Guardian article: SWR leaves passengers stranded

[Bletchleyite]

An interesting creep of scope.

Sort of. I used the term "lockdown" carefully, as I wouldn't want it to be a health-and-safety-of-individuals thing (i.e. thou shalt not leave the house a la COVID), but rather something that protected people from disciplinary action if due to a "do not travel" warning they did not attend work.

How do countries which often experience dangerously severe weather do things? With climate change we're headed that way and so it needs consideration.

 

[Taunton]

Given this train stops at Clapham Junction, where nowadays more passengers often join the services than at Waterloo, someone connecting from the likes of East Croydon would very likely get in the train, advertised as being for Exeter as normal, without any indication of a "do not travel" on this line - and by this stage they are already on their journey anyway.

Where was the actual line blockage in question? It seems that the train being reversed at Yeovil Junction to form an eastbound service which had not made it through from Exeter was part of the process control felt was more important. Was the blockage between Yeovil Junction and Crewkerne, the next station, which although again being far from the place it is named after, it is at least more in lit civilisation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With the vast majority of tickets now sold online and with an itinerary, the railway knows contact details of most passengers. It is not at all far fetched that they might use those details to inform them of a problem.

 

[spyinthesky]

With the vast majority of tickets now sold online and with an itinerary, the railway knows contact details of most passengers. It is not at all far fetched that they might use those details to inform them of a problem.

It seems quite appropriate that even The Guardian issued such problems.
Fancy not reading your own rag!

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Given this train stops at Clapham Junction, where nowadays more passengers often join the services than at Waterloo, someone connecting from the likes of East Croydon would very likely get in the train, advertised as being for Exeter as normal, without any indication of a "do not travel" on this line - and by this stage they are already on their journey anyway.

At a guess, the 16 year-old referred to in the linked article did board at Clapham Junction. The train departs London Waterloo at 1820 and Clapham Junction at 1827. The article states:

The delayed 18.27 London to Exeter

 

[driverd]

Which is almost all cases is the private car, and perhaps long distance coaches. Air competes for, I estimate, less than 1% of rail journeys in this country.

Despite operators like Lumo specifically targeting air travel...

Let's be sensible, obviously we'd be comparing like for like, we're not suggesting the alternative to the train from Shipley to Bradford is to get to Leeds Bradford Airport and fly the journey (unless, of course, its Yorkshire Airlines!).

We aren't talking about "wholly domestic air fares". This discussion has arisen because someone has suggested the regulatory regime which applies to airlines should apply to every railway journey in the UK. One of the key factors is - airline travel is global and the average ticket price is vastly higher than the average ticket purchased in the UK. Nobody is talking about domestic air fares and I happen to be quite cogniscant of what a plane ticket will cost.

Why? Last time I checked you couldn't take a train to Tenerife and it doesn't exactly benefit the conversation to compare London - Glasgow with a transatlantic flight, especially when the earlier discussion centered around air fares for comparative domestic journeys made by train.

As we've just examined, you are disagreeing with me based on something I didn't say and which I took pains to spell out very specifically in the post you quoted!

If I missed this I apologise!

In relation to providing accommodation, it is much easier to find 200 rooms near Heathrow Airport than 50 at Yeovil Junction. You have to travel to what is in effect a built up area with accommodation nearby just to take a flight!

Personally I wasn't suggesting a lovely night in Yeovil, alternative transport would have been more than acceptable in this case - the point was made more to highlight the difference in care - a hotel room vs a cold, empty platform.

Absolutely incorrect. Because the delay/cancellation was due to the weather, it would be written off as exceptional circumstances, and you would receive zero pounds and zero pence by way of compensation. The majority of delays are non-compensable even with EC261 protection.

Perhaps under the regulations, but our recent flight with easyjet was delayed overnight due to weather (an exceptional circumstance). If you elected not to fly you were refunded. Everyone else got a hotel and a re-arranged flight the following day, free of charge, with all meals and associated costs covered - on a London-Scotland flight. Perhaps this is easyjet going above and beyond the regs, but we were delivered exactly what is described in their disruption documents.

Are the provisions good or not? I'd say probably not so much - there is a single clause relating to providing accommodation or onward transport which has "if it reasonably can" and "where necessary" inserted, giving quite a lot of wiggle room. I'd suggest that's where the debate really ought to be starting here. Why do you think the railway didn't book the author's son into the Premier Inn he ended up in?

I agree - there's too much wriggle room for TOCs. Some deliver their obligations well, others do not.

What do you think it's like travelling by plane for most people? There are myriad failures every day even within Europe when it comes to fulfilling the airline conditions of carriage and the provisions set out in EC261.

