Checking out the 84B

Tuesday 4th February 2025

As identified in a recent blog, the future of route 84B between Potters Bar and Barnet is far from secure with confirmed funding in place only until April. Hertsmere Borough Council stumped up the initial £183,600 to fund the service for its first 12 months in September 2023 after which Hertfordshire County Council took over with £83,000 to keep the route going, but only until the end of April 2025.

I took a ride on the route last month to see how it was doing and assess what the chances are for its survival. It’s a one bus, hourly frequency timetable, with a simplified route at the Barnet end after that very convoluted nonsense readers may recall I commented about on its introduction (doubling up on the route passing High Barnet Underground station – it now just does that loop once) while at the Potters Bar end it also operates a loop around the town, with a pause at the railway station.

I only made one return journey at random, so I can’t say whether it was typical but I was encouraged to see 13 passengers travelling during the hour’s round trip from Potters Bar at 11:25 to Barnet and back again for 12:20 on a miserable, cold, wintry Tuesday in January.

Of those 13, two travelled locally within Potters Bar and have other alternatives, four went from Potters Bar to Barnet High Street/Church; three from Potters Bar to Barnet Hospital; two from Barnet Hospital to Potters Bar and two from Barnet Church/High Street to Potters Bar.

Without the 84B those 11 people would have a very convoluted alternative journey catching TfL route 298 to Bramley Road, Cockfosters and change there to a 307 taking 45 minutes to an hour rather than the 20-30 minutes on the 84B.

It’s been reported “between launch in September 2023 and June 2024, an average of 4,338 journeys were made each month, around 145 per day.” There are 13 round trips a day on the timetable so my random experience might indicate the average has encouragingly increased, as 13 times 13 is 169. Furthermore it was explained last September that Central Connect are paid £600 a day to run the service and the Council subsidy was covering “around 72 per cent of the total cost of running the route”.

If average revenue is, say, £2 per passenger trip (including concessionary reimbursement), on my estimates, that makes daily revenue from passengers of £338 which is 56% of £600, meaning the subsidy has now decreased to 44% of costs which should hopefully give Barnet Council some incentive to chip in funding as well as Hertfordshire County Council maintaining its commitment. After all, if the hugely subsidised HertsLynx DRT buses were carrying 13 passengers per hour there’d be mass celebratory events all over the County with cupcakes, streamers, party hats and non stop conferences telling us all DRT is the future.

Where is TfL in all of this one might ask, as commentators to this blog often do whenever a cross-boundary issue is discussed. It’s certainly anomalous that TfL can run routes that cross the Greater London border into neighbouring Counties including to and from the towns of Watford, Borehamwood, Potters Bar (from Cockfosters and Enfield), Waltham Cross, Debden, Loughton, Chigwell, Brentwood, Lakeside, Dartford, Bluewater, Joydens Wood, Swanley, Knockholt, Tatsfield, Warlingham Green, Caterham, Caterham-on-the-Hill, Banstead, Epsom Downs, Epsom, Ewell, Leatherhead, Dorking, Esher, West Molesey, Sunbury, Ashford, Staines and Slough, and not only that, but there are TfL Underground trains serving stations between Epping and Loughton, Watford and Hatch End with TfL funded trains running between Reading and West Drayton, Shenfield and Moor Park and Watford and Hatch End but, we’re told, there are no funds for buses to run between Potters Bar and Barnet – a bus route with a long history going back even before London Transport’s formation in 1933, not least as there’s a significant bus garage in the town.

It just doesn’t seem right.

Interestingly a couple of passengers on the bus were talking about “the good old days” with both reminiscing about the days when the 84 ran through from St Albans to Barnet while I was musing about the 134 which at one time would take you from Potters Bar to Victoria.

I do hope this bus route can be saved come April. It deserves to be. Not least with a decent operator running decent buses, as it now has.

Roger French

Blogging timetable: 06:00 TThS

40 thoughts on “Checking out the 84B”

  1. Interesting that there’s no mention of High Barnet Underground station on either the timetable or the map. Wouldn’t that be an important connecting point?

