News:

Reminder to all members: please keep thread discussions 'on-topic' - this is a structured discussion forum, not a general 'group chat'!

Main Menu

Diamonds off Route

Started by the trainbasher, April 01, 2015, 09:07:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

the trainbasher

Today I've seen two diamond vehicles both off route.

One was a 16 instead of using Hockley Circus, decided to use the Flyover There.

A second one I saw was a 81 going via Pedmore Road instead of the route via Level Street and the cinema at Merry hill.

Quite often I've seen Diamond 226s use High Oak instead of the route via Bradley street and seen a couple miss out the estates between Wordsley and Brierley Hill.

Is this not a licence breach?


All opinions and onions mentioned on here are mine and not those of any employer, current, past, present or future, or presented as fact, unless I prove it otherwise.

646

It would depend on reason for the curtailment/diversion and whether this had been appropriately reported and documented, i.e. via the Traffic Office with lost mileage or similar.

If a complaint had been raised or if DVSA had monitored and the above was not present, then there would be an issue.


PM

Quote from: the trainbasher on April 01, 2015, 09:07:53 PM
Today I've seen two diamond vehicles both off route.

One was a 16 instead of using Hockley Circus, decided to use the Flyover There.

A second one I saw was a 81 going via Pedmore Road instead of the route via Level Street and the cinema at Merry hill.

Quite often I've seen Diamond 226s use High Oak instead of the route via Bradley street and seen a couple miss out the estates between Wordsley and Brierley Hill.

Is this not a licence breach?

Did this honestly need a new thread?!

Your hatred of Diamond has just got extremely boring and stupid...

the trainbasher

Quote from: DiamondDart on April 01, 2015, 10:06:00 PM
Did this honestly need a new thread?!

Your hatred of Diamond has just got extremely boring and stupid...

Sorry but I'm calling a spade a spade and a shovel a shovel. I would say the same if it was NXWM, GRS or even Arriva!


All opinions and onions mentioned on here are mine and not those of any employer, current, past, present or future, or presented as fact, unless I prove it otherwise.

StourportSam

Quote from: DiamondDart on April 01, 2015, 10:06:00 PM
Did this honestly need a new thread?!

Your hatred of Diamond has just got extremely boring and stupid...


I agree. This is all speculation and observation, no facts and reasons as to why each bus went the way they did. I have been on plenty of buses that have diverted off their route and every time it has been down to RTCs, roadworks and a few times driver error. If there are serious problems as you seem determined to prove the appropriate authorities will investigate and take necessary action, surely. Its getting rather tiresome to read constant posts on the Rotala thread that this bus was 5 minutes late and that bus design is horrible etc.

Surely if someone wishes to get Diamond in trouble which seems the case they would be better reporting incidents to the authorities rather than posting every detail here?

the trainbasher

#5
Quote from: StourportSam on April 02, 2015, 10:04:04 AM

I agree. This is all speculation and observation, no facts and reasons as to why each bus went the way they did. I have been on plenty of buses that have diverted off their route and every time it has been down to RTCs, roadworks and a few times driver error. If there are serious problems as you seem determined to prove the appropriate authorities will investigate and take necessary action, surely. Its getting rather tiresome to read constant posts on the Rotala thread that this bus was 5 minutes late and that bus design is horrible etc.

Surely if someone wishes to get Diamond in trouble which seems the case they would be better reporting incidents to the authorities rather than posting every detail here?

So deliberately avoiding parts of the route on the 226 yet the Hansons near enough behind is running NLR is acceptable?

I would ask the same questions if Arriva, NXWM, or even another company were to do it.

Furthermore diamond don't do anything with complaints except say the usual corporate lines (and trust me, I know what they mean working in Local government you learn how to say the opposite of what you mean in a letter!)

As they say a lion cannot change its stripes


All opinions and onions mentioned on here are mine and not those of any employer, current, past, present or future, or presented as fact, unless I prove it otherwise.

646

That would be a tiger surely?

the trainbasher



All opinions and onions mentioned on here are mine and not those of any employer, current, past, present or future, or presented as fact, unless I prove it otherwise.

Trident 4194

#8
This thread is another dig at diamond, and is getting boring, just because the 226 is always late

@the trainbasher has backed up his points with examples, so no problem with what's been posted to date. If it starts another argument, the thread will be locked & those involved will be taking a holiday from the forum

Kevin

#9
Quote from: the trainbasher on April 01, 2015, 09:07:53 PM
One was a 16 instead of using Hockley Circus, decided to use the Flyover There.


Curious one that, even in heavy traffic around the circus itself I've never seen a 16 (or indeed 74/75 & 78/79 from back in the day) take a short cut, quite a lot of people use that stop.
Hasten to add, that includes Diamond, before anyone suggests bias
Now in exile in Oxfordshire....
 

JPC

30019 on Coventry bound service 82 wandering through New Union St, Coventry at about 16:15, driver unaware of or forgot the Corporation St closure exacerbating the lateness.

Trident 4194

002 branded centre in wB bus station

Kevin

002 branded Centro just arriving in Brum on the 56
Now in exile in Oxfordshire....
 

Matt.N0056

The 30 in Solihull has been on some adventures today. Not entirely sure where the driver has ended up but got lost on several occasions!

Tara4352

30886 on 40 but branded for the 29
30888 on 42 but branded for the 29

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk