EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 4.12.2008 
SEC(2008) 2953 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Accompanying document to the 
 
Proposal for a 
 
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 
 
on the rights of passengers in bus and coac h transport and amending Regulation (EC) 
No 2006/2004 on cooperation between nation al authorities responsible for the 
enforcement of consumer protection laws 
 
IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
{COM(2008) 817 final} 
{SEC(2008) 2954} 
 
EN 2   EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. Procedural issues and consulta tion of interested parties.............................................. 4 
1.1. Purpose................................................................................................................... ...... 4 
1.2. Consultation and expert report..................................................................................... 5 2. Defining the problem ................................................................................................... 6 2.1. Project background....................................................................................................... 6  
2.2. What are the main problems identified ........................................................................ 7 2.2.1. Unequal footing with other modes of transport ........................................................... 7 2.2.2. Fragmentation of legislation ........................................................................................ 7 2.2.3. An "atomized" market.................................................................................................. 8 2.2.4. Persons with disabilities and ageing population .......................................................... 8 2.2.5. Insufficiency of the current legislative framework ...................................................... 9 2.2.6. Passengers .............................................................................................................. .... 10 
2.2.7.  Bus and coach operators............................................................................................. 10 
2.2.8. Other sectors........................................................................................................... .... 11 
2.3. Scrutiny of the EU's right to act ................................................................................. 11 3. OBJECTIVES AND KEY ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED  POLICIES............. 11 
3.1.1. Consumer protection .................................................................................................. 11 3.1.2. Cohesion................................................................................................................ ..... 12 
3.1.3. Common Transport Policy ......................................................................................... 12 3.1.4. Social inclusion ........................................................................................................ .. 12 
3.1.5. Single market ........................................................................................................... .. 13 
3.2. Specific objectives pursued by the Commission........................................................ 13 3.3. Key elements of the proposed policies....................................................................... 14 4. DEFINITION OF DIFFERENT PO LICY OPTIONS/ ALTERNATIVES............... 15 
4.1. Option 1 - no policy option ........................................................................................ 16 4.2. Option 2 - Standard protection scenario..................................................................... 19 4.2.1. Rights of persons with reduced mobility ................................................................... 20 4.2.2. Liability of operators in th e event of death or injury ................................................. 21 
 
EN 3   EN 4.2.3. Quality of service and assi stance in case of cancellation, delays and denied boarding
............................................................................................................................... ..... 21 
4.2.4. Complaint handling and enforcement ........................................................................ 21 4.3. Option 3 - Enhanced protection scenario (both I international and II domestic)....... 21 
4.3.1. Rights of persons with reduced mobility ................................................................... 21 4.3.2. Liability of operators in th e event of death or injury ................................................. 22 
4.3.3. Quality of service and assistance in the event of cancellation, delays and denied 
boarding...................................................................................................................... 2 2 
4.3.4. Complaint handling and enforcement ........................................................................ 23 4.4. Option 4 - Self-regulation scenario............................................................................ 23 5. ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACTS............................................................................... 24 5.1. Economic impacts ...................................................................................................... 24 5.1.1. Option 1 – No policy option....................................................................................... 24 5.1.2. Option 2 – Standard protection scenario.................................................................... 24 5.1.2.1. Liability of operators in the event of personal injury or damage to baggage ............ 24 
5.1.2.2. Disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility................................................ 26 5.1.2.3. Quality standard and obligation to inform ................................................................. 27 
5.1.3. Option 3.I - Enhanced protection scenario (international only)................................. 28 
5.1.3.1. Liability of operators in the event of personal injury or damage to baggage ............ 28 
5.1.3.2. Disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility................................................ 29 5.1.3.3. Compensation and assistance in case of can cellations, delays and denied boarding. 33 
5.1.3.4. Quality of service and information obligation ........................................................... 34 5.1.3.5. Complaint handling service and monitoring.............................................................. 34 5.2. Option 3.II - Enhanced protection scenar io (both international and domestic) ......... 36 
5.2.1. Option 4 - Self-regulation scenario............................................................................ 39 5.3. Social impacts ............................................................................................................ 40 
5.3.1. Option 1................................................................................................................ ...... 40 
5.3.2. Option 2................................................................................................................ ...... 40 
5.3.3. Option 3.I .............................................................................................................. ..... 41 
5.3.4. Option 3.II............................................................................................................. ..... 43 
5.3.5. Option 4................................................................................................................ ...... 43 
 
EN 4   EN 5.4. Environmental impacts............................................................................................... 43 
5.5. Value added of the EU action .................................................................................... 45 5.5.1. Options 1 and 4 ......................................................................................................... . 45 
5.5.2. Option 2................................................................................................................ ...... 45 
5.5.3. Option 3.I .............................................................................................................. ..... 46 
5.5.4. Option 3.II............................................................................................................. ..... 47 
5.6. Subsidiary and proportionality of options.................................................................. 47 5.7. Impact on SMEs......................................................................................................... 48 5.8. Administrative costs................................................................................................... 49 6. Key Conclusions of the Impact Assessment .............................................................. 50 6.1. Principle of non-discrimination and assist ance to disabled people and those with 
reduced mobility......................................................................................................... 50 
6.2. Principle of liability of ope rators in the event of death or injury of passengers ........ 52 
6.3. Quality standards / information obligations / compensation and assistance in case of 
cancellations, delays and denied boarding................................................................. 53 
6.4. Final conclusions:....................................................................................................... 5 4 
7. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE IMP LEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED 
POLICY OPTION...................................................................................................... 55 
7.1. Implementation and level of compliance ................................................................... 55 7.2. Risk of failure........................................................................................................... .. 55 
7.3. Outline of possible monitoring tools.......................................................................... 55 
1. P
ROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES  
1.1. Purpose 
This impact assessment has been prepared with  a view to examining the necessity for and 
desirability of establishing and/or extending the legislation granting rights  to passengers in the 
international bus and coach sector. It focuses in  particular on the three main areas of concern 
highlighted by the Commission in its policy docum ents, namely 1) the rights of persons with 
reduced mobility; 2) liability issues (insurance system in the event of death or injury); 3) 
compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of delay or cancellation. 
In assessing the impacts, consid eration has been given to the li st of possible kinds of impact 
identified in the Impact Assessment Guidelin es. However, as also recommended in the 
guidelines, the impact assessment has taken into account the principle of proportionate 
analysis and has focused on the most significant fo rms of impact and their distributive effects. 
Whenever possible, quantified es timates have been provided. 
 
EN 5   EN 1.2. Consultation and expert report 
Before drafting the legislative proposals and the present report, a public consultation was 
conducted in order to gather as many comm ents and suggestions as possible from the 
individuals and bodies concerned. This exerci se complied with the minimum standards for 
consultation of interested parties as se t out in the Commission Communication of 11 
December 2002 (COM (2002) 704 final). 
In July 2005 the Commission la unched a public consultation based on the Commission Staff 
Working Paper “Rights of Passengers in In ternational Bus and Coach Transport”. The 
Commission received 57 responses to the work ing paper from: Member State governments 
(14), European organisations (12), national organisations ( 20), companies (9) and other 
contributors (2). 
Many of the contributions drew the Commission’ s attention to the specific and distinctive 
features of the bus and coach sector. They ment ioned a whole range of factors that set this 
mode of transport apart from air and rail. For example: it does not own the infrastructure or 
maintain contractual relations with infrastructure managers; there are more factors which could cause delays and interruption of journe ys (i.e. traffic congestion, road and border 
checks, and waiting time at borders); services ar e provided mostly by small and medium-sized 
enterprises with limited financial means; local and regional services play a particular role; 
and, lastly, this mode of transport provides serv ices close to the end-cu stomer, adjusts quickly 
to needs of passengers and makes specialised services available for persons with reduced 
mobility.  
The contributions received revealed a clear division between bus and coach operators and 
their associations and federations on the one ha nd and consumer associations on the other. As 
a general rule, bus and coach operators see no need - or only a very limited need - for 
regulation at EU level, whereas consumer associations call for extensive rights for passengers. Most of the replies received from Member  States governments supported a further 
strengthening of protection in the bus and coach sector. Howeve r, very clear concerns were 
also expressed regarding the economic and organi sational pattern of this industry, and there 
was either unanimity about the scope of regul ation nor on whether to include or exclude 
particular types of service, in par ticular local and regional services.  
Consumer associations feel that the level of c onsumer protection is far from sufficient. They 
consider that on-going initia tives concerning se lf-regulation and voluntary commitments may 
be beneficial for consumers, but are insufficient because they are non-binding. They believe, as a matter of principle, that bus and coach  passengers should enjo y the same level of 
protection as passengers in other modes of transport, which is not yet the case.  
One issue that is clearly of gr eat interest is the case of pers ons with reduced mobility using 
this mode of transport. Many responses went  into great detail, reflecting the depth of 
constructive thought which has already been devote d to solving this problem. However, there 
was no unanimity between respondents on the scope of the problem and the means to address it. Some operators pointed to the increased cost and limited feasibility for a whole fleet and indicated that viable alternatives do exist for disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility (specialised bus and coach companies). 
The operators' main arguments are that the current economic situation does not allow any 
additional burden to be imposed, that there is  no real need for regul ation and that, in any 
event, a large number of issues have already be en addressed, either by national legislation or 
 
EN 6   EN by voluntary commitments which the operators th emselves have entered into. Some Member 
States are also concerned that any increase in regulatory burdens could result in rising fares 
and be passed on to consumers. This should be  borne in mind, particul arly when drafting a 
legislative proposal. Concerns we re also voiced that some of the provisions for compensation 
in the event of dela y could undermine safety. A number of stakeholders  expressed a 
preference for simplification, harmonisation and better appl ication of existing rules. 
The consultation was concluded w ith the publication of  the Report on the results of the public 
consultation and of the stakeholders' mee ting held in Brussels on 30 March 2006. The 
consultation paper, the contributions received , a summary of these contributions and the 
stakeholders meeting report are available on th e website “Your voice in Europe” and at the 
following internet address: 
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road/c onsultations/passengers_rights_en.htm  
In July 2006, the Commission received the op inion of the European Energy and Transport 
Forum encouraging Community action concerni ng the rights of bus and coach passengers. 
The Commission commissioned an impact a ssessment study from PricewaterhouseCoopers 
Italy on the establishment of the rights of bus  and coach passengers. The outcome of that 
study, which assesses specific impacts and compar es various options in the light of the 
objectives pursued, serves as the basis for this paper.  Other outside sources of expertise, such as prev ious studies carried out as part of research 
programmes or commissioned directly by the European Commission, are referenced in the 
text of the document. An Interservice Steering Group was set up in order to guide the wo rk of the impact 
assessment. The group consisted of representa tives of DGs that had responded positively to 
the invitation from DG TREN, namely: the Se cretariat General, DG MARKT, DG JLS, DG 
EMPL, DG SANCO, DG ENTR, DG ENV, DG ECFIN, DG RTD and DG TRADE. 
The Impact Assessment was submitted to the Impact Assessment Board that issued its 
opinions on 7 November 2007 and 7 May 2008 in which it suggest ed necessary modifications 
and improvements of the document. These sugges tions concerned more de tailed analysis of 
subsidiarity and proportionality of the proposal including demons tration of insufficiency of 
present legislative framework and analysis of  some of economic costs and benefits. These 
suggestions were incorporated in to the text except for separate  analysis of international and 
domestic services for option 2 where the cost and benefits are largely the same. 
2. D
EFINING THE PROBLEM  
2.1. Project background 
Over the last 30 years, the phenomenon of passenger mobility has increased considerably. In 
fact, since the 1970s it has doubled. This trend is due  to several factors, but three in particular 
stand out: economic growth, lower travel costs a nd progress towards “the creation of an area 
without internal frontiers”1.  
However, liberalisation of trans port services and the growth in travel have not always been 
accompanied by adequate measures to protec t passenger rights. As their numbers have 
increased, passengers have faced difficult s ituations, including cancellations, overbooking, 
                                                 
1 Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union  
 
EN 7   EN loss of luggage and delays. In addition, they are subjected to strict formalities (controls, 
registration) and they have already paid fo r their tickets. Bus and coach passengers, in 
particular, still do not enjoy the same passenge r rights as for other modes of transport, 
especially air transport. Coach  passenger rights are no t yet covered by Community legislation, 
and customers therefore have to rely on national liability schemes, fair trading legislation and 
voluntary customer care commitments by operators. In contrast to other modes there are few 
international agreements concerning passenger rights in bus and coac h transport that are 
binding on Member States. 
Furthermore, for international journeys, certain issues are not always clear, such as: which 
national legislation applies, who has liability, and how can passengers initiate proceedings 
and enforce their rights before the cour ts in the different Member States.  
The Commission has already rec ognised the need to extend pa ssenger protection measures to 
modes of transport other than air2. The outcome of the public consultation clearly proved that 
there was room for substantial improvement of the situation currently faced by bus and coach 
passengers. 
2.2. What are the main problems identified 
This mode of transport exhibits a number of distinctive features whic h affect both operators 
and passengers. 
2.2.1.  Unequal footing with other modes of transport 
Passengers in other modes of transport, partic ularly air passengers, already enjoy a set of 
rights established at Community level providing for adequate protection in cases where their 
journey is interrupted (liability of operato r for death/injury/lost and damaged baggage; 
compensation/assistance in the event of  cancellation/delays/denied boarding). 
Unlike other modes of transport there are neither  international agreements (with the exception 
of CVR3, which has been ratified by three Member States: Czech Republic, Slovakia and 
Latvia) nor Community legislation establishing passenger rights. At present, in contrast to 
other modes of transport, co ach and bus passengers are not covered by an international 
agreement on liability. For bus and coach services , there is an interna tional convention, which 
has been ratified by only three Member States:  
2.2.2.  Fragmentation of legislation 
Protection of bus and coach passengers varies from one Member State to another. Passengers 
have to rely on national liability schemes, fair  trading legislation and voluntary customer care 
commitments by operators. Operators in some c ountries have developed extensive voluntary 
agreements, including appropriate complaint handling and dispute resolution mechanisms; 
however, this is not a case for the majority of Member States. This state of affairs prevents 
fair competition between operators from differ ent Member States and with other modes of 
                                                 
2 White Paper “European Policy for 2010: Time to decide” COM(2001) 370 final; “Strengthening 
passenger rights within the European Union” COM(2005) 46 final. 
3 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on the Contract for the International 
Carriage of Passengers and Luggage by Road 
 
