1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260 
Vim lopped off Scottish fares bid
Page 98
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Scottish Bus Group has underestimated its net revenue income on five occasions when making application for a fares increase. This factor was taken into consideration by the Scottish Traffic Commissioners when reaching a decision—now published—on the group's latest application—at Edinburgh on October 25.
The application was heard, and considered in two parts, Highland Omnibuses Ltd. being treated separately. The estimated additional revenue for the main section of the group was £1,435,000, while Highland Omnibuses' estimate added £29,000 to this figure. The Commissioners noted that at the last application the main section of the group had underestimated its increased income by £180,000, while Highland had been nearer the mark.
The objectors had argued at the most recent hearing that no allowance should be made for additional expenditure of 2d a gallon on fuel as the Suez Canal closure was temporary. They also argued that the Minister's proposed legislation to subsidize uneconomic services should be taken into account. The Commissioners considered that both of these factors were too speculative to be considered.
The speedy expansion of one-man operation and the efforts of the group to improve operational efficiency were praised by the Commissioners. But they considered that a cut of £250,000 in the estimated increase required would not be unreasonable.
This cut was made with the previous underestimating in mind and in the knowledge that the group would in all probability receive a £120,000 grant from the RTITB.
The Commissioners refused an increase on the 4d fare and made reduced grants on the other applications.
The revised fares take effect from November 19.