(06 Jul 2015, 7:32 am)danpick wrote Sure its not the one before.
No. It was the correct one running 3 minutes early.
Skip to main content
(06 Jul 2015, 4:42 pm)Davie wrote I bet that was a nice surprise for you.
(06 Jul 2015, 4:44 pm)aureolin wrote Not really. Meant I had to wait 15 minutes for a late running 56, and then rush around like a blue arsed fly once I got into Durham. Thankfully their liveapp backed my watch up of it being 3 minutes early, and they've got a nice email from me about the matter.
I accept that there's a million and one reasons why a bus can be late, but there's never an excuse for it running early.
(06 Jul 2015, 4:44 pm)aureolin wrote Not really. Meant I had to wait 15 minutes for a late running 56, and then rush around like a blue arsed fly once I got into Durham. Thankfully their liveapp backed my watch up of it being 3 minutes early, and they've got a nice email from me about the matter.
I accept that there's a million and one reasons why a bus can be late, but there's never an excuse for it running early.
Forum Moderator | Let us know if you have any issues
Service Manager, Coatham Connect
(14 Jul 2015, 8:57 am)aureolin wrote Let's see if this one gets regulated. There's little point sending two back out together.
It's actually 52 minutes late, but the timetable hasn't been updated in the app...
(05 Aug 2015, 8:27 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Would that have been 22065? If so, I think I can work out why it was that late
Forum Moderator | Let us know if you have any issues
Service Manager, Coatham Connect
(06 Aug 2015, 8:37 pm)tyresmoke wrote I blame the useless driver He reckoned he took it over late but I'm sure it wasn't just that...
(08 Aug 2015, 7:36 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Well, shall we see how late this 58/59/61 combination gets this evening - the 2022 59 from Stockton is presently 12+ minutes late as the driver hasn't checked her running board and has been serving both ends of Stockton High Street - no 59s and only certain 58s do that.
(17 Aug 2015, 12:54 pm)Jimmi wrote Getting ridiculous now!
Fed up with this now and I can only imagine this is only going to continue to get worse especially with the route being made longer by running via Hitachi from the end of the month.
And why the hell did they take 3 minutes running time out of the Shildon - Aycliffe section of the route and slot it into the Aycliffe - Darlington section which seems so pointless as this section didn't need the extra running time, it's the Bishop - Shildon section that needed it.
(17 Aug 2015, 1:50 pm)danpick wrote It's only 9 minutes late think about Metro users who constantly have failed trains and having to get Taxi's.Think about me with my missed connections, almost everytime I get the 5 I miss my connecting X66 to Middlesbrough and end up having to wait an extra 20 minutes.
(17 Aug 2015, 1:59 pm)Jimmi wrote Think about me with my missed connections, almost everytime I get the 5 I miss my connecting X66 to Middlesbrough and end up having to wait an extra 20 minutes.
This service often sees me getting to places stupidly early to ensure I am not late arriving at my location.
I can't comment on the Metro as I have never used it.
(17 Aug 2015, 7:24 pm)S813 FVK wrote Surely all of these screenshots would be better off being sent to arriva rather on this thread? Not sure how many arriva behind the scenes members (not drivers) are registered on the forum but by sending the stuff to Arriva directly, they may be able to evaluate the punctuality of the service and then make changes where necessary.