EN 8   EN transport. The compensation/assistance schemes in the event of an interrupted journey are not 
generalised across the EU. 
2.2.3.  An "atomized" market 
The market is characterized by a large num ber of enterprises providing bus and coach 
transport services which offer different levels  of passenger care and service quality. Passenger 
care varies from one operator to another a nd depends largely on na tional legislation and 
voluntary agreements that enterprises may have contracted. In many instances, this state of 
affairs prevents passengers from making informed  choices as to the level of service they are 
likely to receive.  
Generally there is little information availabl e to passengers as to how and where they can 
lodge complaints, or avail themselves of ine xpensive and non-cumbersome dispute resolution 
mechanisms in other Member States. 
2.2.4.  Persons with disabili ties and ageing population 
In general, passengers using this type of tr ansport tend to be "vul nerable", i.e. on low 
income/geographically isolated. However, availability of bus and coach services for persons 
with disabilities and reduced mobility is limite d, and this may hamper their integration into 
society. Persons with disabilities make up almost 10% of the population4 and persons with 
reduced mobility constitute an even larger pe rcentage of existing or potential coach and bus 
users. Persons with reduced mobility include:  persons with disabilities, the elderly, and 
persons with temporary disabilities. 
In spite of the progress ach ieved in many Member States5, disabled persons and persons with 
reduced mobility are still not getting appropri ate assistance when travelling or appropriate 
access to transport services. Fu rthermore, the Community and its Member States signed the 
United Nations Convention on th e Rights of Persons with Disa bilities, which provides for 
accessibility of, inter alia, transp ort facilities and non-discrimi nation on grounds of disability.  
Due to the ageing of the population and the larg e proportion of disabled persons, there is a 
need to ensure that bus  and coach services are accessible to  these groups. Curre ntly, this mode 
of transport is not accessible enough, except fo r dedicated services. However, in the near 
future, more and more people will be affected  by disabilities and reduced mobility. The need 
to ensure their mobility will increase significantly. 
                                                 
4 COMM (2005) 46 final – “ Strengthening passenger rights within the European Union ” 
5 The following countries have developed disability rights legislation within the last 15 years: Sweden 
(1979 and 1985): Legislation on public transport to be adapted to needs of disabled persons; Italy (1992 
and 2001): Law on Assistance, Social Integration and Rights of Disabled People. (1996) Law on 
Accessibility of Buildings, Public Transport and Services; UK (1995 and 2005) Disability 
Discrimination Act (DDA); Germany (2002): Act on equal opportunities for disabled persons; Spain 
(2003): National Law for equal opportunities, no n discrimination and universal accessibility; The 
Netherlands (2002): Act on Equal Treatment on the Grounds of Handicap or Chronic Illness; France 
(2005):Law on Equal Rights and Opportunities, Participation and Citizenship of Disabled Persons; 
Ireland (2005): Disability Act. Austria (2006): Disability Equality Package. 
 
EN 9   EN According to OECD estimates on th e ageing of the population in EU 256 the percentage of the 
population aged over 85 years will rise to  4.7 % for men and 7.6% for women in 2050 
compared with 1% and 2.5% respectively in 2000. 
2.2.5.  Insufficiency of the current legislative framework 
The current legislative framework creates re al problems for international and domestic 
passengers. The cross-border problems need to be assessed primarily from the point of view 
of the passenger undertaking inte rnational travel. Fo r passengers, there are big differences 
between bus and coach industry. In the first plac e, these stem from national legislation, which 
differs from one Member State to another, resulting in different levels of passenger 
protection; secondly, bus and coach  transport is on an unequal footing with other modes of 
transport, notably air and rail, where passengers already benef it or will benefit from a high 
and uniform level of protectio n. The real cross-border probl ems may involve issues of 
applicable legislation and the competent cour t/body before which a pa ssenger may claim his 
rights in the event of an accident or imprope r performance of a carriage contract etc.  
Differences between liability sy stems in the Member States may also result in different 
amounts of damages received in the case of an  accident. Generally there are no automatic 
solutions in place for the benefit of victims of accidents. Victims of accidents in another 
Member State tend to face a number of substan tial problems: additional expenses related to 
medical treatment, transportation, visits by fam ilies etc. Disabled persons and persons with 
reduced mobility receive different levels of as sistance, which makes their international travel 
more difficult (problems with boarding, changing fr om one mode of transport to another, etc. 
in Member States that offer lower levels of  protection and assistance, thus making their 
journey virtually impossible when they cannot e xpect a comparable leve l of assistance at the 
beginning of their travel in one Member State a nd the end in another MS). On the basis of a 
public consultation with stakeholders and an impact assessment study  it may be concluded 
that national current provisions appear insufficient as regards: 
- Effective protection of passengers  in the event of death and in jury, as there is generally no 
provision in national legislation for automa tic and speedy solutions, such as advance 
payments to cover the immediate economic needs of victims of an accident;  
- Limited liability rules applicable in the cas e of loss or damage to luggage or mobility 
equipment 
- Rights of people with disabili ties – not all Member States  have develope d legislation 
addressing accessibility and assistance issues suffi ciently. This can give rise to substantial 
problems in international travel where passengers with impaired mobility may receive a differing level of protection in another Member State;  
- Procedures for handling complaints differ fro m one Member State to another: it is often 
unclear where and how passengers can enfor ce their rights in another Member State. 
1.1. Who is affected?  
Passengers and operators, and possibly other sectors, will be affected. 
                                                
 
6 Source: OECD Demographic and Labour Force databa se, used in OECD(2007), Society at a Glance: 
OECD Social Indicators 2006 (w ww.oecd.org/els/social/indicators/SAG >see indicators GE2 Age 
dependency ratio). 
 
EN 10   EN 2.2.6.  Passengers 
Within the EU15, 46.6 million passengers used bus and coach transport for international trips 
in 2005, amounting to 30.8 billion passenger kilome tres (table 1). In total, 72.8 millions 
passengers accounted for 43.5 billion million passenger kilometres. 
Table 1 - Volume of international pa ssenger transport by bus and coach in 2005* 
  Number of passenger
 (millions) Passenger-kilometers  
billion 
intra EU15  46.6 30.800 
intra CEEC  13.1 4.800 
Between EU15 and CEEC 13.1 7.900 
Total 72.8 43.500 
* Theses figures include both scheduled and non-scheduled international services. 
Note: CEEC: EE, LV, LT, PL, CZ, HU, SK, SI, BG, RO 
Source: TEN-STAC study results (2005)  
Passengers, including disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility are affected – see 
point 2.2; at least 10% of the population experience disability problems or reduced mobility. 
2.2.7.  Bus and coach operators  
The bus and coach sector employs 1.382.514 persons in 244.285 enterprises7 The vehicle fleet 
(buses and coaches) in the EU totals 723.7008.  
The average size of companies is small; most of them have 1 or 2-10 vehicles.9 Overall, some 
26% of companies have only one bus or coac h, 50% of companies have between 2 and 10 
vehicles, 22% have between 11 and 50 vehicles a nd 2% have more than 50 vehicles. The size 
distribution is similar to the size di stribution in domestic transport. 
European bus and coach companies providin g long distance domestic and international 
scheduled services, and also domestic and international coach tour companies, occupy the 
main market segments in the bus and coach indu stry. See Table 2: Main market segments of 
the bus and coach industry  
Short distance scheduled services, private hire and school transport services fall outside the 
scope of this impact assessment. It was estimated that in EU27 in 2004 the total revenues of enterprises offering scheduled long distance coach services amounted to EUR980.5 million
10 
The holidays and tours sector accounts for a bout 18.3% of the EU27 bus and coach industry’s 
revenue. 
                                                 
7 EU Energy and Transport in Figures, Statistical Po cketbook 2004. No data av ailable for some Member 
States  
8 Data for 2002 
9 Source: IRU, NEA "A study to update road  transport statistics in Europe" May 2006 
10 Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers " Impact Assessment Study on the legislative proposal on the rights 
of passengers in international bus and coach transport" 2007 
 
EN 11   EN 2.2.8.  Other sectors 
Bodies managing coach terminals in Member  States may be affected by EU action. 
Depending on the option selected, they may incur pa rt of the cost of assistance offered to 
disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility. The coachwork manufacture industry 
may experience some impacts which depend larg ely on the option selected. Associated costs 
and benefits may result from the mandatory requirement for new fleet of vehicles to be 
accessible for disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility. Lastly, the tourism industry will also be affecte d. The holidays and tour sector using bus and coach services 
generated total revenues of  EUR10.163 billion in 2004
11 
2.3. Scrutiny of the EU's right to act 
The European Union has the power to act on passe ngers' rights issues, according to the legal 
basis established for either tran sport regulation or consumer pr otection. The legal basis in the 
field of transport policy is enshrine d in Articles 70 to 80 of the Treaty  establishing the 
European Community. Article 71 of the Treaty, in  particular, states that for the purpose of 
implementing the transport policy, the Council sh all lay down, inter alia: (a) common rules 
applicable to international transport to or from the territory of a Member State or passing across the territory of one or more Member St ates and (d) any other appropriate provisions. 
The establishment of the rights of  passengers in other modes of transport (air, rail) was based 
on the Treaty provisions on transport policy. Howeve r, the European Union also exercises its 
powers in the field of consumer  protection (Article153, paras 1-2)  or may legislate by virtue 
of the rules on the approximation of laws  (Articles 94, 95 and 153). The choice of the legal 
basis is therefore largely determined by the sc ope and subject matter of  the legislative act.  
3. OBJECTIVES
 AND  KEY  ELEMENTS  OF THE  PROPOSED  POLICIES 
The main objectives of establishing the right s of passengers are underpinned by the general 
objectives of the European Union in terms of a high level of customer protection, social 
inclusion of different social groups and en suring the movement of  persons within the 
European Union.  
3.1.1.  Consumer protection  
The Treaty establishing the Europe an Union provides in Article 3 (1) (t) that the Community 
should contribute to the strengthening of consumer protection In this respect, the 
establishment of passenger ri ghts in bus and coach tran sport meets this objective. 
Establishment and further strengthening of the ri ghts of passengers is in  line with the high 
priority given by the Amsterdam Treaty to the protection of consumers. In its Communication 
"EU Consumer Policy strategy 2007-2013: empowering consumers,  enhancing their welfare, 
effectively protecting their identified objectives and priorities"12 the Commission states that 
one of the priorities is to put consumers at th e heart of other EU po licies. The Communication 
notes that progress has been made in the integra tion of consumer interests, inter alia, in air 
transport. The aim for the future is to build on these achievements in order to make integration of consumer interests more systematic. Ther efore, the Commission is extending passenger 
                                                
 
11 Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers " Impact Assessment Study on the legislative proposal on the rights 
of passengers in international bus and coach transport" 2007 
12 COM(2007)99 final 
 
EN 12   EN rights developed in the air sect or to other transport modes, in particular in relation to 
passengers with reduced mobility.  
3.1.2.  Cohesion 
Under the terms of the Treaty (Art. 3 (1)(k ), the Community has a duty to strengthen 
economic and social cohesion within the EU. Bu s and coach passengers in general belong to 
social groups that are vulnerable in terms of in come and age, but also due to disability or 
reduced mobility. Reinforced protection may theref ore serve to improve their social inclusion. 
In fact, coach travel is particularly important  to social groups without  a car, without full time 
employment, those on low income, the young and the elderly. A recent survey carried out 
among 'National Express’13 customers produced the following conclusions: 
• 70% of customers are not in full-time employment; 
• 38% are retired or not working; 
• (only) 30% are aged 25-49; 
• 23% are students and 9% are in part-time employment; 
• (almost) 50% do not ho ld a driving licence. 
Furthermore, the development of international co ach services is closely linked to immigration. 
In most cases, these migrant populations are in the low-income bracket and return to their 
home country at regular intervals by means of  scheduled internati onal coach services.  
3.1.3.  Common Transport Policy 
Article 3(1)(f) of the Treaty stipulates that the Community should strive to achieve its 
objectives by means of a common policy in the s phere of transport. The rights of passengers 
in other modes of transport, incl uding air and rail, have become an  integral part of this policy. 
The objectives should remain in line with policies managed by the European Union with 
regard to abovementioned objectives of the Community. 
3.1.4.  Social inclusion 
With regard to combating social exclus ion, the Lisbon European Council (March 2000) 
agreed on the need to define policies for comb ating social exclusion based on an open method 
of coordination, combining common objectives, national action plans  and a programme  
presented by the Commission to encourage co -operation in this field. In March 2006, the 
European Council adopted a new framework for th e social protection and social inclusion 
process (OMC: Open Method of Co-ordinati on). The proposal regarding the rights of 
passengers in international bus and coach services is consistent with the objectives of the OMC, as it establishes the principle of non-di scrimination and assistance in respect of 
disabled persons. The proposal is also in line wi th Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental 
Rights. Furthermore, it remains in conformity w ith Article 13 of the EC Treaty which enables 
the Community to combat discrimination in areas of Community competence.  
                                                
 
13 National Express is the main coach company in the UK. 
 
EN 13   EN 3.1.5.  Single market 
Lastly, the proposal would allo w passengers to enjoy improved protection so as to benefit 
fully from the Single Market. Within the Inte rnal Market, passengers should not only benefit 
from the wide range of services , but also enjoy adequate protec tion of their ec onomic interests 
as users. This proposal ensures that citizens,  including those with re duced mobility, can make 
full use of the benefits of the single market and have the confidence to use them. The EU 
consumer policy dimension is at the heart of the next phase of the internal  market, as set out 
in the Commission's communication to the 2007 Spring European Council on the Single 
Market Review14. The single market generates benefits for consumers by widening choice and 
lowering prices, and providing adequate protecti on. In this respect, the establishment of bus 
and coach passengers' rights will complement the progress achieved in the transport sector within the framework of European Single Market. 
3.2. Specific objectives pursued by the Commission 
To address the problems faced by passengers, th e Commission has already taken a number of 
policy initiatives. In the White Paper “European  transport policy for 2010: time to decide” the 
European Commission envisaged the establishment of passengers ’ rights in all modes of 
transport. In its Communicatio n on strengthening passengers' rights within the European 
Union, the Commission presente d a policy approach on how to  extend passe nger protection 
measures to modes of transport other than ai r transport. The Commission identified the rights 
that needed to be strengthened by the Community  action regardless of the means of transport 
used: a) rights of persons with reduced mobility, b) automatic and immediate solutions when travel is interrupted, c) liability in the event of  death or injury of passengers, d) treatment of 
complaints and means of redress, e) passenger  information and f) other initiatives. With 
regard to international coach transport, the Commission highlighted three main areas of concern: 1) the rights of persons with re duced mobility, 2) liability issues and 3) 
compensation and assistance in the event of inte rrupted travel. In particular, the specific 
objectives include: 
• Asserting the principle of non-discriminatio n and assistance to disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility; 
• Asserting the principle of liability of operators in the event of death or injury of 
passengers; 
• Ensuring a level of quality st andards of services, defining  information obligations and 
asserting the principle of assistance in the event of cancella tions, delays, etc; 
• Setting up a procedure for handling complaints 
• Ensuring appropriate enforcement. 
                                                
