Allow problems/campaigns to span more than one operator

[MyfanwyNixon]

Feedback via email 6/9/11

You don't have a category for "Connections".

Example: at 1824 each weekday, a publicly-subsidised train is due
into Matlock station. At 1832, the last bus on route 172 (covering
several villages and ending up in Bakewell) leaves the 4-year-old
Bus Station adjacent to Matlock Station. That too is publicly
subsidised.

Because the times are close to each other, the online journey
planners do not show the connection. And perhaps that is just as
well - because if the train is late, the bus doesn't wait. (And the
previous train is an hour earlier so this is quite a big deal).

Why doesn't the bus wait? Partly because the bus station has been
designed without anybody thinking that bus drivers might need to
know when the train has arrived. And partly because the bus company
aren't really bothered about the odd person for whom the connection
might matter - they get their subsidy anyway.

Where on your site does one pursue that sort of issue?

[MyfanwyNixon]

Feedback 8/9/11

I have been working steadily to deliver a UK-wide protocol from all
bus operators on all service bus routes to carry compact folding
bikes.

I have in principle got this with First and Stagecoach - and they
also carry non-folding bikes on some routes - making for example a
practical option for using the Oxford Tube at Lewknor, where there
is no car parking, and the stop is remote from the villages it
serves with a fast motorway service to London.

So my fix my transport call is for all operators to agree a
National protocol on carriage of folding bikes on all service bus
routes - but presumably with some sensible exclusions for busy city
services where standing passengers probably exceed the legal
loading limit from time to time. Please allow the facility to use
UK-wide or area/operator based entries.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Related feedback 30/08/11

I had a reply from one of the Local Authorities a report was sent to.

They didn't read as far as the small print at the end, and as a result logged a separate problem with the second local authority my report also went to, so they will now have it twice (maybe that's not such a bad thing, but it may happen rather a lot). Perhaps the email could be addressed "Dear LA1 and LA2" or immediately after "The problem report below has been sent to you..." add "(and also to LA2)".

[crowbot]

This is now possible by adding other responsible organizations using the admin interface