(16 Feb 2015, 10:48 am)Robert wrote I've always classed an accident as something that isn't intended to happen.
Lets say that a branded vehicle (or a vehicle that is supposed to be allocated) has developed a problem in the depot or breaks down during the day, the depot has no choice but to send another bus out as a replacement. Even if it is branded for another service. Since the breakdown is unintended, i'd see the wrong allocation in this instance to be an accident.

Without wishing to turn this into a similar debates featured elsewhere on the forum, the definition of an accident is "an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause."
One could consider the breakdown itself to be an 'accident', as it happens by chance, but the replacement allocation (in most cases) is deliberate. As such, the allocation is not accidental.

My issue is not with corporate liveried vehicles substituting for branded vehicles when they are unavailable, but when corporate liveried vehicles are stepping in because the branded vehicles have been allocated wrongly to other services. Why should customers on "Sapphire" services X21/X22 suffer because the only spare "Sapphire" vehicle (which was available) has been allocated to "MAX" service X14?