 
14 A Single Market for Citizens: interim report to the 2007 Spring European Council Brussels COM 
(2007) 60, 21.2.2007 
 
EN 14   EN 3.3. Key elements of the proposed policies 
The table below summarizes key elements of  the policy options, including their detailed 
scope. Further on in this paper these key elements  are considered in the light of policy options 
and the different degrees of EU intervention are examined. 
Key element of policies Content 
Principle of non-
discrimination and assistance to disabled people 
 • Non–discrimination clause: reservation cannot be 
refused on the ground of disability/reduced mobility 
• Assistance with 
embarking/disembarking/interconnecting 
• A requirement to provide notification in good time; 
failing such notification, the operator would have to 
make reasonable efforts to provide assistance 
• Mandatory transport of mobility equipment  
• Care facilities at coach terminals; 
• Travel information in the required format; 
• Physical assistance at any stage; 
• Mandatory accessibility of buses and coaches 
Principle of liability of the 
operators in the event of death or injury of passengers 
 • Harmonization of liability system across the EU  
• Unlimited
 liability in case of death and injury 
• A liability system comparable to that in air, rail and 
maritime transport with regard to death or injury of 
passengers 
• Claims up to a certain amount cannot be contested 
• Advance payments in the ev ent of death or injury 
• Strict liability up to the am ount comparable to air/rail 
transport in the event of loss of or damage to baggage. 
Establishment of basic 
quality standards and monitoring 
 • Establishment of quality standards at the EU level 
• Monitoring of compliance w ith quality standards  
• Defining the set of information that should be available 
to passengers 
• Improvement of access to in formation on conditions of 
 
EN 15   EN carriage and fares. 
Cancellation, denied 
boarding and delays 
 • Compensation for cancellation: refund of ticket price + 
compensation related to ticket price or length of journey 
• Assistance: meals, refreshments, accommodation 
• Return service to the first point of departure at the 
earliest opportunity 
• Continuation or re-routing to the final destination (under 
comparable transport conditions) 
• No compensation scheme, only the obligation of bus and 
coach carriers to provide assistance. 
Complaint handling service and monitoring 
 • Existing regulatory mechanisms plus consumer feedback 
• Air transport model 
• Operators to keep a file of all complaints received 
• Quality standards certificate 
• Independent institution at EU level. 
4. DEFINITION  OF DIFFERENT  POLICY  OPTIONS/  ALTERNATIVES 
Table 3 summarises the options considered. Options  2, 3 and 4 are alternatives. It has to be 
noted that each of these options is available separately for every main issue identified. A 
combination of elements of each option for a gi ven issue is also possible. For policy option 2 
"standard protection scenario " the political nature of the acti on is the same as policy option 3 
(i.e. EU action in both cases), and it also invol ves the use of a Community legal tool. The only 
difference between the two policy options is th e purpose of the measure: in policy option 2 
the EU legislators confine themselves to setting a general framework, whereas in option 3 the 
EU legislators go into all the necessa ry details by means of a regulation . 
Table 3 Summary of options 
Option 1  No policy option 
No EU action, so the status quo rema ins intact; i.e. differing levels 
of protection of bus and coach pa ssengers in the Member States 
continue to exist. 
Option 2  Standard protection scenario 
Community legal act establishing a general framework laying down 
only minimum rules of protec tion and, where appropriate, 
consolidating/amending and/or simplifying any existing Community or national legislation (motor ve hicle insurance, package tours 
 
EN 16   EN directive, customer legislation). 
Option I – international transport only Option II – both long distance domestic  and international transport 
Option 3  Enhanced protection scenario 
Community legal act establishing the rights of bus and coach 
passengers in international transport. 
Option I: international transport only. 
Option II: both long-distance domestic  and international transport. 
 
Option 4  Self-regulation scenario 
Scenario in which the bus and co ach operators develop and adopt 
voluntary EU-wide/domestic self-regul ation measures with regard 
to the rights of bus and coach passengers. 
 
4.1. Option 1 - no policy option 
There is no express and specific regulation at EU  level covering users’ rights of bus and coach 
passengers, apart from some special provisions for persons with reduced mobility that are containedin the Council Directive
15 and some general rules on mandatory civil insurance 
provided by Council and Europ ean Parliament directives16. Consequently, EU citizens today, 
in the event of breach of contract, such as fa ulty performance or personal injury, are faced 
with different national rules, which provide different types of prot ection with differing 
degrees of efficiency. However, it may be useful to review so me of the rules on consumer 
protection17 and package holidays18, if not to establish a complete discipline, then at least to 
                                                 
15 See Directive 2001/85/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2001 relating 
to special provisions for vehicles used for the carriage of passengers comprising more than eight seats 
in addition to the driver's seat, and amending Directives 70/156/EEC and 97/27/EC 
16 See Directive 2005/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 relating to 
insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles 
(amending Fourth Directive 2000/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 May 
2000, Third Council Directive 90/232/EEC of 14 May 1990, Second Council Directive 84/5/ECC of 30 December 1983 and First Council Directive 72/166/EEC of 24 April 1972  on the approximation of the 
laws of the Member States relating to insurance ag ainst civil liability in respect of the use of motor 
vehicles). 
17 See Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning 
unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council 
Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and 
of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
(‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair 
terms in consumer contracts 
18 See Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 19 90 on package travel, pack age holidays and package 
tours 
 
EN 17   EN draw up a legal framework with regard to civil li ability, in particular with regard to defence 
against faulty performance and unfair practices . Furthermore, the EU provisions on competent 
jurisdiction19 and the international conve ntions on applicable law20 can help bus and coach 
passengers, insofar as they are involved in international services, to bring an action correctly and to properly exercise their rights - even though the carriage  contract is often not included 
in their scope. On the other hand, the existing rule s, ranging from compensation amounts to 
claim procedures, resulting from the the Un ited Nations International Convention on the 
carriage of passengers, might serve as a model for rules on compensation and claim 
procedures.
21 But so far it has been ratified by onl y three Member States. The following table 
gives an overview of the present legislation rela ted to protection that has an impact on bus and 
coach transport.   Vehicles 
insurance Package 
Holidays Consumer 
protection Internat. 
Agreement
22 Legal 
procedures Law cases 
Liability for death or personal injury √  √ √  √ 
Clause of exclusion due to force majeure    √   
Responsibility for auxiliaries or means   √ √   
Provisions for minimum amounts    √   
Provisions for maximum amounts √   √   
Possibility of higher national limits √  √ √   
Possibility of international  agreement    √   
Cover for death or injury  √  √ √   
Advance payments for death or personal injury       
Provisions for indemnity forms       
Liability for faulty performance  √ √ √  √ 
Clause of exclusion due to force majeure   √     
Responsibility for auxiliaries   √ √ √   
Limitation for passenger fault or negligence   √  √   
Limitation for behaviour of third party  √     
                                                 
19 See Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2000 of 22 December 2000 on ju risdiction and the recognition and 
enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. 
20 See Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations done in Roma on 19 June 1980. 
21 See Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Passengers and Luggage by Road 
(CVR), of 1 March 1973 and Protocol to the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage 
of Passengers and Luggage by Road, of 5 July 1978 (CVR) 
22 See “Convention on law applicable to contractual obligation” done in Rome on 19th June 1990. 
Unfortunately the Conventio n, that was signed and ratify by all Member States, does not apply to 
contracts of carriage, apart from, once time, contracts very similar to holidays packages. 
 
EN 18   EN  Vehicles 
insurance Package 
Holidays Consumer 
protection Internat. 
Agreement
22 Legal 
procedures Law cases 
Wilful misconduct or gross negligence of carrier   √ √   
Indemnity for passenger or baggage delays    √   
Retrieval and delivery for loss baggage    √   
Liability for lost or damaged baggage √   √  √ 
Clause of exemption due to force majeure     √   
Exclusion for dangerous or perishable baggage    √   
Responsibility for auxiliaries or means    √   
Provisions for minimum amounts √   √   
Provisions for maximum amounts    √   
Possibility of higher national limits √   √   
Possibility of international agreement    √   
Responsibility for personal effects    √   
Possibility of special check for baggage    √   
General provisions on liability √ √ √ √   
Liability for successive carriages  √     
Nullity of contrary stipulations   √ √   
Mandatory insurance against liability √      
Mandatory system for travel guarantees  √     
Possibilityfor passenger to withdraw   √ √    
Cover for legal and procedural costs    √   
Provisions on claim or action √  √ √   
Setting of time limits √   √   
Possibility of limitation suspensions    √   
Provisions for burden of proof   √ √   
Provisions for jurisdiction √   √ √  
Possibility of forum shopping    √   
Arbitration clause    √   
Provisions for lis pendens    √ √  
 
EN 19   EN  Vehicles 
insurance Package 
Holidays Consumer 
protection Internat. 
Agreement
22 Legal 
procedures Law cases 
Enforcement and recognition √  √ √ √  
Nullity of contrary stipulations     √  
Legal basis  √ √ √ √ √ √ 
International law   √ √  √  
Court of Justice judgment      √ 
Community regulation      √  
Community directive √  √    
Non-binding Community provision       
Voluntary agreement       
National law √   √   
4.2. Option 2 - Standard protection scenario 
The traditional way to guarantee legal protection for a group of consumer s, such as bus and 
coach passengers, is to create a common framework at European  level to harmonise national 
laws. This may be achieved by means of a dir ective, as has already been done for package 
holidays, consumer contracts and unfair practi ces. A Community act on users’ rights for bus 
and coach passengers would leave Member States  free to choose the appropriate legal and 
administrative measures to implement passenge r rights. Thus, in the impact assessment, 
Option 2 follows the same approach as the one taken with regard to policy option 3 " enhanced 
protection scenario " i.e. by splitting it into an " international only " and " international and 
domestic " option. However, these two sub-options can  be analysed jointly as one option. By 
its very nature, this option should seek to es tablish common minimum rules for bus and coach 
transport, as the lowest common denominator. Th is means that there is actually no reason to 
expect the costs or benefits for companies  to be different according to the nature of the trip 
(i.e. whether it is intra-Community or domestic).  The costs related to long distance trips are 
broadly the same, whether the trip covers  the 900 km distance between Barcelona and 
Granada (domestic) or between Barcelona a nd Dijon (international). Since the impact 
assessment includes a detailed cost-benefit analys is for the two scenarios "international only" 
and "international and domestic" under policy option 3, any specific cost-benefit analysis 
under option 2 would produce essen tially the same result for th ese sub-options. In terms of 
descriptive analysis, the impact of the "inter national" and "international and domestic" sub-
options remains broadly the same. Thus the result s can be presented together in the tables.  
Proportionality and subsidiarity of two sub-options. It has become clear from the public consulta tions that the national legislation of many 
Member States does not appropriately address th e issues of bus and coach passenger rights, 
especially with regard to interruption of jour neys, assistance to disabl ed persons and persons 
with reduced mobility, and enforcement of contractual rights in domestic travel. Passengers using international services are confronted with even more co mplex issues and problems. At 
 
EN 20   EN this stage it can be noted that, by and la rge, the added value of Community action for 
international services will be the same as for domestic services. However, more passengers - especially persons with disabilities and reduced  mobility - will benefit from better protection 
and increased quality of services. It must be stressed that applying two sets of rights to 
domestic and international se rvices would create two classes of passengers and cause 
confusion as to the applicable legal framewor k and regimes for enforcing passenger rights. 
For example: a service Hamburg-Munich-Vienna  where two passengers (one travelling to 
Munich and another travelling on to Vienna) would receive differe nt levels of protection even 
though they are travelling on the same bus. The EP judged this to be unacceptable with regard 
to rail passenger rights.  From the passenger's
 point of view, benefits are much greater by far if 
an EU action covers both international and domestic  trips. With regard to the consequences of 
insufficient protection of passenge rs in transport services, th e EU has adopted a regulation 
establishing the rights of passengers  in air and rail transport. Th ese measures concern liability 
issues, assistance and financial compensation for passengers in the event of interrupted journey, non-discrimination and assistance to pe rsons with reduced mobility, and information 
to passengers. It has to be noted that these m easures apply to both international and domestic 
services.  
The public consultation of stakeholders clearly  demonstrated that protection of passengers 
varies considerably from Member State to Memb er State, and in general terms, is still far 
from sufficient. 
Judging by the example of other mode s of transport, it is  apparent that a real improvement of 
passenger protection can only be achieved at EU le vel. While this is true of international 
services, where the transborder dimension adds to the complexity of the problem, domestic 
services should also be subject to certain minimum requirements. 
4.2.1.  Rights of persons with reduced mobility 
Under this option, disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility would have the right to 
assistance at the terminal a nd on board, which may include: 
• assistance with check-in and registration; 
• proceeding from check-in to the boarding point; 
• boarding and disembarking from buses and coaches;  
• luggage handling; 
• stowage and retrieval of mobility devices; 
• accessing connecting means of transport within the terminal when in transit; 
• travel information in the required format. 
Assistance for disabled persons and persons w ith reduced mobility should be provided at no 
extra cost. Disabled persons or persons with re duced mobility will be required to notify their 
requirements to the long distance bus carrier, its  agent or the tour opera tor concerned at least 
48 hours before the time of departure of the se rvice. If less notice is  given, the terminal 
manager must make all reasonable e fforts to provide the assistance. 
 