    Mike M

    Like

    1. That’s a massive omission, as surely the Underground station should by a major trip generator.

      Peter Brown

      Like

      1. High Barnet might be a trip generator, but Potters Bar has its own fast and reasonably frequent rail service into the capital – half-hourly to King’s Cross, taking 20 minutes, and half-hourly stopping service to Moorgate taking 37 minutes. More attractive frequencies than the bus, and getting you into the capital more quickly.

        Malc M

        Like

  2. I’m not sure comparing the 84B with TfL buses to Watford is fair. Watford is the major traffic generator at the north end of the 142 and 258, and I’d be willing to bet that running both routes through to Watford is actually cheaper (net) than turning them at the border.

    I assume there is a tipping point when like the 84, even with St Albans being the major traffic generator, the number of buses needed to serve it becomes so high that it nolonger financially works for TfL.

    Like

    1. My understanding is that TfL will generally provide a cross-boundary route where the majority of patronage is within Greater London. In some cases, such as Potters Bar and Waltham Cross, they will extend to the first suitable point to terminate. In others, it will either be financially worthwhile to go further (revenue outweighs cost), or it provides a benefit to Greater London which is enough to justify the cost, or there may be funding from the neighbouring authority (I suspect this explains things like the TfL routes serving Loughton/Debden, and the 465 to Dorking, although I could be mistaken).

      The 84 would be unlikely to meet the “majority within Greater London” criteria. London Country took the route over as long ago as 1982, London Buses winning it back four years later as a Hertfordshire tendered service. As “greenline727” has commented below, it was an anomaly that the 84 was a “red” London Transport bus in the first place.

      I can’t see that the 84B would meet any of the criteria for TfL to take over responsibility for it.

      Malc M

      Like

  3. Hi Roger Interesting to read your observations on this remnant of the 84, for which I was mostly responsible for a few years at Metroline. The 84 was run on a commercial basis after its transfer from TfL but, despite various efforts to improve its performance, latterly became very marginal. Most of the demand was at the St Albans end of the route while I was GM at Potters Bar, and the view from my office window of Barnet bound buses was pretty disappointing. As HCC then had a policy of mostly not supporting evening sevices, we kept the route going during those times when at least some demand could be seen, to mitigate potential impact on the daytime service, as well as a Sunday service. We were also quite early adopters of a ticketing app for the 84 and 242 ‘country’ routes, mostly aimed at regular commuters. Serving Barnet Hospital by some means was given some thought but the route, as you say, would be convoluted and the effect on either PVR or headway (latterly 30 minutes) adverse. Some journeys facilitated driver reliefs for our TfL routes terminating at the Hospital, though only in the High Street, but again a diversion might have caused more issues than benefits. Either way, after my time there, I understand Covid finally saw the end of the Barnet section, with Sullivan’s taking over the 84 between Potters Bar and St Albans with some HCC support. I will keep an eye open for further developments! Best regards Ian (McAllister)

    Liked by 2 people

    2. As a former resident of St Albans, I’ve noticed there also seems to have been a long-term change in route patterns from a north – south / south west axis to a west – east one.

      Services via Fleetville to Hatfield have noticably improved as the university (and the business park on the former BAE site) have expanded. Also in the case of the 653 what was previously a St Albans local services (parts of the S2 and S4/5) have been turned into an inter-urban service through to Welwyn.

      Conversely services on the Luton – St Albans – Watford and St Albans to South Mimms roads have gradually been thinned with the exception of the 602. The county appears to have noticed this as well since the BSIP monies have seen new services added to the Luton – St Abans – Watford axis for the first time in decades.

      Like

  5. For those of us who have long memories, it seems inconceivable that the road between Barnet and Potters Bar that saw numerous bus and Green Line coaches pounding along virtually every few minutes has now just one bus per hour. And this having to be held together with a subsidy and constant threat of withdrawal.