I really do not suggest posters try to advocate for the airline industry and suggests its protections should apply to rail journeys here, because not many people seem to actually know:
1) what those protections actually are
2) how they work in practice
3) why they differ so much from the NRCoT

The main point I would draw attention to is that airlines tend to dump passengers in airports, with staff on hand to assist. Airlines generally try and honour the regs and where they can't the passenger has the right to claim costs. This can be far more of a battle with TOCs and such a right, when TOCs fail to deliver isn't clearly spelled out - thus becomes more of a discretionary matter - which in my eyes is the key and important difference.

Yes, the real problem is dumping passengers at Yeovil Junction here. Not a good place to terminate a train at all.

Here here!

 

[AlterEgo]

Despite operators like Lumo specifically targeting air travel...

Yes, despite that one, very small operator, I would estimate about 1% of the journeys made on British railways every day has air travel as a competitor. It only really works between a few city pairs. Pull out a map and check how big the network is and then think how few London to Scotland trains there are in a daily context.

Note importantly that LUMO, an open access operator, are allowed to operate to the NRCoT minima, and no part of their customer offer is "you will get looked after on the extremely rare occasion you're delayed overnight" but they do provide Delay Repay. Their main draw is the very low price, which is the major factor in consumer choices for that sort of journey.

Why? Last time I checked you couldn't take a train to Tenerife and it doesn't exactly benefit the conversation to compare London - Glasgow with a transatlantic flight, especially when the earlier discussion centered around air fares for comparative domestic journeys made by train.

The earlier discussion was incorrectly centred by other posters around domestic fares, because my whole point is - EC261 was brought into combat overbooking and bad faith by airlines, and also that air tickets covered by that regulation tend to be grossly more expensive than what we are dealing with in this thread!

Personally I wasn't suggesting a lovely night in Yeovil, alternative transport would have been more than acceptable in this case - the point was made more to highlight the difference in care - a hotel room vs a cold, empty platform.

Yes, but there weren't taxis for 50 people either and sourcing a random bus wasn't an option either.

Perhaps under the regulations, but our recent flight with easyjet was delayed overnight due to weather (an exceptional circumstance). If you elected not to fly you were refunded. Everyone else got a hotel and a re-arranged flight the following day, free of charge, with all meals and associated costs covered - on a London-Scotland flight. Perhaps this is easyjet going above and beyond the regs, but we were delivered exactly what is described in their disruption documents.

No, you are conflating the care responsibilities of EC261 with the obligations under the same regulations to provide compensation. No compensation is due for delays caused by severe weather, or a myriad other factors, unlike Delay Repay on the railway. It is a vastly poorer set of regulations in terms of giving consumers protection.

The main point I would draw attention to is that airlines tend to dump passengers in airports, with staff on hand to assist.

Yes, that's the only place an airline can strand you.

Airlines generally try and honour the regs

Go on Flyertalk and tell people there it's a land of milk and honey, and let me know what the heaviest object is someone there manages to throw at you.

and where they can't the passenger has the right to claim costs.

The passenger has that right to do that against the railways under legislation here, too. Important for us to distinguish "having the right to" and "are confident and empowered to exercise that right".

 

[robbeech]

With the vast majority of tickets now sold online and with an itinerary, the railway knows contact details of most passengers. It is not at all far fetched that they might use those details to inform them of a problem.

They rarely do this though. It could be entirely automated too, but it’s far too much effort to implement in most cases so it’s much easier to let the passenger down, potentially stranding them in the middle of nowhere safe in the knowledge that you can wipe your hands of the whole matter.
LNER seem very good at generic automated contact if things change, and, perhaps surprisingly Northern have been known to do this although I think that might just be for planned engineering works.

Yes, but there weren't taxis for 50 people either and sourcing a random bus wasn't an option either.

But passengers had been told there was one of those options which is why they were still there and not back on the train heading back the other way to a larger, staffed station. I think we all agree it would be daft to assume an operator could source taxis for 50 people from such a place in any respectable amount of time, but if they’ve already told passengers there are alternatives and have given no indication that there might be a better chance of alternatives if they head back on the same train then there’s no wonder they had 50 people stuck.

There appears to be no indication as to what happened to the rest of them.

Yes, that's the only place an airline can strand you.

We should be thankful for that.

 

[Llanigraham]

With the vast majority of tickets now sold online and with an itinerary, the railway knows contact details of most passengers. It is not at all far fetched that they might use those details to inform them of a problem.

Do they?
Do they have the email address of those that bought from the Trainline, or Red Spotted Hanky, or me when I buy my tickets from TfW even if I'm only using their service for part of the journey?