EN 21   EN There should be a compulsory minimum set of requirements for training the operator and the 
terminal staff in assisting persons with reduced mobility.  
4.2.2.  Liability of operators in the event of death or injury 
A Community act on rights for bus and coach passengers, with respect to the liability 
mechanism for personal injuries or economic lo sses, should ensure the following basic rules: 
minimum indemnities both for death and personal injury and for lost and damaged baggage, minimum amounts for indemnity. 
4.2.3.  Quality of service and assistance in case of cancellation, delays and denied boarding 
The objective should be to establish minimum rules on the following: information for 
passengers before and during the journey; dealing with any even t that interrupts a journey; 
rules to be observed for dela ys; treatment of complaints; and settlement of disputes. 
Although certain carriers are alrea dy considering offering such so lutions on a voluntary basis, 
these should be available under the same cond itions throughout the Community. A competent 
authority would be required to monitor and enforce those rights and obligations. 
In addition, it should be noted that specific rule s for bus and coach journeys are already in 
place as part of "package" travel
23. 
4.2.4.  Complaint handling and enforcement 
A competent body is designated at national level to deal with complaints filed by passengers. 
Possible administrative cost are presented in point 5.7. 
4.3. Option 3 - Enhanced protec tion scenario (both I int ernational and II domestic) 
In order to establish complete  protection of passengers’ rights, a new EU regulation - which 
will be directly and immediately applicable - is preferable. A regulation can cover not only an 
international journey between at least two Member  States, but also a domestic service within a 
single Member State. This approach has alread y been adopted for other modes of transport, 
notably air and rail, where it was apparent that the more general transport or consumer 
legislation is insufficient to address the issu es of passenger protection. At the moment there 
are few Community rules that apply to bus and coach passengers. 
4.3.1.  Rights of persons with reduced mobility 
Under this option, mandatory accessibility of the fleet of vehicles has to be considered. From 
a given starting date, new vehicl es purchased by the European bus and coach operators will 
have to respect accessibility requirements set by the EU. Since for occasional services there 
are already companies that offer specific services for disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility, this requirement will not apply to occasional services. There are many simple features which could be included, at little cost, in the design of vehicles to make them 
                                                
 
23 Directive 90/314 is applicable only for holiday packages (non-scheduled services). The holiday 
“package” is a “pre-arranged combination of not fewer than two of the following when sold or offered 
for sale at an inclusive price and when the service covers a period of more than twenty-four hours or 
includes overnight accommodation: a)  transport; b) accommodation; c)  other tourist services not 
ancillary to transport or accommodation and accoun ting for a significant proportion of the package” 
 
EN 22   EN more accessible to the large numbers of people w ho currently find it diffi cult or impossible to 
use them – they include improved step dimens ions, better seating and on-board audible and 
visual announcements. Furthermore, it has to  be made possible to accommodate wheelchair 
users who travel while remaining seated in their own wheelchair.  However it should be bear 
in mind that some of these issues are alre ady regulated by the Dir ective 2001/85/EC of the 
European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2001 relating to special provisions 
for vehicles used for the carriage of passengers  comprising more than eight seats in addition 
to the driver's seat. Therefore it's apparent th at an improvement of acc essibility of vehicles 
may be done by legislative measures on type-approval of vehicles. 
The EU defines the range of faci lities required at stops and te rminals that has to be provided 
by Member States and local authorities in char ge of managing the infrastructures whenever a 
new infrastructure is built or an exis ting one is refurbished or replaced. 
As with option 2, there is a clause concerning  non-discrimination and assistance for disabled 
persons and persons with reduced mobility. 
4.3.2.  Liability of operators in the event of death or injury 
This option includes the obligation of advan ce payments, setting amounts under which claims 
for damages in the event of death or injury cannot be contested, and setting the limits for 
liability for loss or damage of luggage. It also covers quality of servi ce and assistance in case 
of cancellation, delays and denied boarding. 
4.3.3.  Quality of service and assistance in the event of cancellation, delays and denied 
boarding 
This legislative initiative can cover all types of services, both domestic and international, and 
be applicable to both scheduled and unscheduled occasional services. 
As with air transport, coach pa ssengers should be guaranteed an  adequate level of protection. 
Depending on the circumstances, compensation may be required for any inconvenience 
caused to passengers due to the interruption, cancellation or delay of their journey, as well as 
denied boarding, even though this does not appear to be a freque nt problem for bus and coach 
passengers. 
For this purpose it might be useful to look at what has been done in other sectors (e.g. the 
aviation sector) to see whether the same syst em could be extended to the bus and coach 
transport sector, and specific measures be intr oduced to compensate passengers in cases of 
cancellation, denied boarding, dela ys and interruption of journey. 
Once passengers have been made aware of their rights, the exercise of  these rights should be 
made as simple as possible and Member States should introduce appropri ate measures to that 
end. 
In order to be responsive to passengers’ complaints, each carrier should designate a 
convenient physical meeting poin t for lodging complaints. A ll customer service contact 
information will be provided, if possible by means of timetables, a website and any other public information sources, as well as at all accredited travel agencies. Even with such 
improvements, operators and passengers might sti ll disagree on settlement. Both sides have an 
interest in a mechanism for settling disagreements out of court, for example through 
alternative dispute resolution (ADR).  
 
EN 23   EN Member States should provide for appropriate penalties and clearly define the treatment of 
complaints so that passengers know to whom  they can turn. Each MS should designate a 
competent body to deal with complaints, as ha s already been done in the aviation and rail 
sectors; this will help passengers to exercise their rights. 
One last aspect is the availabi lity of adequate information in  real time on interruptions to 
services (delays, cancellations, changes to tim etables, etc.). Where the journey does not 
proceed as planned, passengers are frequen tly left without information; however, 
cancellations and delays are more readily accepte d if complete information is made available 
promptly.  
4.3.4.  Complaint handling and enforcement 
In order to be responsive to passengers’ complaints, each carrier should designate a point for 
lodging complaints. All customer service contact  information will be provided, if possible on 
timetables, on a website, and any other public info rmation sources, as well as at all accredited 
travel agencies. Even with these improvements,  operators and passengers could still disagree 
on settlement. Both sides have an interest in  a mechanism for settling disagreements out of 
court, for example through alternat ive dispute resolution (ADR).  
Member States should provide for appropriate penalties and clearly define the treatment of 
complaints so that passengers know to whom  they can turn. Each MS should designate a 
competent body for dealing with complaints, as already exists in the aviation and railway 
sector; this will help passenge rs to enforce their rights. 
4.4. Option 4 - Self-regulation scenario 
In this scenario, the EU re gulator could simply promote a common "soft-law" framework 
based on best practices and provide an impr oved, alternative, disp ute resolution system 
backed up by mediation facilities. The bus and coach carriers, for thei r part, could undertake 
to adopt quality and efficiency standards, so as to: 
• Provide services of a specified quality (improve punctual ity, avoid cancella tion and denied 
boarding, etc.) 
• Provide care and assistance in the ev ent of an interruption of a journey 
• Provide, without surcharges, acces sible transport services for pe rsons with disabilities and 
reduced mobility. 
Bus and coach carriers should develop a Passenger Service Commitment, following 
consultation with representatives of stakeholders and authorities. This code of conduct should 
contain commitments to deliver defined standards of services to bus an d coach travellers, to 
describe the level of service consumers may exp ect from signatory carriers and to make them 
better informed about choices when planning th eir travel arrangements.  Signatory carriers will 
in turn develop their own code of conduct, incorporat ing the agreed rules,  establishing staff 
training programmes and introducing charge s to implement the commitments. Under a 
voluntary code, carriers could und ertake to adopt simple, sta ndardised procedures for the 
lodging of complaints, to create effective sy stems for dealing with them, and to respond 
within a short time. They could also give pa ssengers clear information as to where they 
should send their complaints. 
 
EN 24   EN 5. ANALYSIS  OF THE  IMPACTS 
In order to assess the ec onomic, environmental and social im pact of the proposed measures on 
enforcing passengers’ rights, an evaluation of the impact resulting from each proposed measure will be carried out. 
5.1. Economic impacts 
5.1.1.  Option 1 – No policy option 
The analysis of available Member States' nationa l legislation confirms the variable degree of 
protection offered to bus and coach passengers across the EU. This sector is not covered 
either by Community legislation or by international agreements.  
This option basically maintains the status q uo in the sector, and th erefore will have no 
additional impact on it. Thus, no new economic, social or environmental impacts can be 
identified at this stage. Passengers would have to continue to rely on national legislation and 
voluntary schemes developed by the operators . Placing the protectio n of passengers on a 
comparable level across the European Uni on might prove to be a lengthy process. 
However, it should be noted that this option does not correspond to the general and specific 
objectives pursued by the Commission in terms of ensuring a high level of protection of 
passengers that is comparable with other modes of  transport. In the light  of this consideration, 
the Commission has already recognised the need  to extend passenger pr otection measures to 
modes of transport othe r than air transport
24. The outcome of the pub lic consultation clearly 
proved that there was room for substantial improvement in the situation currently facing bus 
and coach passengers. 
5.1.2.  Option 2 – Standard protection scenario 
5.1.2.1.  Liability of operators in the event of personal injury or damage to baggage 
Additional costs that carriers may incur relate to: minimum indemnity amounts, minimum 
insurance cover amounts, advance pa yments and legal procedures.  
The following table shows the number of fatalities for road transport, specifically for bus and 
coach transport in urban and non-urban areas of selected European countries. There are no 
specific statistics on fatalities with regard to  long distance bus and coach services; however, 
these are likely to compare to the number of fatalities regi stered outside urban areas. As 
indicated in the table the number of fata lities in 2004 when travelling by bus and coach 
outside urban areas was only 99 (including drivers), whereas the total number of fatalities 
among travellers by all modes of transport by road was 26.919 in EU1425. In 2005, road 
fatalities for EU 25 were 41 27426; it can therefore be assumed that there will also be an 
increase in the number of fatalities in bus and coach transport. 
                                                 
24 White Paper “European Policy for 2010: Time to decide” COM(2001) 370 final; “Strengthening 
passenger rights within the European Union” COM(2005) 46 final. 
25 Source: CARE Database / EC (2006) da ta available for UE-14 without Germany 
26 EU Energy and Transport in Figures. Statistical pocketbook 2006. 
 
EN 25   EN Table 4 – Number of fatalities in transport by ro ad and specifically by bus or coach transport 
(in which the fatality was travelli ng) and type of area by country, 2004 
 Bus and Coach 
 inside urban area outside urban area All modes of transport by 
road 
BE 1 4 1.162 
DK 0 1 369 
EL 0 8 1.670 
ES 1 4 4.741 
FR 0 21 5.530 
IE 0 0 337 
IT 9 15 5.625 
LU 0 0 62 
NL 0 0 1.028 
AT 1 8 878 
PT 0 3 1.294 
FI 0 24 375 
SE 1 0 480 
UK 18 10 3.368 
EU-14 31 99 26.919 
% by area 23,8% 76,2%  
Source: CARE Database / EC (2006) 
The following table shows the number of fataliti es in the EU-15 Member States in 2004 per 
one billion passenger-kilometres, broken down by m ode of transport. Both rail and bus and 
coach have proved themselves to be very safe modes of transpor t. Furthermore, it should be 
noted that the probability of fatalities in bus a nd coach transport is considerably lower than in 
passenger cars. 
Table 5 – Number of fatalities by trans port mode per 1000 million passenger-kilometres 
(2004 or previous year when data not available) 
  Bus or Coach Passenger car Rail 
BE 0,3 5,6 0,1 
DK 0,1 3,6 0,0 
DE 0,2 3,7 0,3 
EL 0,4 11,4 0,0 
ES 0,1 7,6 0,0 
 
EN 26   EN FR 0,5 4,6 0,1 
IE 0,0 7,0 0,0 
IT 0,2 3,9 0,2 
LU 0,0 8,5 0,0 
NL 0,0 3,3 0,0 
AT 0,6 5,8 0,2 
PT 0,3 8,0 2,2 
FI 3,2 3,6 0,6 
SE 0,4 3,0 0,2 
UK 0,2 2,6 0,4 
UE -15 0,31 4,35 0,24 
Source: PwC elaboration on Eurostat  and CARE Database / EC (2006) 
The responsibility for calculati ng the amount of compensation falls to the national courts of 
the Member States who are responsible for settl ing case by case, and according to domestic 
law. National courts are also responsible for identifying the provider obliged to pay and the 
passenger entitled to damages. In this respect, the Member States are in principle free to choose the type of liability system, the mechanism of the transfer of righ ts and for calculating 
the amount of compensation. Under these circumstances, levels of compensation per se  are 
not expected to rise significantly, even if action by the EU might set a minimum amount for 
indemnities and compensation
27. For higher amounts, it would si mply be a matter of setting a 
common economic threshold, on the basis of national experience.. 
5.1.2.2.  Disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility 
Training of drivers and other staff, the provision of information and similar issues will 
represent other additional costs. It is difficult to  provide an estimate of costs for such matters. 
However, it should be noted that all passengers  have a need for information and for trained 
staff. It is therefore unlikely that there is a gr eater cost in providing for the needs of disabled 
passengers than there is for other passengers. Fu rther additional costs for the coach operators 
may arise from providing care and assistance to pe rsons with reduced mobility. It is expected 
that the cost will be moderate; in  some cases it is difficult to give estimation of costs. Services 
such as assistance with boarding and de-board ing buses, luggage, stowage and retrieval of 
mobility devices can be provided during transfer s, meal and rest stops and other times as 
reasonably requested. However, it has to be noted that these services ca n be provided directly 
by the driver or, in some cases, the second driver.  
Similarly, the body managing the terminal should expect extra costs for providing assistance 
to disabled persons and those with reduced mo bility when proceeding from check-in to the 
boarding point or during transfer . The impact on costs is likely  to be reasonably moderate, 
                                                 
27 Damages and compensations can be similar to those provided for in the Regulation 1371/2007 on rail 
passengers' rights ande obligations e.i 220 000 euro in the event of death or injury of a passenger and 
1800 euro in the event of loss of or damage to the luggage. 
 
EN 27   EN since assistance can be provided directly by te rminal staff once they have been properly 
trained. 
5.1.2.3.  Quality standard and obligation to inform 
It does not appear that the new measures will give rise to any particular significant increase of 
costs to the operators. The bulk of the additiona l activities charged to the operators could be 
covered by short training progra mmes for counter staff whose skills need to be brought up to 
date, and by the operator making available an internal circular at its customer contact points, 
or alternatively by posti ng up a document on the bus or coach  that explains the rights of 
passengers under the new rules. 
The table below summarizes the economic impact of the measures under option 2. 
  Qualitative Description Quantitative 
Description 
  Economic Impacts   
Liability issues  Additional insurance 
costs for compensations 
in event of death or injury of passengers  Moderate additional cost. 
Member States already 
have compulsory liability schemes in case of death 
or injury of passengers. 
 Costs to coach operators  
Additional insurance 
costs for loss/damage of 
luggage or other personal 
effects, such as assistive devices like wheelchairs Moderate additional cost.  
Disabled persons and 
persons with reduced 
mobility  Increase in operating 
costs for providing care 
and assistance to disabled persons and persons with 
reduced mobility Little or no impact. These 
services can be provided 
directly by either the driver, or the second 
driver . 
 Costs to coach operators 
Increase in operating 
costs for staff training  Moderate additional 
costs. Providing training to staff for the needs of 
disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility is unlikely to 
cost more than for other 
passengers. 
 