    The problem of course lies in the isolation of the route, infequent and not linked to anything else. Common sense would have seen the 84 re-extended to Barnet, but with air quality rules, and TfLs blind eyes to cross-boundary services when it suits, this will never happen. As pointed out, the loadings were poor, but if every service in the UK were to be run on that basis, the bus network would look very sparse beyond the chimney pots.

    Terence Uden

    Like

    1. Air quality rules, Terrence? That’s easily settled…

      Check your vehicle

      1. Find out if your vehicle meets emissions and safety standards required to drive in London, or if you need to pay a daily charge.
      2. Enter your number plate Central Connect bus YY24HBH
      3. Choose country of registration UK
      4. Find Vehicle
      5. Result: YY24HBH, Multi-Coloured ALEXANDER DENNIS, United Kingdom
      6. Confirm Vehicle
      7. Result: This vehicle meets the ULEZ emissions standards
        You do not need to pay a daily ULEZ charge to drive in the zone, and are helping to improve air quality across London.

      Did we actually imagine that a 24-reg EuroVI-engined bus would be subject to a ULEZ charge?

      Like

      1. l was referring to the vehicles at present used on Sullivans 84 which I doubt are the standard required to enter Greater London.

        Terence Uden

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Out of the six vehicles Sullivan have operated on the 84 today, four of them are ULEZ compliant (including two somewhat elderly 2008 models. It’s also possible to infer that most of their fleet would be compliant anyway given the national rail and LU replacement work they regularly undertook within Greater London.

          Doesn’t look like the ULEZ is much of a factor.

          Like

  6. This is a far cry from when Potters Bar ran on the 134 (alongside Muswell Hill) every few minutes at times, plus routes 303, 340, 350, 716 and 717

    Like

    2. I’m struggling to find a time when the 134 ran every few minutes over the Barnet to Potters Bar section. Going through some old timetables in my collection, here are the frequencies north of Barnet:

      1960: MF peak 12 mins, MF daytime 18 mins, Sat 10-12 mins, Sun 15-30 mins
      1970: MF peak 12 mins, MF daytime 18 mins, Sat 20 mins, Sun 20-30 mins
      1980: MF 20 mins, Sat 30 mins, Sun 30 mins

      It was more frequent further into inner and Central London.

      London Country buses ceased to operate south of Potters Bar to Barnet section in 1978, with Green Line coaches abandoning it in 1983. Although London Country took over route 84 in 1982, it didn’t run via Potters Bar then. It was rerouted via Potters Bar in 1986, passing back to London Buses at the same time.

      Malc M

      Like

      1. There were times of day when garage journeys added significantly to the advertised service, particularly when we had to reallocate some MH workings to PB because of staff shortages at MH. Bob

        Like

  7. A while back, buses from Potters Bar garage worked in service to and from the London routes they were allocated to. These supplemented the service buses on the original 84 to the Barnet area. Surely TFL and Herts CC could agree some joint funding

    Like

  8. There was a TfL route between Barnet and Potters Bar . . . Route 383; this was withdrawn in the mid-1990s, as TfL’s view was that Route 84 provided an adequate level of service, and London tickets were valid on Route 84 as far as Potters Bar. That changed in the mid 2000s, when TfL ticket machines were replaced by INIT machines; prior to that return fares were not available on Route 84 at all, and Metroline wished to improve the fares offer on the route.

    TfL’s stance was (and I suspect still is) that Potters Bar was adequately connected to “London” by Routes 298 and 313 . . . these routes are effectively extended to Potters Bar to terminate, as any terminal point at the boundary would be in green fields! A link with the Underground at Cockfosters and another with Chase Farm Hospital are still maintained, therefore.

    It was only a historical accident that Route 84 was a Central route (starting from Golders Green in 1912 as a means to allow Londoners easy access to the countryside); passenger numbers were always greater at the “country” end.

