Capacité Transport Voyageurs common mistakes
Capacité Transport Voyageurs · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Confusing the carrier's obligation of safety (obligation de sécurité de résultat) with a simple obligation of means and concluding the carrier escapes liability whenever the passenger was injured by another passenger.
Candidates learn 'transport contracts are result obligations' as a slogan and then over-apply or under-apply it, forgetting the case-law nuances (force majeure, victim's own fault, exoneration).
What to do instead
For each scenario, explicitly state the obligation type, then list the only recognised exonerations (force majeure, fault of the victim, act of a third party that was unforeseeable and irresistible). Practise writing the one-sentence justification that names the exoneration.
Treating the transport contract as formed only when the ticket is issued, and ignoring that the contract can be formed by the mere agreement of the parties (booking, boarding).
Everyday experience associates the ticket with the contract, so candidates equate the two.
What to do instead
Memorise the distinction between formation of the contract and its proof (ticket as evidence). Answer scenario questions by asking 'was there agreement on price and journey?' before discussing the ticket.
Mixing up the EU rules on occasional services (Annex to Regulation 1073/2009) with regular services and cabotage: applying the Community licence alone to a regular service, or omitting the authorisation for a regular service.
All road passenger transport feels like 'free movement', and candidates do not separate the three regimes (regular, special regular, occasional).
What to do instead
Build a one-page decision tree: is the service regular/special regular/occasional? Then list the required documents (Community licence, authorisation, journey form, attestation). Test yourself by classifying ten short scenarios into the tree.
Ignoring the AETR/Regulation 561/2006 driving-time and rest rules for occasional international coach trips, or applying only the daily 9-hour rule while forgetting the 45-minute break after 4.5 hours and the weekly rest compensation.
Candidates study the tachograph rules for goods transport and assume passenger transport has no specificities, or they memorise only one figure.
What to do instead
Produce a timeline exercise: for a given 48-hour trip, place driving periods, the 45-minute break (splittable into 15+30), daily rest and weekly rest, then check against the text. Repeat with a 12-day trip to practise the derogation for passenger transport.
Pricing a service by adding a fixed margin to cost without segmenting demand, and proposing the same fare to school groups, commuters and tourist groups.
Candidates come from an operations background and see pricing as a cost-plus calculation rather than a commercial decision.
What to do instead
For each case, compute the full cost per seat-km, then justify a differentiated price by willingness to pay and load factor. Practise one yield-management exercise (off-peak discount, group tariff, last-minute premium) with the resulting margin per departure.
Confusing revenue, margin and cash: presenting a profitable monthly P&L while the treasury is negative, or forgetting VAT on passenger transport and its exemptions.
Candidates equate profit with cash and are unsure about the VAT regime applicable to passenger transport.
What to do instead
Systematically build a three-line table (result, cash flow, treasury) for each case and explain the gap (depreciation, payment deadlines, VAT collected). State the VAT rule explicitly before computing.
Calculating a vehicle's total cost of ownership using only the purchase price and fuel, omitting depreciation, maintenance, insurance, tyres and the driver cost per hour.
Candidates anchor on visible costs and forget that the driver is often the largest cost item in passenger transport.
What to do instead
Use a fixed cost grid: depreciation, financing, insurance, road tax, maintenance, tyres; then variable costs per km; then driver cost per hour including social charges. Apply it to two vehicle types and compare cost per seat-km at different load factors.
Drafting an employment contract or planning driver schedules without checking the collective agreement applicable to road passenger transport (working time, night work, breaks, Sunday work).
Candidates rely on the general Labour Code and forget that the branch agreement sets more favourable or specific rules.
What to do instead
Before answering any HR scenario, list the three sources to check in order: Labour Code, branch agreement, company agreement. Keep a one-page summary of the branch's working-time provisions and apply it to a weekly roster exercise.
Treating the driver's periodic medical check and the driver's professional qualification (FIMO/FCO) as a single formality, or letting the CPC/fitness validity lapse.
Both are 'driver paperwork', so candidates merge them and forget their different periodicities and consequences.
What to do instead
Make a table with columns: requirement, periodicity, who issues it, consequence of expiry (vehicle immobilised, driver cannot drive). Recite it before any question on driver compliance.
Answering a safety question by citing only the driver's behaviour, without checking the vehicle's technical conformity (periodic technical inspection, tachograph calibration, seat belts, emergency exits, fire extinguisher) and the operator's safety obligations.
Accident prevention is intuitively attributed to the driver alone, and candidates overlook the transport operator's own legal duties.
What to do instead
For every safety scenario, run a two-column checklist: human factors (driver, training, hours) and technical/organisational factors (inspection dates, equipment, maintenance register, safety adviser). Answer by covering both columns.