Northern owner Deutsche Bahn wants compensation from Network Rail

[Greybeard33]

Its been discussed at length on these forums, but in short the delays to infrastructure led to delays in EMU deployment, subsequent strengthening of DMU services leading to more overcrowding, crew training being delayed leading to cancellations, and so on. The May meltdown then eventually led to the emergency timetable and subsequently further delays to planned December timetable improvements.

It was not Northern's fault that electrification schemes overran. If things had gone to plan the timetable changes would have been implemented far smoother.

For the May 2019 timetable change, all the infrastructure will be in place that was originally planned for May 2018. Yet TPE is retaining the timetable changes it implemented in December to mitigate the Castlefield corridor delays (extended layovers at Manchester Airport, stopper split at Huddersfield). It remains to be seen how much Northern will implement of its original May 2018 timetable plans.

I am very sceptical the timetable would have worked like clockwork if the wires had been up last May.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In what way did the electrification delays contribute to the problems through the Castlefield corridor? If the electrification had been ready, Northern was intending to run 7tph through Oxford Road and Piccadilly from May 2018. Due to the delays and consequent DMU shortage, the proposed Leeds to Manchester Airport via Bradford service was cut back to Victoria, leaving the current 6tph. Surely cramming in an extra hourly train would have made the performance of services over the corridor even worse?
The late timetable changes provided a convenient smokescreen for Northern (and TPE) management to try to hide its own failings.

Crewing plans were destroyed by the late electrification, with DMUs still working and driver competence expired (Blackpool).
The timetable didn't work leaving trains stopped short and blocking platforms, without crews, hence the wider disruption.
I'm just guessing at the reasons for the claim.
NR has already owned up to the failure of the timetabling process (partly because of the infrastructure projects being unable to forecast completion properly).

 

[Bantamzen]

Hi

I agree with you there but as David Brown has come out and publicly said he didn't know anything about it then in my book that's not playing politics that's out and out lies if he did.

If he didn't its surely incompitence either by him or Alan Chaplain.

If he really didn't know about it then either he is lying as you say, or he's being fed BS from those directly beneath him. And to be honest either scenario is possible, although in today's middle management culture in the UK my money would be on the latter. All too often in both private and public sector, the layers of middle management often dilute bad news in order to save their own skins.

Either way it sounds to me as though there is a serious shake up needed at Northern / Arriva HQ, I can't imagine that DB can be impressed with such an inefficient management structure. I know the punters & clearly the staff aren't! It all sounds a little too much like how the public sector is managed!!

For the May 2019 timetable change, all the infrastructure will be in place that was originally planned for May 2018. Yet TPE is retaining the timetable changes it implemented in December to mitigate the Castlefield corridor delays (extended layovers at Manchester Airport, stopper split at Huddersfield). It remains to be seen how much Northern will implement of its original May 2018 timetable plans.

I am very sceptical the timetable would have worked like clockwork if the wires had been up last May.

I understand your scepticism, however it can't be beyond the realms of possibility to work the timetables so that the planned paths through Castlefield can run fairly efficiently. The TPE timetable tweaks last month have made a difference, so now its over to Northern to come up with a plan too (maybe move crew changes from Piccadilly / Oxford Road for one).

Interestingly I was watching a cab ride video on YouTube last night of a 185 going through Castlefield from Victoria to the Airport, and one caption when it was halted at Deansgate said that platform changes were rare at Oxford Road. When it did pull into P4 there was nothing on P3, suggesting that it might have been able to use that whilst P4 was presumably occupied, but the policy seems to be not to change to avoid passengers having to cross the footbridge. Perhaps some rethinking on how Oxford Road is used might go some way further to allow the current & planned paths through?

 

[whhistle]

While I appreciate there is fault on all sides here, it also makes me think whether DB will work out running the railways isn't just about extracting profit to prop up their own railway (if the nay sayers are anything to be believed!).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

For a long time, the only booked passenger train into P3 at Oxford Road was the Llandudno service (ATW/TfW).
Once the train had moved off to Piccadilly, the PIS just flipped round an hour.
That's poor utilisation of the capacity (though it is available for freight/ECS).
Even when the planned upgrade is done, it won't create 2 island platforms as at Piccadilly, where you can switch alternate trains and retain same-platform boarding.
P1 is also little used but there are good reasons for that with a short platform, no lift and inadequate shelter.
Oxford Road and Piccadilly badly need their upgrade.
Piccadilly P13/14 on a wet and windy day is now one of the bleakest places on the network, now that the sheltering buildings have gone in the interests of "de-cluttering".