Costs to infrastructure managers Additional costs for the 
provision of appropriate 
infrastructure and 
facilities for the needs of 
disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility Costs vary very 
considerably from simple 
stops to large terminals. 
Cost will be lower if work 
is carried out as part of 
routine refurbishment or maintenance.  
Cost impossible to 
estimate 
 
EN 28   EN  
Modest increase in travel 
due to wheelchair users 
alone Increase of 0.5% of total 
coach passengers  
Additional revenue 
EUR1.63 mln per year  
 Additional revenue for 
coach operators 
Modest increase in travel 
by other disabled persons 
and persons with reduced mobility categories Difficult to estimate. 
Travel may increase up to 
2 or 3 % 
 
Additional revenue for 
tourism industry Accessible international 
scheduled services will 
boost demand for tourism services by disabled 
persons and persons with 
reduced mobility. Potential demand for 
accessible tourism 
accounts for 400 000 journeys per year. (incl. 
accompanying persons) 
Additional revenues to 
the industry of EUR264m 
. per year 
Quality standard and 
information obligation 
Costs to coach operators Increase in costs Low costs. Slight increase 
in training costs and printing information. 
Moderate administrative 
costs for operators related 
to information obligation 
and handling complaints. 
Impact on occasional 
services industry will be 
limited because there are already specific rules for 
bus and coach journeys 
which are part of package travel 
 
5.1.3.  Option 3.I - Enhanced protection scenario (international only) 
5.1.3.1.  Liability of operators in the event of personal injury or damage to baggage 
The effects are the same as those analysed in  option 2. Additional effe cts in the area of 
advance payments have been analysed. A compulsory system that provides for advance payments in the event of physical or fatal inju ries to passengers travel ing by bus or coach is 
neither established by European rules nor provided by the relevant national law, at least not 
with general application in all circumstances. On the one hand, there is  no reason to exclude 
this kind of disbursements from the insura nce schemes and, on the other hand, any advance 
payment to be included in an indemnity fram ework is not to be considered a preventive 
declaration of liability. In this last respect, within th e common liability system, which is 
traditionally based on some kind of intentional or negligent conduct, any advance payments, on behalf of carriers or insurer, are supposed  to represent only a portion of overall final 
amount to be disbursed in the event of fault by the carrier or auxiliar ies. However, if the 
liabilities of the carrier or a uxiliaries are excluded, reimbursement can be claimed from the 
 
EN 29   EN person entitled to the advance payment. This  kind of advance payment scheme involves no 
significant additional costs to transport provide rs. An advance payment mechanism could also 
work under a strict liability system, where the carrier, even when not at fault, should be 
always deemed responsible by law, at least up to certain legal thres holds, which correspond to 
advance payment amounts. In this case the provide r is not entitled, even afterwards, to dispute 
the sum or to claim reimbursement. The advance payment, which has to be paid whatever the 
circumstances but can never be reimbursed, c ould create additional costs for transport 
providers, if it also co vers situations where th e carriers' or auxiliarie s' conduct was not in any 
way intentional or negligent. Within both liabil ity schemes the effects of an advance payment 
system are the same as under force majeure . In the case of common lia bility it would not be 
for the passenger to establish fault, while in the case of strict liability there would be a 
carrier's liability established by law; in any situation of force majeure,  once the fixed sum has 
been paid, the provider is never entitled to any reimbursement. Statis tically, the practical 
impact of these circumstances, such as natural di sasters or legal impediments, can be regarded 
as insignificant. Furthermore,  the economic impact of the pr ovision also depends on the actual 
scope of the rule, i.e. whether an advance paym ent is limited to the case of the most severe 
personal injuries, as commonly experienced, or applies broadly to a ll serious wounding, with 
the aim of making the initial medical expenses  affordable to the passenger. Under these 
circumstances, transport operators are likely to look for appropriate insurance schemes to 
cover the risk related to events for which advance payment is due. However, given the limited number of such events and the supposed value of these advance payments
28, the premiums are 
expected to be very low. 
5.1.3.2.  Disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility 
Estimation of additional costs for operators 
Many of the features intended to improve accessi bility on coaches cost very little and can 
provide benefits for disabled persons and those with reduced mobility. Items such as the provision of colour-contrasted handrails, clear marking of steps, signage and communications, 
and having at least some seats with more suitabl e dimensions, can be of great help to persons 
with sensory or mobility impairments. It is estim ated that such features will generally cost no 
more than EUR1 000 per vehicle, which is a mode rate expense in relation to the total cost of a 
coach, but could help to significantly increase ca pacity in terms of the number of passengers. 
There are two main areas of cost in making coaches fully accessible, including wheelchair 
access: these are the loss of seats (a revenue cost) and the costs of  lifts for wheelchair users (a 
capital cost). There are some further costs a ssociated with maintenance of the lift and the 
removal and replacement of seats in the wheelch air space, but these are smaller and can be 
left out of consideration. Providing one wheel chair space means losing at least four passenger 
seats. On scheduled coach services it is assume d that, for practical reasons, the vehicles will 
always operate with the wheelchair space availabl e, so the loss of seats is “permanent”. On 
the basis of the outcome of the study Cost 349 it  can be assumed that the additional costs may 
amount to 2.7 % of total industry revenue. 
On non-scheduled services, such as holidays and tours, passengers usually book well in 
advance. This gives the operato r time to fit seats in the wheelchair space if no booking has 
been made to use it. Thus, the loss of revenue is  likely to be less than for scheduled service 
                                                
 
28 In the case of rail transport the advance payment in the in the event of death is never less than 21.000 
EUR.  
 
EN 30   EN operators. As mentioned earlier, since advance booking is  normal in this s ector, the dedicated 
wheelchair space - when not used - can be replaced by four seat s; therefore, the loss of 
revenue would be less, and has been  estimated at approximately 0.2%. 
Cost to coach terminals The measures under consideration do not invo lve major modifications  of existing coach 
terminals and associated infrastructure, ex cept for the designation of arrival points at 
terminals where passengers can notify their arri val and the need for assistance. Furthermore, 
accessibility requirements for the built environmen t are enshrined in Member States' national 
legislation. Thus, the managing body of the termin al should expect extra costs for providing 
assistance to disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when proceeding from 
check-in to the boarding point, or during transf er. The impact on costs should be reasonably 
modest, since assistance can be provided dire ctly by terminal staff once they have been 
properly trained. Further costs ma y be incurred in training of the staff and the provision of 
information. However, all passengers need and will benefit from well trained staff and 
accessible information. It is unlikely that the cost of training in providing assistance for 
disabled persons will be higher than for othe r passengers. The COST 349 study concludes that 
it is impossible to give an indication of  representative costs for such matters. 
A growing number of disabl ed persons are travelling 
The provision of fully accessible coaches can be e xpected to lead to an increase in the number 
of disabled persons, including wheelchair passenge rs, using coach services. In the EU, some 
44.6 million persons – or one in six persons ag ed between 16 and 64 - have a longstanding 
health problem or disability
29. Persons with disabilities repres ent at least 16% of the overall 
EU population of working age. In the case of the UK, wheelchair users account for about 1.4% of the population as a whole;  previous research has indicat ed that, even when transport 
is fully accessible, wheelchair users travel only a bout 40% as much as their non-disabled 
peers
30. There are no official statis tics available on the number of wheelchair users in EU27; 
however, it can be assumed that in the EU27 - as in the UK - wheelchair users make up 
around 1.4% of the whole population (about 6.87 milli on persons). This logic suggests that a 
modest increase in journeys, attributable to wheelchair users alone, could amount to 
approximately 0.5% of total coach passengers. Making coaches fully accessible will benefit 
far more potential passengers than just wheelchair  users; however it is impossible to make any 
meaningful estimates of the increase, although a increase of  at least 2-3% is likely. 
The additional revenue for domestic and international services due to  the increase in travel by 
wheelchair users alone is expected to be 0.5%, which represents about EUR55.72 million per 
year. The additional revenues fo r international services alone  are estimated at EUR8.14 
million per year. 
Summary of additional costs and revenues 
The following table summarises the costs and bene fits deriving from the introduction of fully 
accessible coaches in the domestic and international long distance scheduled and unscheduled bus and coach industry in EU27. 
                                                
 
29 Situation of People with disabilities in the EU: Key figures (European Commission C, DG Empl, Unit 
G3) 
30 COST 349 Report 
 
EN 31   EN The estimated additional costs are expressed in EURm per year and as a percentage of total 
industry revenue for the two sectors under review: 
Table 6 – Summary of a dditional costs and revenues from th e provision of fully accessible 
coaches 
 Domestic and 
International (Euro million) Only 
international (Euro million) % on total 
industry revenue 
Total additional costs 297,6 44,92 2,7% 
 Loss of revenue from removal of seats 30,1 5,87 0,3% 
Annualised costs of provision of lift and other related costs 267,4 39,1 2,4% 
Additional revenue due to increase in travel 55,7 8,1 0,5% 
      
Net revenue loss 241,8 36,8 2,2% 
Source: PwC elaboration on COST 349, Eu rostat and other sources (2004) 
Additional costs to be borne by the coach operators are estimate d to amount to 2.7% of the 
total industry revenue for the two sectors in question. The additional revenue (0.5% based on 
wheelchair users alone) would reduce this shor tfall to approximately 2.2%. This is the 
measure of the net cost to the industry of providing fully accessible coach services, and may 
prove in time to be an underestimate of the in creased travelling, because it does not take into 
account the likelihood of an increas e in travelling among older pers ons and other categories of 
persons with reduced mobility. Furthermore, it should be noted that, du ring the initial period, 
real costs for the operators will be slightly lo wer since the process of replacing old vehicles 
with new, fully accessible vehicles will take  several years. It seems certain that the 
introduction of full accessibility of vehicles will  result either in an increase of costs, and 
therefore a reduction in operating margins for th e coach operating industry, or in an increase 
in passenger fares, unless this is offset by ot her measures taken by th e EU. In the worst case 
scenario, carriers will choose to fully cover add itional cost with an average increase in fares 
of 2.2%, which will allow them to balance the estimated revenue loss. There are no official 
statistics available at European level on ticket prices for long distance services. It has been 
estimated that, in 2006, the average fare for a lo ng distance scheduled trip by coach in the UK 
was EUR15.7931. Assuming the abovementioned fare in crease of 2.2%, the average expected 
rise in the ticket price is EU R0.35. It is worth remembering that , initially, the loss of revenue 
to the industry will be less than 2.2%. 
Impacts on the coach manufacturing industry 
                                                 
31 This figure was estimated on the basis of Annual Review and Financial Statement Document for the 
year 2006 of National Express Group Plc. National Express is the largest scheduled coach service 
provider in Europe. The Company operates a network of scheduled coach services to almost 1.000 
destinations within the UK, including all of the major UK airports. It carries over 19 million passengers each year and operates 500 distinctive coaches in the UK and Europe. In 2006 the Grop revenue for this 
market segment were 207,3 £mln. (300 EURmln.). The estimation of the average ticket price was 
obtained dividing total company revenue by passenger number.  
 
EN 32   EN Developing internal demand for new coaches th at provide full access for wheelchairs will 
have a direct impact on the European coachwo rk manufacture industry. Additional costs for 
typical wheelchair-accessible vehicles with a se ating capacity and specification comparable to 
that of an equivalent non-wheelchair accessi ble vehicle are estimated to be EUR19 15032.  
In EU27, the average industry turnover in coachwork manufacturing per person employed33 is 
estimated to be roughly EUR178 70034. It can therefore be assumed that, for every nine fully 
accessible coaches produced, one additional full time employee equivalent unit will be 
created. 
Table 7 – Impacts on coach manufacture indus try in terms of additional revenue and 
employment  
 Stock of vehicles 
(2005) New registration Manufacture ind. 
additional 
revenue Additional 
employment 
 no. no. thousand Euro FTE unit 
Scheduled Long Distance 9.653 643 12.316 69 
Domestic 6.465 431 8.248 46 
International 3.188 212 4.068 23 
Holidays and tours 99.563 6.634 127.032 711 
Domestic 86.942 5.793 110.929 621 
International 12.621 841 16.103 90 
Total 109.216 7.277 139.349 780 
Domestic 93.406 6.223 119.178 667 
 International 15.809 1.053 20.171 113 
Source: PwC elaboration on Eurost at and other sources (2007) 
The gradual replacement of old vehicles by fully  accessible vehicles will  generate an annual 
increase in revenue of EUR139.3 million in the coachwork manufacture industry revenue. 
Impacts on the tourism industry 
The size of the market for accessible tourism has been estimated at 127.5 million persons in 
Europe35. This figure takes into consideration no t only disabled persons, but also older 
persons, families with small children, and persons with short-term or chronic ailments. However, not all these citizens have either th e economic and/or physical ability to travel. 
                                                
 
32 COST 349 Report: Annex 20 “Investment plan for local transport in the Piemonte Region, Italy, for the 
period 01/01/03 to 31/12/06”. 
33 Number of employee in full time equivalent. 
34 This figure refers to NACE DM342 sector that include manufacture of bodies (coachwork) for motor 
vehicles and manufacture of trailers and semi-trailers (Annex I Market Analysis).  
35 One-Stop-Shop for Accessible Tourism in Europe  (OSSATE): “Accessibility Market and Stakeholder 
Analysis” (20th of October 2005). 
 
EN 33   EN Thus, in estimating the potential size of the ma rket, it is assumed th at 70 % of disabled 
persons are physically and financially able to travel36. On average, coach travel represents 
7.6% of all trips of four nights or  more made by European tourists37. Thus, we can assume 
that the potential demand for accessible tour ism by coach accounts for 6.8 million trips per 
year. In addition to this, persons with disabilit ies seldom travel alone. On average, 59% of 
European families have a family member who is disabled and 38% of the European population have a friend with a disability
38. 
Assuming a multiplier effect of 0.539, which means that half of the population with 
accessibility requirements will have at least on e person travelling with them once a year, the 
total potential travel market is 10.2 million. Considering that the average expenditure per 
holiday in Europe in 2005 was EUR62040, the expected additional revenues will amount to 
EUR 6.308 million. 
Assuming that, on average, disabled persons take more than one holiday per year, travel with 
other family members or friends and would travel even more if they could find more information and more accessible sites, a multip lier effect of around two can be factored in
41. If 
a multiplier effect of 2 is accurate, the potential  travel market would rise to over 260 million. 
The following table shows the calculations for both multiplier effects. 
Table 8 – Potential market for accessible coach tourism 
General 
demand for 
accessible 
tourism 70% that have 
the 
economical 
and physical 
ability to 
travel 7.6% will 
use a 
coach to 
travel Multiplier 
effect for 
accompanyi
ng friends 
and family  Accompan
ying 
friends 
and family Total potential 
accessible 
tourism 
travelling by 
coach Average 
expenditure 
per person 
per holiday Potential 
additional 
tourism 
revenues 
0,5 3.4 million 10.2 million EUR6.308 
EURm 
127.5 million 89.3 million 6.8 
million 
2 13.6 million 20.3 million 620 EUR 
EUR12.616 
EURm 
Source: PwC elaboration on OSSATE and Eurostat (2005) 
Depending on the multiplier used, the estimates of additional tourism revenues range from 
EUR6.308 million to EUR12.616 million. Potentially, this is a huge market and one which 
will continue to grow due to  the ageing of the population. 
5.1.3.3.  Compensation and assistance in case of cancellations, delays and denied boarding 
The cost of compensating and assisting passengers  is unlikely to be excessive. Nevertheless, 
the effects on revenue and profits are unlikely to  be significant, and also the impact on the 
                                                 
36 Deloitte Touche “Tourism for All in Europe” (1993) 
37 Eurostat: “Statistics in focus - How Europeans go on holiday” (2006) 
38 Eurobarometer (2001) Attitudes of Europeans to Disability. 
39 This multiplier is consistent with assumption made  by Deloitte Touche “Tourism for All in Europe” 
(1993). 
40 Eurostat: “Statistics in focus - Tourism in the Enlarged European Union” (2005). 
41 This multiplier is consistent with assumption made  by OSSATE: “Accessibility Market and Potential 
tourism revenues ranging between 83 billion Euro and 166 billion Euro Stakeholder Analysis” (20th of 
October 2005). 
 
