Jump to content

Busses that terminate not at the destination originally specified


Recommended Posts

Hi All


I feel that I have to have a rant, today regarding buses148 and the 78 I am on a training course on Fridays in Notting Hill I get on 148 bus to Camberwell Green the last few months it keeps terminating at Lambeth North or Elephant & Castle without any explanation you ask the driver why you receive a grunt or shrugged shoulder or ? I duno mate? which just makes me even more angry.


As for the 78 this particular bus I get on from Shoreditch to Peckham Rye this bus to tends to terminate at Tesco?s or if there is another 78 a head the driver decides to terminate as well this is so frustrating and inconvenient for us passengers not to mention if you have swiped your Oyster card although I have a season ticket I am wondering does this keep happening to anyone else?

Yeah, it's annoying as hell, but I'm pretty sure it's to regulate the service rather than piss people off.


That said, what makes me rage is when the bus I'm on terminates early, but lets the same number bus behind go in front of us, so we can't get on that one. It makes me want to picket Boris. I blame him entirely.

On the P4, you'll quite often hear the radio tell the bus ahead to wait at next stop to pick up passengers from terminating bus. But it is annoying especially if you have list of bags or are pleasantly ensconced in a seat.
Years ago I was on a number 12 which terminated early, and protested to the conductor. I said "it says Oxford Circus on the front" to which this wag swiftly responded "it also shows Typhoo tea on the front but we ain't f**king going to India!!" Nice

Emerson Crane Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Years ago I was on a number 12 which terminated

> early, and protested to the conductor. I said "it

> says Oxford Circus on the front" to which this wag

> swiftly responded "it also shows Typhoo tea on the

> front but we ain't f**king going to India!!" Nice




Hahahaha - this really made me laugh!!:))

Hi All


I wrote a letter to the bus operator this is there reply below


DO NOT DELETE.............................

{ticketno:[1328571]}

DO NOT DELETE.............................


Dear Sir/Madam,




Re: Curtailment of Route Buses 148 and 78


Thank you for your email dated 19 November where I was sorry to learn of the disruption you have experienced repeatedly to your journeys on routes 148 and 78, and for the unsatisfactory explanations you have had for this from the bus drivers. It clearly is of great inconvenience when you have to change all the time, and incurs extra costs on tickets as a result.


On the routes that you describe, there are currently severe delays expected, and would have been the same at the time that you took the journeys you mention. Route 148 was delayed due to junction improvement works until February 2011, and route 78 will be experiencing delays until the end of December due to Victorian water mains replacement works. When a bus is particularly delayed, route controllers can stop it short of its usual destination. This allows the delayed bus to turn around, and return to its usual timetable in the opposite direction. This also prevents severe delays from being passed from one journey to the next. We realise that this causes inconvenience for some passengers, and so expect operators to only take this action as a last resort. However it is taken to benefit the majority of passengers using the service. Drivers should ensure that any passenger who requests a transfer ticket (e.g. Oyster Pay as You Go users) receive one. I apologise for the fact that you were not issued with a transfer ticket on the occasion which you describe.


Thank you again for contacting us and I wish you more pleasant journeys with us in the future.




Yours sincerely,




Lucy Finchett-Maddock


Customer Services

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have no agenda just a simple response expressing my thoughts and experience.  
    • Just as one example, the grass in a least some of  the tree pits in Ulverscroft Road appears to have been sprayed. If it's not the council who has done it, then I wonder if someone is trying to kill the trees 😭 although I doubt if that would work, as the council have sprayed tree pits in the past (ignoring handwritten notices by my then very young grandchildren asking them not to spray as they had sowed flower seeds there) 🤬 Grass in the pavement nearby appears to have been neither sprayed nor scraped out. I'm quite confused.
    • They aren't. They are removing them manually, scraping and cutting them out. I've seen them doing it on my road and surrounding roads. I can't imagine that they would have different methods in different parts of East Dulwich.
    • I see. But as I read it, Tesco would still need the agreement of the owners/ leaseholder to submit proposals, so would need Poundland’s cooperation? I suppose we’ll have to wait while this plays out. There’s applications re this site on the Southwark planning portal dating back over 70 years. In 1954, Woolworth’s applied to convert the original 4 shops here (Nos 29-35) into one Woolies but the council refused because the flats above the shops would be lost and there was a local housing shortage following the war. Small businesses being displaced by big chains on Lordship Lane was already a trend back then.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...