 

[Taunton]

My guess is the most important thing for Control was to tip out and reverse the train, any train, to depart back from Waterloo as 1L80 departing Yeovil at 2127, which it apparently did, thus preventing large numbers of substantial delay repay claims on the eastbound journey. The westbound final bit to Exeter was already blown, nothing they could do about that, but as the eastbound, far more passengers affected, had not made it through from Exeter the need was to protect that.

The key Control "game" is to maximise the compensation from NR for blockages etc, but to minimise the claims for refunds from passengers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There really is a lot of catching up to do. Attached pictures show the detail easyJet provide on their flight tracker (which comes up against your bookings as well as separately) with lots of detailed information. This isn't one of their best either - there aren't many disrupted flights today, this was the first one I found. I have seen ones that explained in great detail what had gone on, including about knock-on delays and all sorts.

 

[robbeech]

thus preventing large numbers of substantial delay repay claims on the eastbound journey.

The key Control "game" is to maximise the compensation from NR for blockages etc, but to minimise the claims for refunds from passengers.

Whilst this does happen it might be a little far fetched to assume they can think this quickly in the situation.
They can minimise passenger claims by just rejecting them.
I’m fairly sure given what we know from going around in circles in true RailUK fashion is that things went wrong, incompetence seeped through some cracks somewhere from the top, nobody really thought about the passengers, nobody communicated anything properly if at all, and SWR were just unlucky this time that there was someone on the train related to someone that can make it into a thing.

 

[Cantab26]

There really is a lot of catching up to do. Attached pictures show the detail easyJet provide on their flight tracker (which comes up against your bookings as well as separately) with lots of detailed information. This isn't one of their best either - there aren't many disrupted flights today, this was the first one I found. I have seen ones that explained in great detail what had gone on, including about knock-on delays and all sorts.

Pah! I wouldn’t hold up easyJet as a model of good practice.

Pretty much everything is “considered an extraordinary circumstance” by them and they can be very loathe to reimburse expenses without pushing (something the railway is not unique on).

 

[Watershed]

There really is a lot of catching up to do. Attached pictures show the detail easyJet provide on their flight tracker (which comes up against your bookings as well as separately) with lots of detailed information. This isn't one of their best either - there aren't many disrupted flights today, this was the first one I found. I have seen ones that explained in great detail what had gone on, including about knock-on delays and all sorts.

The information and IT may be better (though that's hardly saying much when compared to the railway!), but claiming that a cancellation "due to Covid travel restrictions" is "entirely beyond their control" is utter bovine excrement.

They're cancelling the flight because it'd be uneconomic to run; that's no different to the overbooking that EU261 was intended to address. Of course, like the railway does all too often, I'm sure they'll happily deny claims and then quietly settle the handful of cases that are taken to court.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The information and IT may be better (though that's hardly saying much when compared to the railway!), but claiming that a cancellation "due to Covid travel restrictions" is "entirely beyond their control" is utter bovine excrement.

I posted the example not because of the reasoning (I couldn't find a better one - I have seen some where they have explained in a lot of detail why) but because of the quality of communication and the "what to do now" bit.

They've done this for about 10 years and I was really quite impressed when they brought it in.

 

[driverd]

Yes, despite that one, very small operator, I would estimate about 1% of the journeys made on British railways every day has air travel as a competitor. It only really works between a few city pairs. Pull out a map and check how big the network is and then think how few London to Scotland trains there are in a daily context.

I'm not disagreeing - all I'm saying is there's little benefit to comparing much else to air.

The earlier discussion was incorrectly centred by other posters around domestic fares, because my whole point is - EC261 was brought into combat overbooking and bad faith by airlines, and also that air tickets covered by that regulation tend to be grossly more expensive than what we are dealing with in this thread!

Which is all domestic fares? Given I can fly to the Highlands (return) for less than the price of a priv single, I'd argue they aren't grossly more expensive.

Yes, but there weren't taxis for 50 people either and sourcing a random bus wasn't an option either.

I think this has been done to death, but, yes - likely within the TOCs contracted suppliers, they couldn't source transport. I think this is one of the sticking points.

No, you are conflating the care responsibilities of EC261 with the obligations under the same regulations to provide compensation. No compensation is due for delays caused by severe weather, or a myriad other factors, unlike Delay Repay on the railway. It is a vastly poorer set of regulations in terms of giving consumers protection.

No I'm referring to the right to reimbursement or re-routing. If delayed more than 5 hours and you elect not to travel you can be reimbursed, irrespective of cause. Indeed, that's exactly what easyjets t&c's say and it's exactly what was offered with reference to my flight disruption.