EN 34   EN competitiveness of Community companies should be slight, as all operators involved in the 
sector would be covered. 
As has been explained in more detail earlier in the text, the phenomenon of denied boarding 
for overbooking does not seem to be especially  significant in the context of passenger 
transport by bus and coach.  
Cancellations seem to occur more frequently. Ho wever considering that the average cost of a 
ticket can be between EUR10 a nd EUR70 according to the distan ce travelled, and considering 
that the possible compensation amounts to 100% of the price paid for the ticket, this suggests that this type of case does not have a significant economic impact. Additionally, increased level of compensation will provide operators with incentives to offer better quality of service and assistance to passengers. Thus the numbe r of passengers claiming compensation will 
decrease. The same has proven true in the avia tion sector in relation to compensations for 
denied boarding. The economic imp act of the application of the new measures - even in this 
case - should be quite slight. The circumstances in which operators are excluded from liability 
in the case of delays and cancellations may e ffectively reduce the economic impact of these 
measures. 
Therefore, there should be no significant effect  on employment, investme nt or the creation of 
new business. 
Nevertheless, operators can expect an increase in staff and training costs, along with a 
possible slight increase in ticket price without any d ecrease in passenger demand. 
5.1.3.4.  Quality of service and information obligation 
The effects are the same as those analysed in option 2. 5.1.3.5.  Complaint handling service and monitoring 
The process of managing the settlement of dis putes is not expected to lead to any major 
additional economic burdens for the operators. Th e approach should provide for a review of 
internal procedure so as to guarantee that wri tten feedback is provided quickly and efficiently 
to the traveller submitting the complaint. 
 
The table below summarizes the economic impact of option 3.I 
  Qualitative Description Quantitative 
Description 
  Economic Impacts   
Liability issues  Additional insurance 
costs for compensations in event of death or injury 
of passengers  As with option 2 above 
 Costs to coach operators  
Advance payments for 
death or personal injury 
of passengers Significant additional cost 
(but easily affordable by 
means of insurance forms 
or guarantee systems) 
 
EN 35   EN   Additional insurance 
costs for loss/damage of 
luggage or other personal effects such as assistive 
devices like wheelchairs As with option 2 above. 
Disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility 
 Increase in operating costs for providing care and assistance to disabled 
persons and persons with 
reduced mobility Small impact. These 
services can be provided directly by either the 
driver or second driver. 
 Costs to coach operators 
Increase in operating 
costs for training the staff Moderate additional 
costs. It is unlikely that 
the cost of providing 
training to staff for the needs of disabled persons 
and persons with reduced 
mobility is greater than for other passengers. 
 
Costs to infrastructure 
managers Additional costs for the 
provision of appropriate 
infrastructure and 
facilities for the needs of 
disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility Costs vary very 
considerably from simple 
stops to large terminals. 
Cost will be lower if work 
is carried out as part of routine refurbishment or 
maintenance.  
Impossible to estimate. 
 Additional costs for the 
provision of appropriate 
infrastructure and 
facilities for the needs of disabled persons and 
persons with reduced 
mobility As with option 2 above. 
 
Additional revenue for 
coach operators 
Modest increase in travel 
due to wheelchair users 
alone As with option 2, but the 
same increase in travel 
(+0.5%) is also expected 
with occasional services. 
As with option 2, but with 
additional revenue due to 
occasional services 
(EUR6.50m).  
Total additional revenue 
= EUR8.14m per year  
 
Additional revenue for 
tourism industry Modest increase in travel 
by other disabled persons 
and persons with reduced mobility  As with option 2 above, 
but travel is also likely to 
increase with occasional services. 
 Additional revenue for 
coachwork manufacture Developing of internal 
demand for new coaches As with option 2, but with 
additional demand for 
 
EN 36   EN industry that provide full access 
for wheelchairs  841 fully accessible 
vehicles per year to be 
used on occasional services. Total demand = 
1.053 vehicles per year 
As with option 2, but with 
additional revenues due to 
vehicle to be used on 
occasional services (EUR16.10m per year). 
Total additional revenue 
= EUR20.17m per year 
Assistance and compensation in the event 
of delays, cancellations Costs to coach operators Increase of costs for 
compensation and 
assistance in case of 
cancellations, delays and denied boarding Costs slightly higher than 
option 2 above, because 
of a more precise 
definition of rules. 
Quality standard and 
information obligation 
Costs to coach operators Increase of costs Low costs. Slight increase 
in costs for training and 
printing of information. 
Moderate administrative 
cost related to information obligation. 
Impact on occasional 
services industry will be limited because there are 
already specific rules for 
bus and coach journeys that are part of package 
travel 
Complaint handling 
Costs to coach operators Complaint handling 
service and monitoring Low costs. Slight increase 
in operating costs due to the implementation of 
new procedures 
 
5.2. Option 3.II - Enhanced pr otection scenario (both international and domestic) 
Although option 3.II covers the same subject matter as option 3.I, its scope extends to 
domestic long distance services; in this way, mo re operators/routes will be covered. Therefore 
the description of the the sub-option 3.I holds true for this sub-option. 
  Qualitative Description Quantitative 
Description 
  Economic Impacts   
Liability issues  Costs to coach operators  
Additional insurance 
costs for compensations in event of death or injury As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of operators will be affected. 
 
EN 37   EN of passengers  
 Advance payments for 
death or personal injury 
of passengers As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of 
operators will be affected. 
  Additional insurance costs for loss/damage of 
luggage or other personal 
effects such as assistive devices like wheelchairs As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of 
operators will be affected. 
Disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility 
 For scheduled services: 
loss of up to 4 seats per 
trip (-1% on revenues) as in option 2. 
In addition a loss of up to 
4 seats per trip on occasional services when 
the need for wheelchair 
accommodation is notified (-0.2% on 
revenues). 
As with option 3.I with 
additional loss of revenue 
up to EUR24.26m per year due to domestic 
services. Total revenue 
loss = EUR30.13m per year) 
 Costs to coach operators 
Increase in operator’s 
costs for providing fully 
accessible vehicle to be used on international 
scheduled and occasional 
services. 
As with option 3.I, but 
with increase on capital 
costs extended to operators on domestic 
market 
As with option 3.I with 
additional revenue loss up 
to EUR228.38m per year 
due to domestic services.  
Total additional capital 
costs EUR267.38m
 year 
  Increase in operator's 
costs for providing care 
and assistance to disabled 
persons and persons with reduced mobility As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of 
operators will be affected. 
 
Costs to infrastructure managers Additional costs for the 
provision of appropriate 
infrastructure and facilities for the needs of 
disabled persons and 
persons with reduced As with options 2 and 3.I, 
but terminals and stops 
used only for domestic services will also need to 
be adapted/refurnished  
 
EN 38   EN mobility 
 
Modest increase in travel 
due to wheelchair users 
alone As with option 3.I, but 
same increase in travel 
(+0.5%) is also expected with domestic services. 
As with option 3.I, but 
with additional revenue due to increase in travel 
in domestic services 
(EUR47.58m).  
Total additional revenue 
= EUR55.72m per year  
 Additional revenue for coach operators 
Modest increase in travel 
by other disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility categories As with option 3.I above, 
but travel is likely to increase also with 
domestic services. 
 
Additional revenue for 
tourism industry Accessible international 
and domestic services will boost demand for 
tourism services by 
disabled persons and 
persons with reduced 
mobility. Compared to option 3.I, 
potential demand for accessible tourism is 
significantly higher = 
10.2 million journeys per 
year (with accompanying 
persons).  
Total additional revenue 
EUR6.308 mln per year 
 
Additional revenue for 
coachwork manufacture industry Additional costs for the 
provision of appropriate infrastructure and 
facilities for the needs of 
disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility As with options 2 and 3.I, 
but terminals and stops used only for domestic 
services will also need to 
be adapted/refurnished  
Assistance and compensation in the event of delays, cancellations Costs to coach operators Increase of costs for 
compensation and assistance in case of 
cancellations, delays and 
denied boarding As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of operators will be affected. 
Quality standard and information obligation Costs to coach operators Additional costs As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of 
operators will be affected. 
Complaint handling 
Costs to coach operators  
Additional costs As with option 3.I above, 
but a larger number of 
operators will be affected. 
 
 
EN 39   EN 5.2.1.  Option 4 - Self-regulation scenario 
Under this option, the EU w ill promote a common "soft law" framework, based on best 
practices, to persuade bus and coach opera tors to develop and adopt voluntary EU-
wide/domestic self-regulatory measures with rega rd to the rights of bus and coach passengers. 
At this stage, it is difficult to compare this option against the others in terms of expected economic impact, since the available literature do es not allow a reliable quantified estimate of 
how far operators are complying with volunta ry agreements..Generally, it may be assumed 
that the possible economic imp act of these voluntary commitme nts will be counterbalanced 
by increase of confidence of passengers and at tractiveness of this mode of transport. 
Some idea of whether this pol icy option is likely to honour th e commitment by bus and coach 
operators to a voluntary agreement can be gain ed from the EUSG Report on “Evaluation and 
monitoring of trends with rega rd to passenger needs on the leve l of service and treatment of 
passengers”. The report provides a table showing the perception of  passenger rights' charters 
and guarantees, and their implementation by co nsumers and industry. The results are set out 
below: 
Table 9 Country comparison: Evaluation of charters and guarantees 
Country Points Country points Country points 
Austria 0.5 Greece 1.0 Poland 0.5 
Belgium 1.0 Hungary 0.5 Portugal 1.0 
Cyprus 1.5 (x) Ireland 2.0 Slovakia 1.0 
Czech Republic 1.5 Italy 0.5 Slovenia 1.0 
Denmark 2.0 Latvia 1.0 Spain 1.0 
Estonia 1.0 Lithuania 1.5 (x) Sweden 2.5 
Finland 1.5 Luxembourg 0.5 United Kingdom 2.5 
France 2.0 Malta 1.0   
Germany 2.0 Netherlands 1.5   
(x) = no information available to evaluate this criterion Source: EUSG – Evaluation and monitoring of the impact of trends with regard to passengers' 
needs on the level of service and treatment of passengers 
The statements collected are influenced by the interviewer’s general e xpectations, perceptions 
of the situation and the standard in the c ountry itself. All respondents had an opinion on 
charters and guarantees, although the number and quality of schemes in each country varies considerably.  
The trade associations have conceded that so far implementation has been somewhat difficult. 
This state of affairs is particularly striki ng when one considers the great effort that 
governments have put into these documents, both formally (obligation to produce, update 
 
EN 40   EN them and submit copies to the Ministry) and in terms of their design (detailed template for 
each public sector and each mode of transport)42. 
Finally, with regard to voluntar y agreements, lessons learned from previous experience in 
regulating the air transport sector should prov ide valuable information on the chances of 
success of such types of agreement. In the case of air transport, the development of voluntary 
commitments and their correct application eventu ally turned out to be quite limited. This 
prompted the EU to introduce compulsory rules in  order to oblige the operators to ensure air 
passengers’ rights. 
5.3. Social impacts 
5.3.1.  Option 1 
No new social impacts are expected with option 1. 
5.3.2.  Option 2 
Passengers making bus and coach j ourneys will benefit if the qua lity of service is improved. 
They will also have the benefit of assistance if they experience inconvenience during the journey. Disabled passengers wi ll also receive more assistan ce than is currently the case. 
Their mobility will increase significantly. Thanks  to the proposed measures it will be possible 
to achieve an important social objective, na mely for people with reduced mobility to enjoy 
comparable opportunities for road transport. W ithout such opportunities, they would lose not 
only direct travel benefits, but al so the indirect benefit of full inclusion in economic and social 
life; for example, they would not be able to trav el for work, visit family  and friends or go on 
holiday like other citizens. In this context, the problem of ageing of the population will be 
addressed, whereby a increased demand from services from elderly persons should be 
matched by an appropriate provision of services.
43 
Social Impacts 
Employment  Positive impact on employment in 
the tourism industry due to an increase in holiday travel by 
disabled persons and persons with 
reduced mobility 
 Creation of up to 5 900 FTE additional 
employment per year in hotels and restaurants 
 
Social Inclusion Increased accessibility to transport 
services for disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility 10% of EU population could benefit 
                                                 
42 EUSG – Evaluation and monitoring of trends with regard to passenger needs on the level of service and 
treatment of passengers 
43 See OECD Demographic and Labour Data Base: OECD Social Indicators 2006: GE2 Age dependency 
ratio 
 
EN 41   EN Better protection of passengers' 
rights in case of death, injury, etc.  Passengers will benefit from better legal protection 
(see liability) and greater economic security (see 
insurance). This will implement the right of EU citizens to move freely 
 
Reimbursement in the case of lost or 
damaged luggage It will be made easier for passengers to be refunded 
when their luggage is lost or damaged  
Compensation for passengers in case of cancellation, delay, etc. Passengers might be eligible for compensation.  
This will give operators an incentive to meet 
quality standards 
Higher fares Costs of compliance are likely to be 
passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares Travel would be more difficult for social groups on 
low incomes. However, the impact on fares is not expected to be high. 
 
5.3.3.  Option 3.I 
Employment impacts 
The provision of fully accessible coaches can be e xpected to result in an increase in the 
number of disabled persons, including wheel chair passengers, that use coach services. 
However, the modest increase in the number of trips by wheelchair users alone is unlikely to 
lead to an increase in the number of services  provided by the operators . Therefore, impacts on 
the level of employment in the coach industry are not expected. 
Tourism industry 
Better accessibility of bus and coach services  will have a positive impact on the tourism 
industry, including in terms of  the number of persons employed. The following estimates 
were based on the average turnover of EUR44 60044 per person employed in hotels and 
restaurants in 2004: 
Table 10 – Potential additional employment  in the tourism industry (thousand FTE) 
  Additional Employment  
(thousand FTE) 
A. Scheduled Long Distance 12,4 
Domestic 6,5 
International 5,9 
B. Holidays and tours sector 129,0 
Domestic 67,6 
                                                 
44 Eurostat Database: NACE H Hotels and Restaurants, year 2004, EU27 
 
EN 42   EN International 61,4 
Total A. + B. 141,4 
Domestic 74,1 
International 67,3 
Source: PwC elaboration on OSSA TE (2005) and Eurostat (2006) 
Coach manufacture industry 
Gradually replacing old vehicles with fully accessi ble vehicles will increase the revenue of the 
coachwork manufacture industry by EUR139.3 milli on per year. Increasing production in this 
manufacturing sector in EU27 w ill generate extra jobs, which we have quantified at 780 FTE 
per year 
The table below summarizes the social impact of this option. 
Social Impacts 
Positive impact on employment in 
tourism industry due to an increase in holiday trips by disabled persons 
and persons with reduced mobility As with option 2 above, but further increases in 
holiday trips due to acce ssible occasional coach 
services will create 61 400 FTE.  
Total additional FTE = 67 300 FTE.  
Employment  
Growth of internal demand for new 
coaches that prov ide full access for 
wheelchairs As with option 2, but further creation of up to 90 
FTE additional jobs per year in the coachwork manufacture industry.  
Total additional FTE employment = 113 per year 
Increased accessibility to transport 
services for disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility As with option 2, but 10% of EU population might 
also make use of occasional services 
Better protection of passenger rights 
in case of death, injury, etc.  As with option 2, but passenger will also benefit 
from advanced payments and better legal 
protection. 
Reimbursements in case of luggage loss or damaged  As with option 2 above Social Inclusion 
Compensation for passengers in case 
of cancellation, delay, etc. As with option 2, but rules of protection will be 
better defined. 
Higher fares Costs of compliance are likely to be 
passed on to passengers in the form 
of higher fares As with option 2 or slightly worse  
 