    Just prior to Covid in 2020 (actually scheduled to commence 4 days after lockdown started) Route 84 was to be reduced to 2 BPH throughout, still with the limited evening service . . . it was felt that this would secure its future. Unfortunately, as Ian McA says, after two years of being told “don’t travel”, the passenger numbers simply weren’t recovering sufficiently, and the Barnet end had become very quiet apart from at school times . . . Metroline therefore decided that enough was enough. The discrepancy between TfL fares and “country” fares was too great, such that fares between Barnet and Potters Bar were seriously sub-standard . . . part of the reason why Sullivan Buses declined to run to Barnet.

    My understanding is that daytime loadings on Route 84B are just about acceptable, but that loadings after 4pm fall off drastically . . . a total of 11 passengers in one hour on the “freehold” section isn’t that good. I supect that continuance will depend greatly on local political pressure. With Route 242 recently going from mainly commercial to (I think) fully tendered, the cost to Herts CC for buses in Potters Bar is increasing greatly . . . hopefully the budget is resiliant enough!

    Liked by 1 person

      1. PB1 has a very neat timetable (it takes 26 minutes to do the circuit and it is a half hourly service).

        Extending it would leave you with a very messy service pattern on the eastern half of the route with one bus a hour doing the current loop and the other being extended to or from Barnet.

        Also I’m not sure that this would actually save any budget since the combined PVR would still be two buses which is no change over the current position.

        Like

    2. Another idea. Extend the 242 to Barnet Hospital. It makes some sense as well as unless it has changed recently the main hospital surviving Cheshunt and Waltham Cross is Barnet General

      Like

    3. For several years Potters bar operated a route 310A, Basically followed the 310 route EXCEPT it went up the Hertford Road rather than the A10

      Like

  9. Speaking of authorities not funding cross boundary services, in North Wales & Cheshire the long standing 5 Mold-Ellesmere Port has been split, as Flintshire County Council stopped funding for the service in Cheshire area so it’s now 2 routes,

    F5 Mold-Queensferry funded by Flintshire County Council

    101/101A Ellesmere Port-Garden City, funded by Cheshire West & Chester

    Rather annoyingly both services are operated by Arriva Wales, who used to operate the 5

    Ideally this should have been continued as a through Ellesmere Port-Mold service funded by both councils, which did used to happen back in the day, but hey ho, so much for joined up thinking.

    SM

    Like

  10. The various anomalies that exist when travelling across the border into and out of Wales from England, is something that local politicians neither understand, and certainly something they do not want to get involved with! For example, living here on the border of Shropshire and Wales. Using my Shropshire concessionary pass, I could if I wished to, get as far as Cannock quite comfortably on a Saturday. But cannot get to Chester, as the

    number one service from Wrexham to Chester will only accept Cheshire issued passes. Interestingly, the few and far between service 5 from Chester to Wrexham via the villages, and operated by Stagecoach happily accept all English concessionary passes.
    Arriva Wales have continued to honour English concessionary passes on the number two service between Oswestry and Wrexham, after the ill conceived closure of the Arriva Midlands Oswestry garage. But there needs to be a thorough countrywide review of all cross border services, in order to sort out once and for all, the various anomalies that now exist,

    Derek Lawman,

    Oswestry.

    Like

    1. Hi Derek,

      The Stagecoach 5 should NOT be accepting ‘all English concessionary passes’. If caught by the council they would be in trouble. The only people can officially travel cross border on the 5, are Wales pass holders and Cheshire Concessionary Pass (Cheshire West, Halton and Warrington) holders. And the journey must be continuous and start or end in Wales or Cheshire West (respectively).

      Arrivas 1 service is following the rules correctly.

      Like

  11. 13 passengers per hour, if I’ve read it correctly, is far from commercial and its continued existence will have to be with a significant contract payment.

    Like

  12. How extraordinary, that this section of road has aroused so many opinions and a wonderful drenching of nostalgia. Living in Hersham, my nearest Country Garage, Addlestone, would have had its Green Line coaches traversing this area frequently. When Capitalcard was launched in 1985 I just had to test it out on a LCBS driver working a Route 84 bus SA32, LR9, on 01/04/1985 and I was indeed correctly carried from New Barnet Station to High Barnet Station. In my Go As You Please era I had the privilege riding a DMS out of service on a Route 84 direct at night to PB Garage.