 

[Bantamzen]

While I appreciate there is fault on all sides here, it also makes me think whether DB will work out running the railways isn't just about extracting profit to prop up their own railway (if the nay sayers are anything to be believed!).

I am of the growing opinion that Arriva/DB won't be the only company looking at their UK railway operations & wondering if it is really worth it any more. The next round of franchise bidding for certain parts of the network could be interesting to say the least.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am of the growing opinion that Arriva/DB won't be the only company looking at their UK railway operations & wondering if it is really worth it any more. The next round of franchise bidding for certain parts of the network could be interesting to say the least.

Nobody bothering to bid may be what's needed to get the Government to fix things.

 

[Bantamzen]

Nobody bothering to bid may be what's needed to get the Government to fix things.

Maybe so, although quite honestly looking at other major issues they are handling right now I wouldn't hold my breath. Imagine a "No Deal" for new franchises and leaving DfT to run the whole show.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe so, although quite honestly looking at other major issues they are handling right now I wouldn't hold my breath. Imagine a "No Deal" for new franchises and leaving DfT to run the whole show.....

The advantage of franchising is that most TOCs (Northern excepted) are vaguely competent at running a train service, and are left to it without too much meddling for a few years once contracted to do so. This is a key advantage of tendering-type privatisation of all business areas, really.

 

[AMD]

Piccadilly P13/14 on a wet and windy day is now one of the bleakest places on the network, now that the sheltering buildings have gone in the interests of "de-cluttering".

Quite deliberate - in making it bleak on the platform it's forcing people to wait upstairs and free up platform space. P14 can be quite a difficult platform to dispatch from because of the sheer volume of people, and from an operational and risk viewpoint getting passengers to wait upstairs is a good thing.

 

[Bantamzen]

The advantage of franchising is that most TOCs (Northern excepted) are vaguely competent at running a train service, and are left to it without too much meddling for a few years once contracted to do so. This is a key advantage of tendering-type privatisation of all business areas, really.

I'm not sure I'd agree, it seems there are growing problems up and down the country (reading some of the rumours on here), and there have been a couple of spectacular failures with the ECML franchise. Personally speaking, I can't help but feel that many TOCs are swan like, seemingly calm on the surface but frantically paddling below to keep going. Without some serious rethinking about the franchising model, I can see some of the big operators backing away over the coming years, with perhaps another total collapse.

 

[Greybeard33]

I understand your scepticism, however it can't be beyond the realms of possibility to work the timetables so that the planned paths through Castlefield can run fairly efficiently. The TPE timetable tweaks last month have made a difference, so now its over to Northern to come up with a plan too (maybe move crew changes from Piccadilly / Oxford Road for one).

Interestingly I was watching a cab ride video on YouTube last night of a 185 going through Castlefield from Victoria to the Airport, and one caption when it was halted at Deansgate said that platform changes were rare at Oxford Road. When it did pull into P4 there was nothing on P3, suggesting that it might have been able to use that whilst P4 was presumably occupied, but the policy seems to be not to change to avoid passengers having to cross the footbridge. Perhaps some rethinking on how Oxford Road is used might go some way further to allow the current & planned paths through?

Northern crew changes at Oxford Road are not Network Rail's fault. The Wigan - Alderley Edge and Liverpool - Crewe services were not affected by the late timetable change. Given that the increased frequency through the corridor was originally planned for December 2017, a proactive ARN management would have had plenty of time to anticipate the issue and develop mitigations before May 2018.

There is little point in using alternate eastbound platforms at Oxford Road while everything has to be funnelled through Piccadilly P13.

 

[HH]

Getting back to the thread title, DB have a right to sue Network Rail under the Network Code. The failure to provide the promised Infrastructure on time counts as Network Change and they should be able to recover all losses relating to that. Of course, agreeing what those are will provide several lawyers a nice xmas bonus...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Northern crew changes at Oxford Road are not Network Rail's fault. The Wigan - Alderley Edge and Liverpool - Crewe services were not affected by the late timetable change. Given that the increased frequency through the corridor was originally planned for December 2017, a proactive ARN management would have had plenty of time to anticipate the issue and develop mitigations before May 2018.

