Gareth

BFE Staff
  • Content count

    2,817
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Gareth

  • Rank
    BFE Member
  • Birthday 28/12/66
  1. Fantastic report Ed, and also great idea. So many will have sailed right past Les Ecrehous on Bretagne completely oblivious to their existence.
  2. I know - that is already acknowledged and respected (see previous post). But the discussion has broadened out from your particular issue and I was addressing a poster who claimed it does not matter if you book a vehicle that is different from the one you present at check-in.
  3. Probably booked up by all of BF's regulars!
  4. And, to get the discussion back on topic, just want to come back to this. Of course you, as one person, doing this is not going to make any difference. But my point is that if 50 people did this then it could well play havoc with the car deck configuration plan. The amount of mezzanine they plan to use pretty much has to be designed pretty much before they start loading anything, and then they have to load in the right order around the setting of the mezzanines. If everyone turned up in something higher than booked then this could prove a real problem for loading.
  5. Already in use aboard Normandie.
  6. You'd think it wouldn't be rocket science for blue badge holders to be issued with some sort of authentication number that they can use when making reservations for disabled facilities and then the transport companies could require authentication before selling a reservation for such facilities. Surprised such a system does not already exist.
  7. Wouldn't be surprised to see Etretat taking over BDS' schedules on a temporary basis to fill the gap before the charter arrives once Normandie has taken over at Le Havre (?)
  8. I can see why BF would want to know either way round - whether you're "upgrading" or "downgrading" the type of vehicle, BF would want to know before you get to check-in. It's not primarily about the price you pay, it's about the loading plan for the ship. The loading plan, or more specifically the car deck configuration for the voyage you are about to embark on, will have been designed some time before you get to check-in. If everyone turned up at check-in in a different type of vehicle to that booked, without you having bothered to let them know beforehand, it could play havoc with their plan for loading that sailing.
  9. Now I think you're protesting too much SFD. You raised an interesting and valid point regarding the car database, and you ought to follow Jim's advice and write to customer services about the matter. But to extrapolate that issue to general advice regarding advance bookings is a little melodramatic, and to talk about contacting Trading Standards before contacting BF Customer Service is ludicrous. This is a BF Enthusiasts forum, not a grumbling forum.
  10. I don't think that's the issue though Iain. The issue as I understand it isn't BF charging appropriately for vehicles that exceed the 1.83m height limit. The issue is BF allegedly making faulty rulings on whether a vehicle does exceed the limit based on use on an inaccurate data base.
  11. I guess at the very least this gives them options. They can keep the route going in the immediate future, and then when 2019 comes round they can take stock of the options in light of post-2016 traffic patterns. At that point they may choose to recall Cotentin from charter, or transfer Etretat after the entry into service of Honfleur, or retain Pelican, or abandon the Poole route depending on how they perceive demand going forward.
  12. There....er.....don't seem to be that many passengers on board.... (?)
  13. I would have thought that IF BF were going to have her back, it would only make sense to do so converted to a second Armorique. But if Stena are happy with her and she attracts good charter fees then chartering in an already-existing ropax would make more sense.
  14. Toast. That's what I had for breakfast - that's straight down the line quality reporting. The complete truth, I assure you!