Tuesday, 29 January 2008

Drama Drama Drama

The folks at Brighton’s The Big Lemon are in the news again. They seem to be turning a crisis into a drama.

A 1,000-word message from the company reveals that last time around over 150 people wrote to the traffic commissioner in support of The Big Lemon. That’s a lot of people, given that mostly, most of us are apathetic, most of the time. The commissioner doesn’t seem to have heeded this unprecedented upsurge in public support. Instead, Lemon bosses believe the traffic commissioner will this morning consider whether The Big Lemon should face a public inquiry.

Although Lemon bosses may feel that the traffic commissioner is being harsh, do readers feel that such an action is unreasonable where an operator may be playing by its own rules? Would a larger operator think about acting in this sort of fashion?

The Big Lemon started in September 2007. It was at the end of November that The Big Lemon told its drivers it was facing problems. Revenue did not meet expectations. Upon hearing the announcement, too many drivers deserted The Big Lemon.

To say that the company was in an invidious position was an understatement. If it wanted to stand a chance of retaining an O licence, it needed to give the required notice for cancellation. The Big Lemon then took the unprecedented step, in early December, of requesting direct appeals from its passengers to the commissioner. The Big Lemon managed to get an interim, leaner service at short notice, basically at peaks and during the evening, coinciding with Brighton student movements, from 7 January. This apparently expires today.

The Big Lemon applied at the end of December for a new permanent timetable. It sought to circumvent the 56-day period by suggesting that the new service replaced its existing one. This is something that often happens when a commercial service is first deregistered and then re-registered following the award of a contract. The commissioner has yet to grant what is the second application at short notice—which may mean a gap in service.

Instead, the traffic commissioner may therefore act by calling a PI. Perhaps The Big Lemon's been a little naïve, perhaps it's been a victim of circumstance, perhaps it's been a little too honest. In its favour, it does appear to have been upfront about its difficulties and it's certainly kept passengers and staff informed in a refreshing sort of way.

In fact, the travelling public will no doubt feel that the bureaucracy of bus operation is pointless and tiresome. The Big Lemon will be seen as entirely reasonable. It will no doubt continue its support for the company. Unless, of course, there’s that gap in service. And so it is that there's a little drama being played out in Brighton, Leeds and Eastbourne, the likes of which we haven't seen in the bus industry before.

3 comments:

cogidubnus said...

The process of registration, variation and cancellation is hardly rocket science...

The man's got a CPC and O Licence, and must, therefore, be deemed to at least realise the implications of registering a service...and the obligation not to quit without adequate notice...

From the Commissioners point of view he's just had another Brighton operator (Tuk Tuk) up for PI for failing to give notice of his seasonal closedown...so I'd have thought under the circumstances he could hardly grant an exception for Big Lemon without leaving Dominic Ponniah prime facie grounds for appeal.

Moreover look at the myriad cases where larger operators have been quite severely penalised for not operating within the six minute box...never mind ceasing altogether...

The Commissioners have also made it well known that for ANY short notice application they now require a letter of support from the local authority, (even if its a change of a nature where statute doesn't actually require one - like Wakes Weeks or one-off events for example), and in that letter, said local authorities MUST assure the Commissioner that there are no competitive implications...

Difficult to see how Brighton and Hove City Council could make such a declaration in this case, or how the Commissioner could grant such an application without the letter...otherwise the precedent created would surely be unthinkable...

Furthermore, granted the cessation of service from 30th November to 7th January, then the failure to operate to the REGISTERED timetable from 7th January to date, I'm afraid it is difficult to see how the man's going to hang on to his O Licence at all...

Philip Brown would appear to be boxed in by his own regulations, and the admissions in Big Lemon's rather naive press statements since November do not help Mr Druitt's case...I honestly don't think Mr Brown, as Senior Commissioner has much discretionary room for manouevre, but when all's said and done, who can second-guess him...

If I'm honest about it, I'd have thought the time for amateurism of this sort ended in 1930 with the Licensing Laws...At best I'd guess Big Lemon's future is measured "on a wing and a prayer".

Volvo bus driver said...

Philip Brown is, in my opinion, one of the harsher Commissioners. With that in mind, and despite The Big Lemon's honesty throughout their difficulties, I too cannot see the licence continuing.
I wouldn't be surprised if the company's financial standing did not meet the legal requirements, thereby allowing the Commissioner to revoke the licence without even having to consider the operational 'glitches'.

mutley said...

STOP PRESS - Tuk Tuk's just been fined (someone said £13,500 - which is a lot on such a small fleet) for failing to deregister at the end of Summer...

There are (allegedly) also questions being asked about his continuing repute...which may affect any future plans he has...

Still no news re Big Lemon though, so perhaps he's getting away with it!

(heh heh heh)