall. I'm posting the conversations here mainly as
therapy.

Basically, there was a burst water main on a bus route near my house.
All the traffic, and four bus routes (2, 196, 432 and 468) were
diverted along the road I live on. This road is normally served by
just one route (417). Every 15 minutes (Officially a higher
frequency...!).

The road is currently choked with traffic due to the diversions, so my
usual bus is subject to severe delays.
The good news is that London Buses website said that because of the
diversion 'drivers have been asked to observe bus stops on the
diversionary route'. 'Drivers have been asked...' is such a vague
statement, because in reality drivers have NOT observed the stops. So
not only is my journey to work taking longer because of the extra
traffic, I now have four buses whizzing past which could have picked
up passengers.

So, I decided to call London Buses to enquire as to what was actually
happening.

1st call.
ME: 'I'm calling about the diversions to route 468 '
LB: 'Yes, there are diversions. What road are you on?'
ME: 'xxx xxx Road'
LB: 'Route 468doesn't go along that road.'
ME: 'But it's on diversion, because two of them have just gone past'
LB: 'Your road is served by route 417 and that's not diverted'.
ME: 'I'm not calling about that route I am calling because the
diverted buses aren't stopping on my road and London Buses website
says...'
LB: 'No mate, diverted buses don't stop'
ME: 'But your website says they will stop.'
LB: 'All I can do is put you through to complaints'.

The phrase 'All I can do' should be banned!

London Buses Complaints kind of understood the problem, and said that
they would contact the garages to tell them to stop.

Of course, that didn't happen.

2nd call, two days later.

ME: 'I'm waiting for a 468 bus'
LB: 'That's been diverted'
ME: 'I know. It's just driven past my stop'
LB: 'Where are you?'
ME: 'XXX Road'
LB: 'That's bus route 417 and that's not diverted'
ME: 'I know that. But London Buses website said that route 468 would
stop on the diversion. It's just that there is now so much traffic on
this road it's taking me longer to travel, and it's annoying when
these empty buses go past, when your website says that they should
stop'
LB: 'What road are you on now?'
ME: 'xxx Road. It's parallel to the original route.'
LB: 'I don't know that part of London. All I can do is put you
throught to London Buses Customer Services where you can make a
complaint'.
ME: 'I spoke to them already'.
LB: 'Well that's all I can do'

'All I can do...' again!

Four days later, buses are still diverted and still driving by without
stopping. (One driver at least shrugged his shoulders at me...)

ME: 'I'm calling about your website. It says that bus route 468 should
pick up passengers on diversion'.
LB: 'No, diverted buses don't pick up passengers.'
ME: 'But your website says they will in this case'
LB: 'Well you need to speak to London Buses Customer Services then and
tell them'.
ME: 'Why can't you tell them?'
LB: 'It's your responsibility'
ME: 'How is it my responsibility?
LB: 'Because you've found incorrect information and it's your
responsibility to tell someone.'
ME: 'I'm telling you! Why can't you tell London Buses that an error
has been reported?
LB: 'That's not my responsibility'
ME: 'It's not mine either, I didn't put the information on the
website!'
LB: 'Neither did I. Goodbye'.

I've had something similar happen to me in the past. However there is an
important distinction with diversions. If a diversion is "unplanned" -
i.e. a burst water main or such like then buses on the diversion do NOT
stop.

I don't understand the principle behind this. It seems to be based on
the assumption that passengers are familiar with every inch of the
whole length of their usual bus route but are not familiar with roads
near their home that are not on the bus route.

If I see that I am in a familiar road, near home, parallel to my usual
bus route, why must I and my heavy shopping be taken miles to an area
that I am not familiar with, with no way of getting home, just because
the diversion happens to rejoin some distant part of my bus route
there?

It's verging on abduction, and it's happened to me in the past.

On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 05:30:58 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote:

On Feb 2, 12:39*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist
[snip]
I've had something similar happen to me in the past. However there is an
important distinction with diversions. If a diversion is "unplanned" -
i.e. a burst water main or such like then buses on the diversion do NOT
stop.

I don't understand the principle behind this. It seems to be based on
the assumption that passengers are familiar with every inch of the
whole length of their usual bus route but are not familiar with roads
near their home that are not on the bus route.

If I see that I am in a familiar road, near home, parallel to my usual
bus route, why must I and my heavy shopping be taken miles to an area
that I am not familiar with, with no way of getting home, just because
the diversion happens to rejoin some distant part of my bus route
there?

It's verging on abduction, and it's happened to me in the past.

