Could a Preserved Railway be Compulsorily Purchased

[21C101]

Is it possible that in the future one or more preserved railways could be compulsorily purchased.

For example, say the Government decided that extra capacity was needed on the Brighton line or a new town was to be built at Horsted Keynes, could the Bluebell extension and Ardingly Branch be compulsorily purchased, redoubled, electrified and reintegrated into the SouthCentral TOC as per the original SR 1946 electrification plans to provide London - Oxted - East Grinstead - Haywards Heath - Brighton trains.

I'm guessing this would cause absolute uproar, but an unsympathetic government could do, it just as they took over the Ashburton - Buckfastleigh section of the Dart Valley Line a couple of years after it reopened as a preserved line and closed it to build the A38 over it.

If it happened, I fear that the money spent by the preservationists to restore it would be far more than the government would ever pay them for it, indeed in the hypothetical Bluebell case, but for the efforts of the preservation society the cost of doing and purchasing it from a myriad of landowners would make it much harder.

Similar risks probably apply to Peak Rail.

 

[cf111]

I can't see why not if there was the need to. I'm no lawyer though.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, absolutely. Compensation would be in line with that for any other business.

 

[GarethJohn]

If you can compulsory purchase a home then why not an attraction that is basically a preservation of the what they want turn it back too?

 

[Greenback]

I have never heard of any exemption for preserved railways under the CPO laws.

 

[daikilo]

Yes, absolutely. Compensation would be in line with that for any other business.

Not sure about that. The line would have been closed for financial reasons but a heritage somesort would have taken it over. If they had developped it to the point where it had become a business (that the govt had failed to do) I am not sure that the regular rules would apply.

Indeed, taking the case of the Bluebell, I would suggest they insist on transforming it into a captive TOC. I think this is unfathomed territory.

 

[Bald Rick]

Not sure about that. The line would have been closed for financial reasons but a heritage somesort would have taken it over. If they had developped it to the point where it had become a business (that the govt had failed to do) I am not sure that the regular rules would apply.

Indeed, taking the case of the Bluebell, I would suggest they insist on transforming it into a captive TOC. I think this is unfathomed territory.

Almost all preserved railways are businesses of one form or another. Not necessarily profitable.

 

[PrinceBishop]

I've often thought about this myself. I assume there must be some people on here who work on preserved railways, how would you feel about it if Network Rail suddenly took over a line again? I'd be interested to hear.

On one level I imagine it might be pretty soul destroying, seeing a line where so much effort had been put into lovingly restoring every single detail over many years with the help of donations etc. and with magnificent steam trains running along them suddenly taken from you and handed over to someone like Northern Rail to chuck a load of Class 150s or Pacers on it.

On the other hand people who work on heritage/preserved railways presumably love the railways and therefore part of them must welcome old routes being reopened and pressed into real passenger service again.

Also, how would it work in practice? Could Network Rail take it over sympathetically and attempt to preserve as much as possible and continue to attract plenty of rail tours (steam charters etc.) to the line outside peak hours. You could even have the volunteers continuing to man and look after the stations on the line. In which case, that would sound great.

Or would it be brutal and unsympathetic. Are there so many regulations that would have to be conformed to that they would have to rip up everything and start again? Perhaps demolishing lovingly restored station buildings and canopies and replacing them with a bus shelter in order to keep running costs down for any future TOC to run.

Was there not a suggestion that they might run commuter services down the East Lancashire Railway at peak times at one stage? How realistic were those suggestions and how would that work in reality?

Realistically I suspect it's not a situation that will arise anytime soon but it would certainly be interesting to see what might happen if it did.

 

[Railsigns]

I'm guessing this would cause absolute uproar

On what grounds, if the whole purpose of a preserved railway is to keep open a line that would otherwise have been closed, so that people can continue to have the opportunity of travelling on it?

"How dare the national rail industry, with its vast resources and professional manpower, come along and take over the running of our favourite line for the foreseeable future, which we have struggled to keep going on a shoestring? We are outraged!"

 

[Bertie the bus]

Similar risks probably apply to Peak Rail.

I don't think they do. Reopening Matlock - Buxton is often brought up by enthusiasts but I've never seen a credible case for the reopening or any evidence of serious interest by anybody in a position to pay for it.

 

[CockneySparrow]

In answer to the main question yes they can compulsory purchase a preserved railway

At first though they would try to come to some sort of arrangement with the preserved line, arrangements might include asking them to run a service to meet the needs required or requesting the nearest TOC run a selection of services over the tracks such as Monday to Friday workings only, I can't see the government go in like a bull in a china shop at the outset as they try to avoid such situations

If however the preserved don't want work with other stakeholders to achieve the result required it will leave the government no option, now as to whether they buy the section they need or the whole lot is another question, I would hazard a guess it would be the whole lot considering most preserved lines aren't that long in miles

The only other grey area is track maintenance, I would have thought NR would need to do work on upgrading the track, also what would happen about the signalling systems do they get replaced to current equipment which would mean NR controlling every move on the preserved line or do the preserved railway use volunteers more often, actually the more I am thinking and writing I think the government would have no option other than to buy the trackbed minimum even if the preserved railway are allowed to play trains at weekends only
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another note there was talk of MNR running commuter services or allowing GA to run trains over its tracks but not heard anything recently

Not sure what the signalling system is down there whether NR control any of it when they need to, but there has been mainline movement down there in recent years, with GA units being transfered from road to rail at Dereham and a few freight workings with a 66

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I have never heard of any exemption for preserved railways under the CPO laws.

