ALBUM Conference (Blackpool 2009)
12th May 2009 - 13th May 2009
Over 200 delegates attended the Conference from bus and coach companies all over the UK. The Keynote speaker was Brian Souter of Stagecoach who spoke to the Conference about passenger growth. He offered humorous anecdotes about how Stagecoach had been built together with his vision for the future of Stagecoach and the bus industry. On 12 May, Ian Jones spoke to the Conference about the European Union's proposal for enhanced Passenger Rights for the bus and coach industry. Ian acknowledged that the industry was unlikely to welcome the proposals with the Halleluiah Chorus but the theme of his presentation was that the industry has adapted over the years and must continue to adapt.
Ian Jones urged the delegates to adopt a Barack Obama 'yes we can' approach rather than an old fashioned British approach that can sometimes lapse into 'no we can't and why should we'. The law has changed over the years and the transport industry has adapted. That said, if the legislation is implemented, the bus industry will have to carry a unique class of litigants. The regulations will, if brought into force, effectively introduce strict liability meaning that a Claimant passenger will not have to prove negligence or fault. Currently, within the UK, if a passenger wants to secure compensation from a bus company he must prove that the bus company, or its driver, was in someway negligent or at fault. Under the new regime the passenger need not prove fault but only need prove that he was a valid holder of a ticket entitling him to ride on the bus. The Courts will not concern themselves with who was, exactly, at fault for the incident that caused the injury. The new regulations will enhance the passengers' contractual rights and allow the passenger to recover compensation as a right. There will be enhanced rules requiring advanced payments and stipulated sums to be paid, for example, in the event of death.
Ian confirmed that operators can, after making a payment, seek recoupment from the truly negligent party but this could affect cash flow. Ian drew an analogy between the regulations and swine flu. It is not known if swine flu will reach pandemic proportions in Great Britain and what the full consequences would be. The same principle applies to the regulations in that EU legislators are yet to make a final decision on the proposals and it is very much a question of watching and waiting. The view of Backhouse Jones it that for the proposals to be defeated would require a bold move by politicians (both British and European) and, if only for that reason, it is more probable than not that the regulations will be introduced albeit, perhaps, in a more watered down version. We will post updates, as and when they arrive, on this website.
On 13 May James Backhouse, Barry Prior and Ian Jones performed a mock Public Inquiry before Traffic Commissioner Beverly Bell. The scene was set by James Backhouse who outlined a fictional bus company called 'Clitheroe Charabanc' who had got into difficulties with their fleet of 100 vehicles. VOSA had found the maintenance of the vehicles to be unacceptable and had issued PG9s against the company and this resulted in a Public Inquiry before Traffic Commissioner Beverley Bell. Barry Prior played the part of the Transport Manager and Ian Jones played the part of the owner / operator of this family business. It became apparent from Mr Prior's evidence that he had too many responsibilities and was not given appropriate respect or consideration by the owner / operator. Mr Prior articulated how he was obliged to manage the vehicles whilst juggling other managerial responsibilities. The Traffic Commissioner's concerns about this situation were confirmed when Mr Jones, to his surprise, was asked to give evidence. Mr Jones thanked the Traffic Commissioner for the opportunity to engage in a dialogue at this 'meeting'. He confirmed that he had not got where he was today without being able to delegate hard work'. There were some humorous exchanges between Traffic Commissioner Bell and Mr Jones with Mrs Bell firmly advising the operator that she had not called him to a 'meeting' but rather to a tribunal that had the power and capacity to revoke his operators licence. The humour of the mock tribunal emphasised the reality of the situation with Mr Jones's jocular approach evaporating during the Public Inquiry especially when Mrs Bell asked Mr Jones if he had ever contemplated 'going to prison'.
James Backhouse summarised the evidence and the sanctions available to the Traffic Commissioner and asked the audience to vote on whether they thought the hearing was typical of a Public Inquiry and, furthermore, how they would deal with the matter if they were the Traffic Commissioner appointed to deal with this matter. This created a lively debate about what constitutes 'repute' and whether thoroughly decent men and women could lose their 'repute' and thereby lose their 'O' licence and, ultimately their business. Questions of repute, it was decided, were settled by matters of competence. It was important that Transport Manages and Operators alike undertook their respective roles competently for the safety of everybody.
Should further information be needed in respect of the Passenger Rights proposals please contact Ian Jones on 01254 828300 or ian@backhouses.co.uk.