I agree with your concerns but I'm not here to defend London Buses or
their policies. I'm sure there are reasons for the difference in
approach but I don't know what they are.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On 2 Feb, 20:01, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 05:30:58 -0800 (PST), MIG







wrote:
On Feb 2, 12:39*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist
[snip]
I've had something similar happen to me in the past. However there is an
important distinction with diversions. If a diversion is "unplanned" -
i.e. a burst water main or such like then buses on the diversion do NOT
stop.

I don't understand the principle behind this. *It seems to be based on
the assumption that passengers are familiar with every inch of the
whole length of their usual bus route but are not familiar with roads
near their home that are not on the bus route.

If I see that I am in a familiar road, near home, parallel to my usual
bus route, why must I and my heavy shopping be taken miles to an area
that I am not familiar with, with no way of getting home, just because
the diversion happens to rejoin some distant part of my bus route
there?

It's verging on abduction, and it's happened to me in the past.

I agree with your concerns but I'm not here to defend London Buses or
their policies. I'm sure there are reasons for the difference in
approach but I don't know what they are.
--
Paul C

Admits to working for London Underground!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks Paul C for your helpful comments - to add insult to injury
London Buses have removed all information about the diversions from
their website, so one would assume the diversion has ended. Except it
hasn't. Five buses passed me this morning between 5.41 and 6.02, while
I waited for my usual service to trundle along...!

Brr.. it was cold too.

On 3 Feb, 09:48, Railist wrote:
On 2 Feb, 20:01, Paul Corfield wrote:





On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 05:30:58 -0800 (PST), MIG

wrote:
On Feb 2, 12:39*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist
[snip]
I've had something similar happen to me in the past. However there is an
important distinction with diversions. If a diversion is "unplanned" -
i.e. a burst water main or such like then buses on the diversion do NOT
stop.

I don't understand the principle behind this. *It seems to be based on
the assumption that passengers are familiar with every inch of the
whole length of their usual bus route but are not familiar with roads
near their home that are not on the bus route.

If I see that I am in a familiar road, near home, parallel to my usual
bus route, why must I and my heavy shopping be taken miles to an area
that I am not familiar with, with no way of getting home, just because
the diversion happens to rejoin some distant part of my bus route
there?

It's verging on abduction, and it's happened to me in the past.

I agree with your concerns but I'm not here to defend London Buses or
their policies. I'm sure there are reasons for the difference in
approach but I don't know what they are.
--
Paul C

Admits to working for London Underground!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks Paul C for your helpful comments - to add insult to injury
London Buses have removed all information about the diversions from
their website, so one would assume the diversion has ended. Except it
hasn't. Five buses passed me this morning between 5.41 and 6.02, while
I waited for my usual service to trundle along...!

Brr.. it was cold too.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Actually, I was wrong. I've found it he
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/livetravel...dent=71046_TfL

WEST NORWOOD, KNIGHTS HILL: Due to a burst water main, Routes 2 432
and N2 are diverted northbound between West Norwood Bus Garage and
Tulse Hill (Hardel Rise). Routes 196 468 and N68 are diverted
northbound between Norwood (Crown Point) and Tulse Hill (Norwood Road/
Thurlow Park Road), and Route X68 will not pick up at stops north of
Norwood (Crown Point)
Routes 2 432 and N2 are diverted via Knights Hill, Crown Lane, Leigham
Court Road, Streatham Hill and Christchurch Road.
Routes 196 468 N68 and X68 are diverted via Crown Lane, Leigham Court
Road, Streatham Hill and Christchurch Road.
London Buses have asked drivers to serve existing bus stops on the
diversion route, on request

On Feb 2, 12:39 pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist



wrote:
Grrr. Dealing with London Buses call centre is giving me a headache.
Over such an easy thing too, but I feel like I am banging my head
against a brick wall. I'm posting the conversations here mainly as
therapy.

Basically, there was a burst water main on a bus route near my house.
All the traffic, and four bus routes (2, 196, 432 and 468) were
diverted along the road I live on. This road is normally served by
just one route (417). Every 15 minutes (Officially a higher
frequency...!).

The road is currently choked with traffic due to the diversions, so my
usual bus is subject to severe delays.
The good news is that London Buses website said that because of the
diversion 'drivers have been asked to observe bus stops on the
diversionary route'. 'Drivers have been asked...' is such a vague
statement, because in reality drivers have NOT observed the stops. So
not only is my journey to work taking longer because of the extra
traffic, I now have four buses whizzing past which could have picked
up passengers.

So, I decided to call London Buses to enquire as to what was actually
happening.

1st call.
ME: 'I'm calling about the diversions to route 468 '
LB: 'Yes, there are diversions. What road are you on?'
ME: 'xxx xxx Road'
LB: 'Route 468doesn't go along that road.'
ME: 'But it's on diversion, because two of them have just gone past'
LB: 'Your road is served by route 417 and that's not diverted'.
ME: 'I'm not calling about that route I am calling because the
diverted buses aren't stopping on my road and London Buses website
says...'
LB: 'No mate, diverted buses don't stop'
ME: 'But your website says they will stop.'
LB: 'All I can do is put you through to complaints'.