There is little point in using alternate eastbound platforms at Oxford Road while everything has to be funnelled through Piccadilly P13.

The historical reason for not using P3 would be that P4 was wheelchair accessible, but I think the lifts have now been reinstated?

It's a shame Oxford Road is not two island platforms, one for each direction. Ideally both Castlefield stations (close Deansgate) would be so.

 

[daikilo]

Northern crew changes at Oxford Road are not Network Rail's fault. The Wigan - Alderley Edge and Liverpool - Crewe services were not affected by the late timetable change. Given that the increased frequency through the corridor was originally planned for December 2017, a proactive ARN management would have had plenty of time to anticipate the issue and develop mitigations before May 2018.

There is little point in using alternate eastbound platforms at Oxford Road while everything has to be funnelled through Piccadilly P13.

I agree that having crew changes taking place in such a congested section of the network should be avoided completely.

However, Oxford Road is the only means to regulate traffic to cope with congestion through the station throat at Piccadilly. Alternating does give this possibility without causing late platform changes. Indeed, it can also allow some regulation of out-of-sequence services coming in from the west.

 

[Eccles1983]

You cannot change staff anywhere else but Oxford road.

If you don't change there (which is a natural break between several depots then the sheer route learning required would be astronomical.

Anything going beyond 13/14 requires at least 2 days walk around Piccadilly, then where are you going to change? Stockport/airport is the next changing points and you are just pushing the problem further down the same track. The airport line is 2 days, and Stockport is about the same get the trips in. The other way is just as bad.

Bolton or Wigan are your nearest authorized change points, beyond that it's Liverpool or Warrington.

So each driver now requires 6 days additional training to go through Piccadilly throat, and about the same to carry on west bound.

A crew change takes around 2 mins at worst, and seconds normally. Even without them you still have the volume of trains attempting to get down to piccadilly.

 

[yorksrob]

There is little point in using alternate eastbound platforms at Oxford Road while everything has to be funnelled through Piccadilly P13.

Not necessarily. The arriving train can start disgorging passengers whilst the leaving one is still loading. It might only be minutes, but it could make a difference.

 

[Bantamzen]

Northern crew changes at Oxford Road are not Network Rail's fault. The Wigan - Alderley Edge and Liverpool - Crewe services were not affected by the late timetable change. Given that the increased frequency through the corridor was originally planned for December 2017, a proactive ARN management would have had plenty of time to anticipate the issue and develop mitigations before May 2018.

There is little point in using alternate eastbound platforms at Oxford Road while everything has to be funnelled through Piccadilly P13.

I didn't say it was NR's fault but something Northern has to sort out.

I agree that having crew changes taking place in such a congested section of the network should be avoided completely.

However, Oxford Road is the only means to regulate traffic to cope with congestion through the station throat at Piccadilly. Alternating does give this possibility without causing late platform changes. Indeed, it can also allow some regulation of out-of-sequence services coming in from the west.

Not necessarily. The arriving train can start disgorging passengers whilst the leaving one is still loading. It might only be minutes, but it could make a difference.

This was what I was thinking, alternating services from the west would at least allow for two services to detrain & board whilst waiting for their slot on P13. In the video I watched, the 185 halts at Deansgate as it seems P4 is occupied but when it arrives P3 was clear. So it might have been possible that it could have been released from the signal at Deansgate earlier, stopped at P3 and have been ready to approach P13 at Piccadilly a bit earlier, getting out of the way of subsequent services arriving from the west. It might only save a few seconds to minute, but that would add up and allow NR to maximise capacity instead of potentially several services queuing behind each other for the same platform at Oxford Road. And if P1 was ever brought up to spec to allow step free access, better shelter etc it might a smaller effect for westbound trains, though nowhere near as significant.

 

[hwl]

Getting back to the thread title, DB have a right to sue Network Rail under the Network Code. The failure to provide the promised Infrastructure on time counts as Network Change and they should be able to recover all losses relating to that. Of course, agreeing what those are will provide several lawyers a nice xmas bonus...

Northern's incompetence and inability to cope with change and issues generally is Northern problem and they won't have been staffed up properly for a once in a decade type big timetable change so that will take some unpicking as NR aren't responsible for that.