Neither have I.

Yes, absolutely. Compensation would be in line with that for any other business.

Not sure about that. The line would have been closed for financial reasons but a heritage somesort would have taken it over. If they had developped it to the point where it had become a business (that the govt had failed to do) I am not sure that the regular rules would apply.

It's more likely that a heritage Railway would have aquired Charitable Status (regulated by the Charity Commissioners) under which there are constraints on how a Charity's assets are distributed. However, there are ways - I'm reminded of the Charities which were the English regional Arts Boards (some established under a Royal Charter) and which the government subsumed into its own 'Arts Council England' without much trouble.

 

[CockneySparrow]

This might be worth reading

http://www.mnr.org.uk/your-visit/hire-the-line/

**apologies can't copy and paste the detail as using mobile device

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I'd guess probably a TWAO, which can include compulsory purchase powers.

 

[al.currie93]

If the government wanted to seize a truly private railway, such as the bluebell, and hand the infrastructure to Network Rail and the operation of trains to a franchised TOC for those reasons, they could easily do it, and they wouldn't have to give them anything for it (although that WOULD cause an uproar). However I severely doubt they ever would do this.

Personally I reckon they would probably actually come to an arrangement with the private heritage railway to extend to wherever they needed it to be, to operate a certain amount of services in addition to their usual heritage operations and allow National Rail services on their tracks and subsidise them to do so; essentially creating a truly private local rural railway (something that, despite supporting nationalisation of most of the railways, I actually agree with for small rural railways and branch lines, such as Dorking to Horsham or the Looe Branch).

 

[nr758123]

In answer to the original question, a preserved railway can be compulsorily purchased, and not only that, it has happened.

The railway in question was the Festiniog - the original alignment between Dduallt and Tanygrisiau - which was acquired for the Stwlan hyro-electric scheme.

The court case (Festiniog Railway Co v Central Electricity Generating Board) established an important bit of case law relating to the award of compensation based on the cost of equivalent reinstatement rather than market value.

Apparently it was the second longest legal battle in British history, spanning over 18 years.

Following the precedent set in this case, it is likely that if part of a preserved railway was to be compulsorily purchased (or acquired under threat of compulsory purchase) then the compensation would be based on the cost of replacing the missing section of railway.

 

[HSTEd]

Parliament can compulsorily purchase anything it wants.

For instance during the first nationalisation of iron and steel it did not nationalise the assets as it did with the railways, it simply unilaterally converted share certificates into government bonds.

 

[phil beard]

More immediate than anything to do with the Bluebell Railway would be if BML2 went ahead then the Lavender Line at Isfield would be threatened.

 

[Yew]

Following the precedent set in this case, it is likely that if part of a preserved railway was to be compulsorily purchased (or acquired under threat of compulsory purchase) then the compensation would be based on the cost of replacing the missing section of railway.

It would be interesting to see if the compensation would be the cost of a volunteer group to make the replacement route, or of a commercial contractor.

 

[Wolfie]

Parliament can compulsorily purchase anything it wants.

For instance during the first nationalisation of iron and steel it did not nationalise the assets as it did with the railways, it simply unilaterally converted share certificates into government bonds.

That was before the European Convention on Human Rights....

Other countries trying things similar to your discription subsequently have been absolutely hammered by the European Court of Human Rights.....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That is why there were all sorts of shenanigans (essentially moves to make it financially unstable) around Railtrack....

 

[Bantamzen]

Would it be feasible for the line itself to be compulsorily purchased, but the heritage company / organisation offered am open access contract to continue to run their services & maybe go for some other stock from ROSCOs where required?

I'm thinking in particular about the North Yorkshire Moors Railway. In recent times there have been noises made about extending the existing track from Pickering towards Malton, with a view of giving the entire area, and in particular Whitby a direct link towards York & thus better mainline connections than they currently have. So could NR take ownership of the line itself, but the NYMR keep running their stock plus some additional commuter stock as well as maintaining the stations & selling tickets to the wider network? I know there's fierce debate about the link, with quite a lot of obvious resistance from the NYMR for obvious reasons so could them being offered open access help bridge the gap?

 

[Altnabreac]

The other thing to bear in mind is the effect on a Business Case of both the cost of compensation and the Economic disbenefit of loss of a tourist attraction.

While a small preserved line like the Lavender Line with regards Uckfield could potentially be purchased if you started looking at something like NYMR removing the Economic Benefits from tourists visiting the line would almost certainly outweigh any benefits from reopening the line.

 

[Max]

The other thing to bear in mind is the effect on a Business Case of both the cost of compensation and the Economic disbenefit of loss of a tourist attraction.

