Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi I'm a new Mum & a bit clueless about public transport with a baby . I need to go into London Bridge next week and can't decide the best way to go with my pram.


Options seem to be no 40 bus or train.

Bus- I'm worried it'll be crowded and I won't get on with the pram

Train- is the slope at ED too steap to push it up?!


Any advice? I know I need to man up!;)

Totally understand! I have a 14 month old daughter, I was really worried about using public transport at first for all the same reasons, but once you get the hang of it all you realise it was really not worth worrying about. We now frequently use the bus, train and underground without even thinking about it!

The buses have 2 allocated spaces for wheelchairs/Prams/pushchairs, but there is only enough room for 2 so u might have to wait for the next bus,so allow extra time, but the driver will let u know. If there is space but the bus is crowded u can ask the driver to let u in by the other set of doors.

The slope at the station is fine, I remember there being a couple of steps, but they should be manageable. I have found that nearly all the time on public transport people are great and offer a hand!

When my daughter reached about 4 months I bought a fully reclining umbrella style pushchair, it's nice and small for the bus, I can carry it with my daughter in it up and down a few steps and I can even manage the escalators on the tube! Also great for being thrown about when going on holiday.

Good luck

ED to London Bridge is super easy with a pram and the ramps/slopes are fine!

Baby carrier even easier but that's another thread :)

Good luck, everything's daunting to begin with but it be worth the trip, I loved going into town when my eldest was small :)

V true re going on backwards! My first time on the ED- LB train a v kind mum who also had a buggy of her own to handle kindly helped me onto the train.


If you look for the disabled carriage there is more room for the buggy there. London Bridge became my favourite place to go with my first baby as it's so easy. Have fun!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Anyone got any feedback on Transgender Awareness Week over the last week? I don't. And neither has my wife. And neither have my sisters. And neither has my mum, nor my daughter   x
    • It's an estate that they have been gifted. They may choose to earn a living from it, or to sell all, or part of it. In many cases, the land will only have been purchased as a way to avoid tax (as is the case for people like Clarkson, Dyson and other people with significant land holdings) and has little to do with farming at all. The idea that if I give you land worth £3m + tomorrow Rocks, it's not an massive windfall, but simply a necessary tool that you need to earn a living is silly. It's no different from someone inheriting any other estate where they would usually be required to pay 40% tax and settle up immediately.  If you're opposed to any tax on those inheriting multi-million pound estates - I would be interested in who you would like to place a greater tax burden upon? Or do you simply think we should watch public services collapse even further.
    • Because it's only a windfall if they sell it - until that time it is an asset - and in this case a working asset but, as far a the government is concerned a taxable asset. The farm is the tool that they use to earn a living - a living that they will be taxed on in the same way a nurse is - it's just to do their job they are now expected to pay extra tax for the privilege - just because the farm was passed to them. Or are you advocating nurses pay tax on the tools they are provided to do their job too? 😉  Now, if they sell the farm then yes, they should pay inheritance tax in the same way people who are left items of value from relatives are because they have realised the value and taken the asset as cash.  Our farming industry is built upon family business - generations of farmers from the same families working the land and this is an ideological attack and, like so many of Labour's policies, is aimed at a few rich farmers/farm owners (insert pensioners on Fuel Duty), but creates collateral damage for a whole load of other farmers who aren't rich (insert 50,000 pensioners now struggling in relative poverty due to Winter Fuel) and will have to sell land to fund it because, well, they are farmers who don't earn much at all doing a very tough job - the average wage of someone in agriculture is, according to the BBC around £500 a week and the national average is £671. Do you see the point now and why so many farmers are upset about this? It's another tax the many to get to the few. Maybe farmers should wear Donkey jackets rather than Barbour's and the government may look on them a little more favourably.... Some good background from the BBC on why farmers are fighting so hard. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62jdz61j3yo
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...