 

[Greybeard33]

I agree that having crew changes taking place in such a congested section of the network should be avoided completely.

However, Oxford Road is the only means to regulate traffic to cope with congestion through the station throat at Piccadilly. Alternating does give this possibility without causing late platform changes. Indeed, it can also allow some regulation of out-of-sequence services coming in from the west.

A glance at RTT shows that this morning several Northern Blackpool to Piccadilly and Preston to Airport services used Oxford Road P3, in addition to the TfW service and the through trains from Scotland and Trafford Park. P3 is also used by some westbound services.

When Northern control know that a relief crew is likely to be late, I would hope that they would ask the signallers for a platform change in advance, so that following services can overtake while using their booked platforms.

 

[jayah]

Agreed!

Also, someone mentioned Northern use taxis to ferry staff between Piccadilly and Oxford Road.

I work near Piccadilly and you should see the amount Northern conductors and drivers walking between Oxford Road and Piccadilly everyday. It really is as daft as it sounds.

I assume many of them feel the 10-15 minute walk is quicker on relying on a taxi which could be held up in traffic. Such a thoroughly unprofessional arrangement can't be good for morale.

Going for a walk surely?
There are trains every 4-5mins.

 

[yorksrob]

Having had the misfortune of having to use their train, and attempting to use their "bus service" today, I can't help but think it wouldn't be too much of a shame if Arriva were to dissappear from these shores altogether.

 

[HH]

Having had the misfortune of having to use their train, and attempting to use their "bus service" today, I can't help but think it wouldn't be too much of a shame if Arriva were to dissappear from these shores altogether.

Used anything First lately?

 

[yorksrob]

Used anything First lately?

Two buses this morning.

 

[northernchris]

Used anything First lately?

Agreed, First are significantly worse than any other transport operator. Their West Yorkshire bus operation is dire, and both TPE and Hull Trains have had a rough few months

 

[Greybeard33]

Going for a walk surely?
There are trains every 4-5mins.

There are only 10tph that actually call at Oxford Road, and they are not evenly spaced. Even if everything is on time, there are gaps (in the standard hour) up to 9 minutes eastbound and 12 minutes westbound. That is similar to the walking time between the stations.

 

[The Planner]

Getting back to the thread title, DB have a right to sue Network Rail under the Network Code. The failure to provide the promised Infrastructure on time counts as Network Change and they should be able to recover all losses relating to that. Of course, agreeing what those are will provide several lawyers a nice xmas bonus...

I think you misunderstand Part G/Network Change, that process is effectively to get agreement on the material change to the network in its final state and to claim compensation in relation to that change, such as driver training, route learning etc... the date of implementation doesnt really come into it as they are normally worded open ended.

 

[DerekC]

Can I suggest that many of those posting on this thread should read the ORR's report which does at least set out the facts. Available as follows (read the September 2018 interim first)

http://orr.gov.uk/rail/consumers/inquiry-into-may-2018-network-disruption

 

[Dr Hoo]

I think you misunderstand Part G/Network Change, that process is effectively to get agreement on the material change to the network in its final state and to claim compensation in relation to that change, such as driver training, route learning etc... the date of implementation doesnt really come into it as they are normally worded open ended.

Perhaps a claim is being made under the 'Sustained Planned Disruption' provisions in Schedule 4 of the Track Access Contract. This can be found in the standard passenger track access agreement. Not really feasible to summarize this lengthy document but it can be found at http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/word_doc/0004/2956/model-passenger-contract.docx

 

[Starmill]

For a long time, the only booked passenger train into P3 at Oxford Road was the Llandudno service (ATW/TfW).
Once the train had moved off to Piccadilly, the PIS just flipped round an hour.
That's poor utilisation of the capacity (though it is available for freight/ECS).
Even when the planned upgrade is done, it won't create 2 island platforms as at Piccadilly, where you can switch alternate trains and retain same-platform boarding.
P1 is also little used but there are good reasons for that with a short platform, no lift and inadequate shelter.
Oxford Road and Piccadilly badly need their upgrade.
Piccadilly P13/14 on a wet and windy day is now one of the bleakest places on the network, now that the sheltering buildings have gone in the interests of "de-cluttering".

Platforms 1 and 3 have to be used at least once an hour by the TransPennine Express train to or from Scotland to overtake the Chat Moss stopper. This must happen at Manchester Oxford Road.