    Like

  13. I wonder if it’s possible that Oyster-Card acceptance boosts bus usage figures.

    I remember that in the 2000s, many non-TfL “cross-border” bus services accepted Oyster payment, then for some reason, around 2012, TfL changed Oyster fare rules? which then meant that no cross-border non-TfL services would continue to accept Oyster cards as fare payment.

    I think that TfL should turn the Oyster Card into something similar to Hong Kong’s Octopus Card, and should therefore be expanded nationwide, similar to a contactless debit card, but without any card fees. TfL aren’t run by innovators, so that’ll probably never happen.

    Like

  14. Thank you for this useful report. Having grown up in High Barnet in the 1960s when the 84 offered an attractive and relatively fast direct journey to St Albans (not via Potters Bar, in the days when the South Mimms interchange was merely a simple crossroads), it has been frustrating as a user to see it become far more convoluted over the years and ultimately truncated at Potters Bar. While the 84B is a welcome development as a stop-gap, given its hourly frequency and limited route, there is indeed a challenge in generating usage. If common sense could only prevail, a restored 84 route between Barnet and St Albans would regenerate usage that is currently lost on both the 84 and 84B.

    Like

  15. The 84B to me is a symptom of a much wider often ignored problem. The roads are there, the garage and the buses are there stationed in Potters Bar but because of some damned line on the map, certain places either are awkwardly served like the 84B or just not served at all. It’s ridiculous! The way TFL and the neighbouring counties treat (ignore) each other, you’d think there was some ocean or impassable barrier between them.

    The 84B as it is, really aught to be a temporary solution and a different longer route made to cover that 2 mile gap. No reason that section shouldn’t have a similar level of service to either the 298 or 313. More than enough routes are based out of Potters Bar Garage and we only need 1 route to Barnet. As someone who grew up in London and lives just outside now, the situation is absurd and very frustrating, how can quite sizable commuter towns that just happen to be on the wrong side of the border lose out on these essential services? Especially when historically, things like London Country and Greenline were essential lifelines connecting both city, town and country. I’ve noticed a lot of London’s traffic problems are caused from people who drive in from outside, what do we honestly expect when there is no coordination of buses with trains or of just buses between different areas?

    People don’t live their lives to a set line on the map, transport shouldn’t be restricted in that way. The short-sightedness is making towns like Potters Bar, Cheshunt and Waltham Abbey really suffer and holding everything back when they should be amongst the best places to live and commute from. Buses are really letting us down. Suppressed demand in these places for sure. The growth of Central Connect proves it. It’d be stupid to cut the 84B again just as it’s building up it’s base which after decades of cuts, it’s amazing it has the ridership it has even now. We need long term planning and funding to provide a service people can rely on. Backed up by boundaries that actually match the built up areas. Also good to see something like Superloop come about but a missed opportunity to not use it to cover more of the essential cross boundary journeys that we need.

    Aaron

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Maybe but the service needs to run at least half hourly ideally, whether just over the whole 242 route or the bit between Barnet and Potters Bar. The thing that frustrates me about it straddling across London and Hertfordshire is the lack of coordination. A direct bus route from Waltham Cross to Barnet Hospital sounds very good on paper but both Barnet and Cheshunt need a lot of bus priority and ideally the 242 wouldn’t go to Brookfield at that point, a separate route would cover that section as a circular town service. Also even if the route is lower in frequency, in general they need to run much later than 7:30pm. In either case, no reason at all for Barnet to Potters Bar to lack any bus service, that would be unthinkable given the relatively short distance between the towns.

    Aaron

    Like

    1. I think Barnet General is the main Hospital for Cheshunt and Waltham Cross do from that point of view it makes sense . I doubt the 242 would support a half hourly service though

      Like

  17. Minor correction… The 134 bus used to terminate in Pimlico (Chichester street), next to Dolphin Square. This was cut before Pimlico station on the Victoria line was opened.

    Like

Comments are closed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