While a small preserved line like the Lavender Line with regards Uckfield could potentially be purchased if you started looking at something like NYMR removing the Economic Benefits from tourists visiting the line would almost certainly outweigh any benefits from reopening the line.

Though for a railway like the NYMR that actually provides a useful strategic link (if extended to Malton), there's surely an argument that the benefits to the wider economy from increased connectivity to York/Leeds and beyond would outweigh the disbenefits. Additionally, steam trains already run on NR metals for significant distances elsewhere in the country (Mallaig-Fort William is the prime one that comes to mind), and its fair to say that such services are still a major tourist attraction.

 

[HSTEd]

That was before the European Convention on Human Rights....
Other countries trying things similar to your discription subsequently have been absolutely hammered by the European Court of Human Rights.....

That is why there were all sorts of shenanigans (essentially moves to make it financially unstable) around Railtrack....

I see no reason why the ECHR would prevent this?
Why would you be able to compulsorily purchase real estate and not any other property, assuming you pay fair value?

 

[paul1609]

As a director of One of the Preserved lines in the South East I would say that the general consensus amongst all the lines is that the market is saturated, Although many of them are peripheral East Sussex currently has 4 operating heritage railways. When you take in to account all the competing attractions that is too many. In the event of one or more of the lines being needed for the national network Id like to think we could come to some sort of agreement to absorb the society this has happened in the past with the north Downs Steam railway being absorbed in to the Spa Valley and the Westerham Railway being absorbed in to the K&ESR.

 

[grove]

Speculating ... like merge the Lavender with the Bluebell and use the compensation to re-open the Horsted Keynes to Haywards Heath or head south from Sheffield Park - a race to Lewes.

 

[chorleyjeff]

It would be interesting to see if the compensation would be the cost of a volunteer group to make the replacement route, or of a commercial contractor.

See the case referred to.
Depends on the facts. If volunteers would be likely to or actually did the work then that costing would be the basis.

 

[21C101]

Some interesting responses, particularly the Ffestiniog one. The difference with say the Bluebell is that the railway would not be removed, just upgraded and operated by someone else.

I would imagine that there is no serious risk to the NYMR even if it went to Malton. They are already an official TOC and the "mainline" trains would not be that frequent. If mainline trains ran outside steam operating hours then they might be able to run at up to 60mph as happens on the GCR with test trains. Alternatively the NYMR could operate using steam hauled mk 2s when main line trains are about.

The hypothetical Bluebell case would be more difficult. For example, were a second runway built at Gatwick it would mean that a lot of extra capacity would be needed on the Brighton line. It would probably be cheaper to run trains via Oxted and Horsted Keynes to Brighton and upgrade north of South Croydon than lay six tracks all down the Brighton line to Gatwick. A preserved railway operating a 90mph double track third rail or 25kV a.c. line with an intensive service probably isn't on, certainly mixing that with wooden body hauled steam services isn't.

While a tiny luddite minority would be very happy indeed to go back to playing trains with terriers shuttling between Sheffield Park and the now closed Bluebell Halt just south of Horsted Keynes, most would be outraged and morally I don't think you could do that without compensating them by rebuilding the line to a new Culver Junction interchange or if Uckfield Lewes wasn't already open along the uckfield to lewes line then a new chord to a separate Bluebell station at Cooksbridge

But I fear that the UK government just would not do that, just pay them the market asset value of the line, buildings and land and negotiate hard on that to boot.

As the rail network expands and more and more preserved railways start to connect the national network to somewhere useful, its probably the sort of thing the HRA ought to be thinking about so they can organise quckly/lobby if needed, along with the equally problematic issue of an open access company or TOC attempting to get the open access rules amended so they could run a commerical service along a preserved line that has a passenger signalled interchange with the national network.

 

[Trog]

Just a thought but would the ghost of Dr Beeching have any effect, think how he is regarded fifty years down the line, Axe might as well be the second half of his surname. Would a political career survive even just a few percentage points of that. If every time you appeared on TV a load of people instantly start thinking of a crying Thomas the tank engine, and film of a beautiful period piece station being demolished. They might opt to be careful and bribe the preserved railway into going quietly, after all it is a valuable career and only public money.

 

[jnty]

Just a thought but would the ghost of Dr Beeching have any effect, think how he is regarded fifty years down the line, Axe might as well be the second half of his surname. Would a political career survive even just a few percentage points of that. If every time you appeared on TV a load of people instantly start thinking of a crying Thomas the tank engine, and film of a beautiful period piece station being demolished. They might opt to be careful and bribe the preserved railway into going quietly, after all it is a valuable career and only public money.

Wouldn't they be doing the complete opposite of Beeching - opening a new part of the national network, rather than closing it? Assuming it was needed by the local community I'd imagine it would be an electoral boost more than anything.

I have to say I'm quite surprised by the hostility people here have and believe there would be towards integration of these railways into the national network. I'd have thought that, for others, re-opening of the line as a "real" railway would be a bit of a dream come true.