 
EN 43   EN 5.3.4.  Option 3.II 
The impact of the measures under option 3.II may be greater than under option 3.I because 
these measures could also be extended to l ong-distance domestic bus an d coach services. The 
table below summarizes the soci al impact of this option. 
Social Impacts 
Positive impact on employment in 
tourism industry due to an increase 
in holiday trips by disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility  As with option 3.I above, but further increases in 
holiday trips because domestic bus and coach 
services will create 74 100 FTE.  
Total additional FTE = 141 400 FTE. 
Employment  
Developing of internal demand for 
new coaches that provide full access 
for wheelchairs As with option 3.I, but further creation of up to 667 
FTE additional employment per year in coachwork 
manufacture industry.  
Total additional FTE employment = 780 per year 
Increased accessibility to transport 
services for disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility As with option 3.I, but 10% of EU population 
might benefit also of domestic services 
Better protection of passenger rights 
in case of death, injury, etc.  As with option 3.I, but passengers on domestic 
journeys will also benefit 
Reimbursements in case of luggage 
lost or damaged  As with option 2 and 3.I, but passengers on 
domestic journeys will also benefit Social Inclusion 
Compensation for passengers in case 
of cancellation, delay, etc. As with option 3.I, but also passengers on domestic 
journeys will benefit 
Higher fares Costs of compliance are likely to be 
passed on to passengers in the form 
of higher fares As with option 3.I, but also passengers on domestic 
journeys will be affected. 
5.3.5.  Option 4 
Under this option the EU w ill promote a common "soft-law" framework based on best 
practices to get bus and coach operators to develop and adopt volunta ry EU-wide/domestic 
self-regulatory measures with regard to the right s of bus and coach passen gers. At this stage it 
is difficult to compare this option against the othe rs in terms of expected social impact, since 
it is not possible on the basis of the available literature to make a reliable quantified estimate 
of the degree to which operators comply with voluntary agreements. 
5.4. Environmental impacts 
Not all options under consideratio n are directly related to e nvironmental issues. However, 
these measures may involve increases or de creases in passenger tr ansport demand, and 
therefore a possible modal shift that c ould have some environmental impacts. 
Environmental Impacts 
 
EN 44   EN Possible 
increase in 
pollution Higher fares for coach services may 
cause a modal shift to low cost 
airlines, cars and railways. Difficult to estimate, since modal shift can both 
have both positive and negative impact on pollution 
Possible 
decrease in 
pollution Better protection of passengers' 
rights might encourage more 
European citizens to take 
international coach journeys Difficult to estimate. Possi ble increase in travel 
might be outweighed by increase in fares. Modal 
shift is likely to be slight. Therefore environmental 
impacts are not expected. 
 
The proposed measures might encourage more European citizens to take long distance 
journeys by bus and coach in Europe if there is  no increase in ticket price. This might bring 
associated environmental benefits when compar ed against journeys by car. However, it is not 
certain that there would be net benefits in th is area. There is possibl y a general expectation 
that the costs of compliance would be passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares, 
making international and or long distan ce services less attractive overall. 
The following table gives an overview of the results of a survey conducted on a small number 
of European bus and coach ope rators, mostly offering schedul ed services. Operators were 
asked to indicate the competitive strengths of other modes of transport compared to their own sector. Each mode of transport was rated on a competition scale from 1 (no competition) to 10 (extremely strong competition) . 
Table 11- Coach Competitor Rating
 
Modal Competitor Rate 
Private cars 6.50 
Railways 6.00 
Low cost airlines 8.25 
Coach operators from EU15 countries 5.25 
Coach operators from EU10 countries 5.00 
Coach operators from Non-EU countries 3.25 
Source: NEA survey of IRU members (2006) The table shows that low cost airlines are rega rded as the most important competitor to bus 
and coach transport. Competition from private cars and railways is considered to be a minor threat compared to competition by low cost airlines. 
Better protection of passenger right s is likely to lead to an increase in demand for bus and 
coach transport that will mainly impact on low co st airlines and, to a le sser extent, on private 
cars and railways. 
On the other hand, if costs of compliance w ith the new measures are passed on to coach 
passengers in the form of higher fares, this will favour a modal shift from bus and coach to 
low cost airlines and, to a lesser ex tent, to private cars and railways. 
 
EN 45   EN Table 12 - Average environmental costs in EU15, Norway and Switzerland by cost category 
and type of transport (Euro / 1000 pkm)  
 Car Bus & Coach Railway Aviation 
Noise 5,2 1,3 3,9 1,8 
Air Pollution 12,7 20,7 6,9 2,4 
Climate change* 10,1 4,8 3,6 26,4 
Nature & Landscape 2,9 0,7 0,6 0,8 
Up-/Down stream 5,2 3,9 3,4 1,0 
Total EU15+NO & SW 36,1 31,4 18,4 32,4 
Note: * Average of the outcomes  of the high and low scenarios 
Source: PwC elaboration on IWW & INFRAS “External co sts of transport” (2004) 
The cost for bus and coach is EUR31.4 per 1000 pkm. Passenger cars are worse polluters than 
bus and coach, at EUR36.1 per 1000 pkm. Railw ays, with external  costs of EUR18.41000 
pkm, can be considered the most environmenta lly friendly mode of tr ansport. Aviation and 
low cost airlines record similar environm ental costs to bus and coach transport. 
In conclusion, any modal shift that occurs will lead to an increase or a decrease in demand 
respectively for modes of trans port that are high polluting (pri vate cars) and those which are 
low polluting (rail) or equally polluting (low cost airlines), Therefore, it is not advisable to 
pronounce on negative or positive envir onmental impacts in this context. 
5.5. Value added of the EU action 
This paragraph analyses the added value of EU  action for each option. On this basis it will 
draw conclusions on the added value and necessity of each identified measure. 
5.5.1.  Options 1 and 4 
In principle, option 1 will not alter the existing si tuation, and therefore represents no value 
added for EU citizens. While the implem entation of option 4 may reflect current 
developments in the bus and coach  market, it is not possible to fully ascertain the value added 
of this approach, since the number of voluntary agreements is quite limited and they are not 
applied consistently across the EU. The invol vement of EU institutions in encouraging 
economic operators to adopt se lf-regulatory schemes may bri ng positive results  in the long 
term. 
5.5.2.  Option 2 
Measures Value added to the EU 
Rights of persons with 
reduced mobility Disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility (over 10% of EU 
population) can benefit from increased accessibility of vehicles operating 
international services. Furthermore, it is easier for them to access the main 
terminals and, lastly, they enjoy the bene fit of assistance and information before 
and during the trip.  
 
EN 46   EN These measures are expected to have positive impacts on the tourism industry, 
since more people (sometimes accompan ied) will have the opportunity for 
leisure travel (Estimated impacts: 0.4 million of additional trips per year corresponding to EUR 264m of additional revenue and 5 900 additional jobs in 
FTE). 
The EU does not have to bear major cost s. On the contrary, Member States are 
expected to incur the costs for the provision of facilities and infrastructures 
adapted to the needs of disabled pers ons and persons with reduced mobility.  
Liability of operators in 
event of death or injury, etc.  Rights of passengers in international tr avel are enforced. Passengers will enjoy 
better legal protection (see liability) a nd greater economic security (see 
insurance). These measures comply with the right of EU citizens to freedom of 
movement.  
Furthermore, passengers can easily obtain a refund if their luggage (as well as 
mobility equipment) is lost or damaged. 
The cost to the EU and Member  States is insignificant.  
Quality of service and 
assistance in case of cancellation, delays and 
denied boarding, etc. It will be mandatory to give passengers information in the event of cancellation, 
delays, etc. Furthermore, passengers will be given information about their rights. 
National enforcement bodies (NEBs) gene rate extra costs to Member States 
 
5.5.3.  Option 3.I 
Measures Value added to the EU 
Rights of persons with 
reduced mobility As with option 2, disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility are 
afforded increased accessibility and assist ance. This option assumes that buses 
and coaches are physically accessible. In  addition to option 2, the protection 
measures are extended to occasional international services. 
Impact on the tourism industry is significantly higher than with option 2 (Total 
impacts: 4.4 million additional journeys per year corresponding to EUR 3.000 M of additional revenue and to 67,300 additional jobs in terms of FTE). 
There are still likely to be impacts on the coachwork manufacturing industry 
(higher than with option 2, but still moderate). 
As with option 2, the EU does not have to bear major costs.  
Liability of operators in 
event of death or injury, etc.  As with option 2, the rights of passengers undertaking an international journey 
are enforced in terms of better legal protection (see "liability") and greater 
economic security (see "insur ance"). In addition, passengers can receive advance 
payments.  
As with option 2, passengers can easily obtain a refund when luggage (and 
mobility equipment) is lost or damaged. 
Costs to the EU and Member States are insignificant. 
Quality of service and 
assistance in case of 
cancellation, delays, denied As with option 2, passengers can en joy better protection in terms of 
compensation and assistance in the even t of cancellation, delays, denied 
boarding, etc. 
 
EN 47   EN boarding, etc. Furthermore, the EU intervening by means of a Regulation directly ensures 
maximum protection of passengers’ rights, since the Regulation is compulsory 
and directly and immediately applicable. 
As with option 2, implementing NEBs generates additional, though moderate 
costs. 
 
5.5.4.  Option 3.II 
Measures Value added to the EU 
Rights of persons with 
reduced mobility As with option 3.I, disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility benefit 
from increased accessibility, assistance a nd information. In addition to option 
3.I, the protection measures are extended to domestic services. 
Impact on the tourism industry is twice as high as with option 3.I because of 
inbound demand (Total impacts: 10.2 million additional journeys per year 
corresponding to EUR 6.300 M. EUR of additional revenues and to 141 400 additional jobs in terms of FTE). 
Impacts on the coachwork manufacturing industry are still expected (higher than 
with option 3.I). 
As with options 2 and 3.I, the EU does not have to bear major costs. Member 
States are expected to incur the same costs as with options 2 and 3.I for the 
provision of facilities and infrastructures adapted to the needs of disabled 
persons and persons with reduced mobility, but in this case the number of 
terminals and stops needing to be renewed and adapted will be higher. 
Liability of operators in the event of death or injury, etc.  As with option 3.I, rights of passengers are enforced as regards better legal 
protection (see liability) and greater ec onomic security (see insurance), but 
protection is also extended to passengers on a domestic journey. 
It will be easy for both domestic and international passengers to obtain a refund 
when their luggage (and mobility equipment) is lost or damaged. 
Costs to the EU and Member States are insignificant. 
Quality of service and 
assistance in the event  of 
cancellation, delays and 
denied boarding, etc. The same as option 3.I, except that passengers using long distance domestic 
services can also enjoy the same protection of their rights.  
Implementing NEBs generate slightly higher costs than under the other options, 
but costs are still moderate. 
5.6. Subsidiary and proportionality of options 
In fact there is no reason to expect costs or benefits for companies  to differ according to the 
nature of the trip (whether it is intra-Commun ity or domestic). Costs related to long distance 
trips are mostly the same, whet her the trip covers the 900 km between Granada and Barcelona 
(domestic) or between Dijon a nd Barcelona (international).  
Passenger protection, as part of th e internal market and common transport policies, is an issue 
of European scale which requires a solution at  Community level. The liberalisation of a 
market is only one side of the internal mark et; the other side has to take into account 
consumer interests, especially those not c overed by market forces. Given the increasing 
 
EN 48   EN number of consumers travelling for leisure or  work within the European Union, it becomes 
more and more important to ensure that they can  count on a similar set of rights wherever they 
are. This can be achieved by an action on Community level. 
Member States are imposing public service obl igation on bus operators, including quality 
standards of the services. These standards shou ld provide passengers w ith a high level of 
protection. Member States should be free to further regulate th ese services wi th regard to 
passenger rights provided that they can ensure a comparable  amount of rights to that 
established on Community level. 
Other domestic services not covered by public se rvice obligation may not be subject to such 
obligations. Therefore they may be regulated on uniform way in all Member States. This can 
be achieved by Community  legal instrument. 
From the passenger's  point of view, on the other hand, the benefits are far greater if a 
regulation covers both internat ional and domestic trips. For example, should an accident 
happen to a coach covering the tr ip Madrid-Paris, those passe ngers on the coach who intended 
to cross the border would be protected and would have righ ts under the new proposal for a 
Regulation, whereas those who intended to get off the coach at Gerona, just before the border, 
or those who embark at Montpellier would not  be protected and would have no rights.  
Situations of this kind would be very common. Taking the example of a coach travelling from 
Madrid to Lisbon with a stop in Badajoz, the passengers crossing the border would have 
rights that those disembarking just a few kilome tres before would not have. A disabled person 
would be protected by the regulati on if travelling from Krakow to  Berlin, but another disabled 
person, sitting on the same coach, but travelling onl y from Krakow to Poznan, i.e. before the 
border, would not be protected. Community citizens would not understand their rights and 
their protection would differ according to the nature of the trip in Europe. 
The same problem arises with railway passe nger rights. Originally  the Commission proposed 
to cover only international cross-border serv ices and no domestic services. The European 
Parliament rejected this approach, as th e Commission proposal would have created two 
classes of passengers. Those who could afford to travel on Thalys would be protected, 
whereas domestic passengers on regional services would be without rights. Even worse, there 
would be different legal regimes on the same tr ain: a passenger leaving the train before the 
border would be unprotected whereas a passenger l eaving after the border would be protected. 
Council has finally accepted this  point of view, and the adopt ed regulation will cover both 
international and domestic rail trips. 
5.7. Impact on SMEs 
Given the structure of the bus and coach industr y, the measures proposed will have an impact 
on small and medium-sized enterprises. Depend ing on the option chosen the impact on SMEs 
may range from: none (option 1), very limited ( option 4), modest (option 2) to large (option 
3). 
The sector is characterised by the dominance of small and medium-si zed enterprises. In 
general, some 26% of the companies providing international services have only one bus or 
coach, 50% of the companies have 2 to 10 vehicl es, 20% have 11 to 50 vehicles and 4% have 
 
EN 49   EN more than 50 vehicles. This size distribution is quite similar to the size distribution in 
domestic transport45 
A survey46 carried out by IRU on profitability in inte rnational bus and coach  transport showed 
that, in the EU25, profit levels range between 0% and 5%.  
The main reason for this is the relatively easy access to the profession and to the market, 
which encourages firms to expand fleets immediat ely when they see a market upturn. Such an 
expansion of fleets then cont ributes to overcapacity, leadi ng to a drop in price levels. 
Furthermore, although large firms do achieve econom ies of scale, they lack flexibility as 
regards the utilisation of their fleets, and a negative development in  one or two market 
segments could easily put large firms in trouble. Smaller firms are more flexible, and are able 
to switch more easily between different markets segments.  
Options 1 and 2 would not create any new burde n for small and medium-sized enterprises. 
Whereas the costs generated by option 2 would be moderate (liability issues, assistance), the 
impact of option 3 would be signif icant in terms of the cost of a fleet of vehicles available to 
disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility. 
5.8. Administrative costs 
Options 1 and 4 would not generate any additio nal administrative cost, but options 2 and 3 
may have some financial implications. However,  at this stage, the administrative costs of 
implementing the provisions on enforcement of  passenger rights can be quantified on the 
basis of the work of national enforcem ent bodies under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004. A 
legislative initiative will clearly involve an administrative cost for the Member States. The 
national enforcement body (referred to hereinaf ter as "NEB"), designated by each MS, will 
have to process an increasing number of co mplaints from passengers. According to the 
“Review of Regulation 261/2004”47 on air transport, the 25 NE Bs reported that they had 
received around 32 000 complaints under the Regul ation since it came into force, which is 
equivalent to 44 complaints per million passen gers departing from EU airports. There are 
significant differences in the resources available to NEBs to handle these complaints. However, the average number of staff worki ng on enforcement of the Regulation, by Member 
State, expressed in terms of full time e quivalents (FTEs) is 0.09 per million departing 
passengers. 
Assuming that the rate of compla ints per passenger in bus and coach transport will be similar 
to that reported for air transport, and give n that the number of international passengers 
transported by bus and coach in 2004 was estimated at approximately 72.8 million
48, it can be 
assumed at this stage that the number of compla ints to be handled pe r year will amount to 
around 3 200. If the proposed regu lation is also extended to in clude long-distance domestic 
services, the above figure can reasonably be exp ected to triple; consequently, the number of 
complaints to be handled in a year could be around 10.000. However, this number may prove 
to be an overestimate if a "lighter" regulat ory regime is chosen for buses and coaches. 
                                                 
45 IRU, NEA "A study to update road tr ansport statistics in Europe", May 2006 
46 See footnote 49 
47 European Commission DG TREN: “REVIEW OF REGULATION 261/2004”. Report was prepared by 
Steer Davies Gleave (February 2007) 
48 see Chapter I. 
 