The phrase 'All I can do' should be banned!

London Buses Complaints kind of understood the problem, and said that
they would contact the garages to tell them to stop.

Of course, that didn't happen.

2nd call, two days later.

ME: 'I'm waiting for a 468 bus'
LB: 'That's been diverted'
ME: 'I know. It's just driven past my stop'
LB: 'Where are you?'
ME: 'XXX Road'
LB: 'That's bus route 417 and that's not diverted'
ME: 'I know that. But London Buses website said that route 468 would
stop on the diversion. It's just that there is now so much traffic on
this road it's taking me longer to travel, and it's annoying when
these empty buses go past, when your website says that they should
stop'
LB: 'What road are you on now?'
ME: 'xxx Road. It's parallel to the original route.'
LB: 'I don't know that part of London. All I can do is put you
throught to London Buses Customer Services where you can make a
complaint'.
ME: 'I spoke to them already'.
LB: 'Well that's all I can do'

'All I can do...' again!

Four days later, buses are still diverted and still driving by without
stopping. (One driver at least shrugged his shoulders at me...)

ME: 'I'm calling about your website. It says that bus route 468 should
pick up passengers on diversion'.
LB: 'No, diverted buses don't pick up passengers.'
ME: 'But your website says they will in this case'
LB: 'Well you need to speak to London Buses Customer Services then and
tell them'.
ME: 'Why can't you tell them?'
LB: 'It's your responsibility'
ME: 'How is it my responsibility?
LB: 'Because you've found incorrect information and it's your
responsibility to tell someone.'
ME: 'I'm telling you! Why can't you tell London Buses that an error
has been reported?
LB: 'That's not my responsibility'
ME: 'It's not mine either, I didn't put the information on the
website!'
LB: 'Neither did I. Goodbye'.

I've had something similar happen to me in the past. However there is an
important distinction with diversions. If a diversion is "unplanned" -
i.e. a burst water main or such like then buses on the diversion do NOT
stop.

If a diversion is implemented due to planned works such as water main
replacement then buses DO stop on the diversion. I had a row with
London Buses when buses would not stop on a planned diversion in my
area. In one instance I was held hostage on a bus that refused to let me
off until it regained its line of route.

Had the bus stopped? I avoid them like the plague, but I'm fairly sure
they have "in emergency pull to open door" levers.

On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 09:49:07 -0800 (PST), Paul Weaver
wrote:

On Feb 2, 12:39 pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist

[snip]
If a diversion is implemented due to planned works such as water main
replacement then buses DO stop on the diversion. I had a row with
London Buses when buses would not stop on a planned diversion in my
area. In one instance I was held hostage on a bus that refused to let me
off until it regained its line of route.

Had the bus stopped? I avoid them like the plague, but I'm fairly sure
they have "in emergency pull to open door" levers.

When they were digging the tunnel for the pedestrian link at Walthamstow
Central many routes were diverted off their normal line of route.
Passengers were specifically advised to leave the tube at Blackhorse Rd
to catch the diverted routes. I had had a battle to persuade the driver
(of a 275) to let me board the bus at BHR. The stop I wanted was on the
diversion rather than the Bell Corner where I'd normally alight if the
buses were running normally. The driver completely ignored all of my
protestations and my TfL Staff Pass - he was basically an ignorant git
IMO. The passengers thought I was in the wrong judging from their smiles
and tut tutting. Unfortunately I was right and they were all wrong. I
had no opportunity to use the door emergency open as the bus was never
in a safe position to do so. If I had tried that then the driver would
have had a defence for his ignorance and appalling attitude and I'm sure
the passengers would have been even more convinced I was a trouble maker
and the driver was an angel simply trying to do his job.

I rang London Buses who agreed that my understanding of the situation
was correct. They put out a radio bulletin, to the affected Arriva
routes advising of the diversion and the stopping requirements, while I
was on the phone to them. When I wrote in I demanded that the driver be
suitably reprimanded as a result of his failure to do his job correctly.
Personally I would have preferred he was sacked.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist
wrote:

The phrase 'All I can do' should be banned!

I agree.

Part of my job is customer service, and I was trained to never use the
phrase "all I can do" or "the best I can do".

James Farrar wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 04:19:44 -0800 (PST), Railist
wrote:

The phrase 'All I can do' should be banned!

I agree.

Part of my job is customer service, and I was trained to never use the
phrase "all I can do" or "the best I can do".

I hope they also banned the phrase "What can I do you for?"