Routemaster Buses Nantwich

[knutstransport]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(16/02/2016 17:25)Raawwwrrr! Wrote:  It is legal, you can use a non-DDA bus on a service for 14 days of the year (or if a DDA bus comes non-DDA due to a fault up to 28 days of rectification).
Technically if you had 27 different bus services and used one DDA bus on each for the 14 days, then you could run a non-DDA bus for an entire year in service.

I knew you could use a loophole to replace non-accessible single deckers with non-accessible deckers and coaches but that sounds an even bigger loophole. Someone could set up a leasing company with a huge fleet of non-DDA vehicles which could keep rotating between operators with just a change of the legal name and address on the bus on each rotation.

[LJ51 DDA]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(16/02/2016 17:29)knutstransport Wrote:  I knew you could use a loophole to replace non-accessible single deckers with non-accessible deckers and coaches but that sounds an even bigger loophole. Someone could set up a leasing company with a huge fleet of non-DDA vehicles which could keep rotating between operators with just a change of the legal name and address on the bus on each rotation.

I think its registered as a Coach which is why it does not fall into DDA laws like a lot of Merc Minibuses have since been registered as Coaches as Coaches dont have to be DDA until 2020 and you stated about Deckers it does not matter as they dont have to be DDA up until 2017 so this year is the last for them (unless on School Contracts)

BTW i spoke to the driver to and he said the only reason he was given that was simply because X615JCS was unavailable due to faulty doors, which to be quite honest i dont see no harm in a one of saves ditching a Service they want to provide with of course Routemaster wanting to get a good reputation which to be honest they are in my eyes and it had a decent loading to.

[knutstransport]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(17/02/2016 04:02)LJ51 DDA Wrote:  I think its registered as a Coach which is why it does not fall into DDA laws like a lot of Merc Minibuses have since been registered as Coaches as Coaches dont have to be DDA until 2020 and you stated about Deckers it does not matter as they dont have to be DDA up until 2017 so this year is the last for them (unless on School Contracts)

But then don't coaches have to be fitted with either lap belts or seat belts? As genuine minibuses (opposed to small buses) generally already have seat belts and no standing they already meet a lot of the requirements for being a coach.

[Nicholas]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(17/02/2016 10:41)knutstransport Wrote:  But then don't coaches have to be fitted with either lap belts or seat belts? As genuine minibuses (opposed to small buses) generally already have seat belts and no standing they already meet a lot of the requirements for being a coach.

No, the legal difference between a bus and a coach is the latter is not permitted to have standing passengers.

[knutstransport]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(17/02/2016 19:20)Nicholas Wrote:  No, the legal difference between a bus and a coach is the latter is not permitted to have standing passengers.

Quote:Minibuses and Coaches Registered On or After 1 October 2001

All minibuses and coaches registered on or after 1 October 2001 (whether they carry child or adult passengers) must have forward-facing or rearward-facing seat belts.

So does that mean minibuses and coaches which were first registered to be used on the road on after 1 October 2001 and not 'coaches' which were buses on 1 October 2001 and have been 'converted' since?

[Nicholas]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(18/02/2016 09:24)knutstransport Wrote:  So does that mean minibuses and coaches which were first registered to be used on the road on after 1 October 2001 and not 'coaches' which were buses on 1 October 2001 and have been 'converted' since?

A vehicle can easily be re-certified. I believe some companies have done this to get around the DDA legislation. You'd probably find a lot of vehicles were classed as buses but had seatbelts anyway due to contract requirments... primary school runs always require them.

[ANW 2283]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich
Hi All,
4993 UG dropped again on the #79 Hanley - Nantwich (presumably it worked in the other direction too). Best ride of the year so far...

   

[knutstransport]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(18/02/2016 19:00)Nicholas Wrote:  A vehicle can easily be re-certified. I believe some companies have done this to get around the DDA legislation. You'd probably find a lot of vehicles were classed as buses but had seatbelts anyway due to contract requirments... primary school runs always require them.

4993 UG would have been too old to have been fitted with seatbelts initially, unless it's been designated as a school bus since. At the date that bus was built not wearing a seat belt in the back seat of a car was legal! However, if the interior was changed too much I doubt Routemaster would have been as interested in that particular vehicle.

[motormayhem1]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich
I bet its still got a good turn of speed to as the ones shearings/timeline had were rockets as used them regular from st helens to earlstown when i was a kid.

[Nicholas]

RE: Routemaster Buses Nantwich

(19/02/2016 19:51)knutstransport Wrote:  4993 UG would have been too old to have been fitted with seatbelts initially, unless it's been designated as a school bus since. At the date that bus was built not wearing a seat belt in the back seat of a car was legal! However, if the interior was changed too much I doubt Routemaster would have been as interested in that particular vehicle.

If the loophole thing is true (and I will need to look it up), then that bus would obviously be exempt. My previous post was referring to the minibus thing.

The whole DDA thing is proving to be a headache because there are so many grey areas that the government simply haven't properly confirmed.