EN 50   EN It is estimated that the designated NEBs will have to employ 7 FTEs to handle complaints 
related to international bus and coach services. If the forthcoming regula tion is also to apply 
to domestic services, then the number of FTEs to be employed by the NEBs might be as high 
as 20. Therefore, the number of persons to be  employed to enforce the forthcoming regulation 
is expected to be less than one unit per MS. Gi ven that the average labour cost for one FTE in 
public administration in EU27 wa s EUR32 600 per year in 200449, the total cost  of employing 
seven extra FTEs will be EUR 214 000 and the to tal cost of employing 20 extra staff will be 
roughly EUR 640 000. It is possible that these labour costs might be overestimated; in fact, 
considering the small number of staff required, it is likely that the complaints will initially be handled by the existing staff.  
6. K
EY CONCLUSIONS OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
This chapter sets out the optimal policy options with a view to achieving the objectives of the 
legislative act. It contains a succinct comparison of available options with regard to the main 
policy objectives as defined in Chapter 2 of the document. The scoring reflects the cost and 
associated benefits of each option for every m easure considered under th is impact assessment. 
The benefits are measured against the objectiv es of an EU action and the ability of the 
measure considered to address effectively the problems identified. The option preferred is the 
one that represents the best ratio. 
6.1. Principle of non-discrimination and assist ance to disabled people and those with 
reduced mobility 
The optimum policy option is the standard protection scenario  (which also covers domestic 
services). 
The choice of the best option has be en influenced by two main issues: 
• Trade-off between the asserting of passenger rights and increasing costs. The additional 
costs to the operators are likely to be passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares. 
An increase in ticket price might result in less social inclusion for disadvantaged categories of persons; 
• Bus and coach passengers are "price-sensitive" customers and an increase in fares may 
cause a modal shift to low cost  airlines, cars and railways; 
• Bus and coach passengers are often those on low incomes. 
Therefore, in order to assert  the principle of non-discrimina tion and assistance to disabled 
persons and persons with reduced mobility, th e proposed policy has to guarantee an optimum 
level of accessibility which compels the operat ors and the terminals to install adequate 
features and, at the same time, to avoi d any attendant increase in ticket prices. 
Therefore, taking the best available option, an EU legislative act should include at least the 
following elements: 
                                                
 
49 Eurostat Labour Market Survey (2004). 
 
EN 51   EN • Assistance at the terminal. The terminal mana ger shall be responsible  for the provision of 
the assistance to disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility.  
• Assistance on board. A coach or bus operator and/or a t our operator shall provide 
assistance to disabled persons and persons w ith reduced mobility both on board and during 
boarding and disembarking from a vehicle. 
• Non-discrimination with regard  to making a reservation  
Table 13 – Costs-Benefit analysis: Principle of  non-discrimination and a ssistance to disabled 
persons and persons with reduced mobility 
Principle of non-discrimination a nd assistance to disabled persons 
and persons with reduced mobility50 
Policies Costs Benefits 
1) No Policies option - 3 
Some country have already adopted a 
regulation (i.e. UK, Sweden, Ireland et al.)  
2) Standard protection 
scenario X X 
Training costs  
The assistance can be provided directly 
from either the driver, the second driver, on 
board attendant a nd terminal staff) . 
Capital costs for adapting l terminals; 
 3 33 
Disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility (10% of EU population) will have 
full access to international scheduled 
services  
3.I) Enhanced protection 
scenario (only international 
transport) X X X X X 
As with Option 2 
Accessibility of bus and coaches will 
generate significant costs 
Carriers offering occasional international 
services will be affected  3 3 3 
As with Option 2 +  Accessibility extended 
to international occasional services  
3.II) Enhanced protection 
scenario (both domestic and 
international transport) X X X X X 
As with Option 3.I, but also carriers and 
terminals domestic services will be affected  3 3 3 3 
As with Option 3.I +  Accessibility extended 
to domestic services  
                                                 
50 The evaluation criteria used to a ssess costs are as follows: none (-),  very modest (X), modest (XX), 
significant (XXX), high (XXXX), very high (XXXXX).The evaluation criteria used to assess benefits 
are: as follows: none (-), very modest ( √), modest ( √√), significant ( √√√), high (√√√√ ), very high 
(√√√√√ ). 
 
EN 52   EN 4) Self-regulatory scenario - 3 
Accessibility to disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility is not expected to increase compared to the no 
policy option 
6.2. Principle of liability of operators in the event of death or injury of passengers 
The optimum policy option is the enhanced  protection scenario (both domestic and 
international transport). 
Option 3.II is seen as the best option because it will increase protection of passengers’ rights 
(both domestic and international) and will establish the responsibility of the operators at EU level, with only a moderate impact on the costs to the operators. 
Option 3.I would solve all problems of legal di fferences between Member States on the issue 
of international services, but it could also open up some issues regarding discrimination 
between domestic and international passengers. In  fact, since there are few if any national 
laws at the present time, the EU provisions wo uld mean that national journeys would benefit 
from less protection than European journeys: this difficulty might be overcome simply by 
including domestic transport in the scope of the provisi ons (Option 3.II). 
Table 14 – Costs-Benefit analysis. Principle of liability of operators in the event of death or 
injury of passengers 
Principle of liability of op erators in the event of 
death or injury of passengers51 
Policies Additional Costs Benefits 
1) No Policies option - 3 3 
Some benefits are already granted by 
Directive 2005/14/CE and national 
legislation.  
2) Standard protection 
scenario X 
Additional insurance co sts to the operators 
of Member States whose national 
legislation is not already compliant to the proposed regulation. 3 3 
The benefits are not expected to increase 
significantly compare to the no policy 
option. 
                                                 
51 The evaluation criteria used to a ssess costs are as follows: none (-),  very modest (X), modest (XX), 
significant (XXX), high (XXXX), very high (XXXXX).The evaluation criteria used to assess benefits 
are: as follows: none (-), very modest ( √), modest ( √√), significant ( √√√), high (√√√√ ), very high 
(√√√√√ ). 
 
EN 53   EN 3.I) Enhanced protection 
scenario (only international 
transport) X X X  
As with option 2, but operators will have to 
borne extra costs due to advanced payment and more expensive legal procedures.  3 3 3 
Passenger will benefit of better legal and 
economic protection.  
3.II) Enhanced protection 
scenario (both domestic and 
international transport) X X X X  
As with option 3.I, but also carriers 
operating only on domestic market will be 
affected.  3 3 3 3 3 
As with option 3.I but benefits will be 
extended to domestic journeys.  
4) Self-regulatory scenario - 3 3 
Benefits are likely to be limited compared 
to the no policy option.  
6.3. Quality standards / information obligatio ns / compensation and assistance in 
case of cancellations, delays and denied boarding 
The optimal policy option is the standard protec tion scenario combined with aspects of the 
self-regulatory option. 
Option 2 (standard protection scenario) would be  preferable because sufficient protection of 
passengers guaranteed by legislation will also encourage bus and coach transport operators to 
offer better services without raising fares. They  will have a greater ince ntive to pay attention 
to passengers’ demands, maintain consistently high standards and avoid any failure in service 
that could create dissatisfacti on among passengers. This shoul d improve their position on a 
market in which companies compete on both price and quality of service. Therefore, a legislative initiative on passenger protection can be expected to contribute positively to the 
competitiveness of Community operators.  
Lastly, it should be noted that  introducing an obligation of “compensation in the event of 
delay” may not be recomended, since it mi ght prove impossible to  regulate this area 
effectively because of difficu lties in apportioning responsibil ity for the delay which are 
directly related to the definition of cause of “ force majeure ”. This may also have an adverse 
effect on road safety, as carriers may be temp ted to disregard other relevant provisions in 
order to avoid the financial consequences of  a mandatory compensation scheme. Therefore 
any compensation scheme for delays should take  into consideration th ese circumstances. The 
Commission should encourage European bus a nd coach companies to draw up appropriate 
quality standards and develop good practices.  
Table 15 – Costs-Benefit analysis with regard to  Quality standards / information obligations / 
compensation and assistance in case of cancellations, delays and denied boarding 
Quality standards / information obligations / compensation and 
assistance in case of cancellati ons, delays and denied boarding52 
                                                 
52 The evaluation criteria used to a ssess costs are as follows: none (-),  very modest (X), modest (XX), 
significant (XXX), high (XXXX), very high (XXXXX).The evaluation criteria used to assess benefits 
are: as follows: none (-), very modest ( √), modest ( √√), significant ( √√√), high (√√√√ ), very high 
(√√√√√ ). 
 
EN 54   EN Policies Additional Costs Benefits 
1) No Policies option - 3 
Passenger can already benefit from Charters 
and guarantees adopted by some European 
carriers, even if not fully comprehensive.  
2) Standard protection 
scenario X 
Additional costs for operators.  3 3 3 3 
Minimum standard of quality/information 
obligation / compensa tion and assistance 
defined at EU level. 
3.I) Enhanced protection 
scenario (only international 
transport) X X X  
Costs to the operators will be higher 
compared to option II because the rules of 
protection are strictly defined.  3 333   
Comprehensive standard of quality / 
information obligation / compensation and assistance defined at EU level.  
3.II) Enhanced protection 
scenario (both domestic and 
international transport) X X X X  
Also carriers operating on domestic services 
will be affected  3 3 3 3 3 
As with option 3.I, but benefits are 
extended to passengers that undertake 
domestic journeys.  
4) Self-regulatory scenario X 
Operators would not be incurring large 
additional costs  33 3 
Benefits are likely to be limited in the 
beginning, but may increase when the self-
regulatory agreement become more general across the EU.  
6.4. Final conclusions: 
It is considered that the selected options: 
• Are the most appropriate with a view to  achieving the objectiv es of strengthening 
passenger rights in bus and coach transport 
• Guarantee the basic rights of passengers across the EU 
• Ensure a level of protection of passengers that is comparable with ot her modes of transport 
• Ensure non-discriminatory treatment of, and assistance to, disabled persons and persons 
with reduced mobility with a view  to their social integration 
• Generate only limited costs for economic operators, especially small and medium-sized 
enterprises, and for Member States 
• Give precedence to a self-regulatory appr oach whenever operators themselves can 
guarantee a high level of passenger care and serv ice quality as part of market competition. 
 
EN 55   EN 7. CONSIDERATIONS  ON  THE  IMPLEMENTATION  OF THE  PROPOSED  
POLICY  OPTION 
7.1. Implementation and level of compliance 
Currently, passengers using inte rnational bus and co ach transport across the EU enjoy a 
variable level of protection, depending inter al ia on the rights established under national law, 
which are often inconsistent and patchy. Given that most Member States do not appear to 
have appropriate legislation in place to protect pa ssengers that use this mode of transport, then 
none of the existing systems guarantees imme diate assistance and compensation without 
recourse to national judicial systems. Furtherm ore, there are very few Member States whose 
national legislation contains specific provisi ons on accessibility and assistance to disabled 
persons and persons with reduced mobility. 
7.2. Risk of failure  
The level and degree of compliance with th e provisions depends largely on the legal 
instrument chosen and the clarit y of the legal text. Mo reover, the success or  failure of the EU 
intervention depends on the Member States  putting in place an efficient system of 
implementation. The unsatisfactory implemen tation of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 on air 
passengers' rights has demonstrated that this is a crucial issue53. These problems with 
enforcement should be taken into consideration with regard to the es tablishment of passenger 
rights in other modes of transport in terms of  clarity of provisions and effectiveness of 
complaint handling procedure. 
By the same token, the effectiveness of voluntary charters, especially w ith regard to quality 
standards, is highly debatable: the strong views expressed by consumers’ organisations 
confirm that codes of conduct have so far failed to deliver full implementation. Past experience has demonstrated that, even when the carriers have satisfied the commitment to 
transform voluntary commitments  into a contractual obliga tion, passengers have been 
dissatisfied with the actual performance of the services. However, the active involvement of the European Commission may in its elf provide an incentive for bus and coach enterprises to 
draw up viable voluntary agreements on service quality and passenger care.  
7.3. Outline of possible monitoring tools 
In line with other acts establishing passenger rights, Member States should designate an entity 
responsible for the enforcement and the appl ication of the proposed  regulation, taking the 
necessary steps to ensure that the rights of passengers are respected. 
Furthermore, the designated body should also  examine complaints from passengers and 
ensure that their rights are respected when  infringements are found. Passengers should be 
allowed to complain about any infringements,  wherever they happen,  to the body in the 
Member State where they reside and even to refer the complaint to the competent national body, if necessary. 
                                                
 
53 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE 
COUNCIL pursuant to Article 17 of  Regulation [EC]261/2004 on the operation and the results of this 
Regulation establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of 
denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights. COM(2007)0168 
 
EN 56   EN Furthermore, Member States shoul d be required to set penalties for infringements of the act, 
and these penalties must be effec tive, proportionate and dissuasive.