Yes 5 hours is a fair delay but to suggest you'd never get your money back due to weather is simply incorrect.

Yes, that's the only place an airline can strand you.

Thanks for that. I think you rather overlooked the point that there are staff on hand and you are undercover, not at a cold, rainy, exposed platform with no assistance.

The passenger has that right to do that against the railways under legislation here, too. Important for us to distinguish "having the right to" and "are confident and empowered to exercise that right".

I can only speak from my experience, but claiming costs against an airline was effortless and took a matter of minutes, responded to and repaid within a week.

Some TOCs struggle to manage delay repay within a month.

I'm not saying every airline is perfect and every TOC is shambolic, merely highlighting that some airlines do deal with disruption more efficiently and more compassionately than some TOCs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Airlines can, barring anything really serious, only strand people at airports, yes. They have staff, yes. They are however often not actually airline staff (even though wearing their uniforms) and are often powerless to do anything.

 

[driverd]

Airlines can, barring anything really serious, only strand people at airports, yes. They have staff, yes. They are however often not actually airline staff (even though wearing their uniforms) and are often powerless to do anything.

In the same way a guard can't personally do anything about rail replacement transport?

It's really quite an irrelevance, because what matters is their ability to contact someone who can do something. Customers usually can't.

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm not disagreeing - all I'm saying is there's little benefit to comparing much else to air.

So why do you insist on doing it?

Which is all domestic fares? Given I can fly to the Highlands (return) for less than the price of a priv single, I'd argue they aren't grossly more expensive.

Are you intentionally misunderstanding my very clear posts? This discussion - which you entered into with me, not the other way around - is about why

1) the regulations governing airlines are not suitable for the railway, and are in fact, mostly inferior given the average passenger experience, and
2) why those regulations are different - which is because, for the third time, those rules cover every air fare possible under EC261, not just ones which are 400 miles long in the UK, but all of them. The average ticket price covered by EC261 is vastly more expensive, and saying "well it's cheap to fly to Inverness with easyjet" is like saying "well going from Woolwich Arsenal to St Pancras isn't expensive".

This is what I said yesterday:

We aren't talking about "wholly domestic air fares". This discussion has arisen because someone has suggested the regulatory regime which applies to airlines should apply to every railway journey in the UK. One of the key factors is - airline travel is global and the average ticket price is vastly higher than the average ticket purchased in the UK. Nobody is talking about domestic air fares and I happen to be quite cogniscant of what a plane ticket will cost.

So why is this difficult to understand?

No I'm referring to the right to reimbursement or re-routing. If delayed more than 5 hours and you elect not to travel you can be reimbursed, irrespective of cause.

But that is far, far worse than the railway's own entitlement to simply not travel and refund! On the railway, there is no lower limit on the length of delay at all. That is called, on the railway, an abandoned journey and you will get your money back.

Yes 5 hours is a fair delay but to suggest you'd never get your money back due to weather is simply incorrect.

I'm talking about compensation, not your right to a refund for deciding not to go. This again, was abundantly clear from the quote you are responding to and I am not sure how much more simply and plainly I can write that I am literally talking about Delay Repay, not a customer's right to abort their journey and claim a refund. Indeed, you seemed to think that, under EC261:

You would only not be entitled to compensation for the ticket in the circumstances described above if they provided an alternative flight - which coupled with the care provided, should make for a reasonably well dealt with disruption incident.

Which is wrong. (By the way, notice how you talk about compensation and not a refund!)

Thanks for that. I think you rather overlooked the point that there are staff on hand and you are undercover, not at a cold, rainy, exposed platform with no assistance.

No, I did not. This was entirely my point, hence me pointing out that the passengers shouldn't have been simply tipped out at Yeovil Junction which has precisely the conditions you describe, and then you agreeing with me.

I can only speak from my experience, but claiming costs against an airline was effortless and took a matter of minutes, responded to and repaid within a week.

Of course an anecdote is not data.

I'm not saying every airline is perfect and every TOC is shambolic, merely highlighting that some airlines do deal with disruption more efficiently and more compassionately than some TOCs.

No, you are saying you made an EC261 claim once and it was fine.

I claim Delay Repay all the time and it's mostly fine but I wouldn't think to use that as a defence of the system.

 

[Falcon1200]

The key Control "game" is to maximise the compensation from NR for blockages etc, but to minimise the claims for refunds from passengers.

During my 30 year career in railway Control on not one single occasion, ever, whether under BR or privatisation, was the key 'game' to maximise compensation and minimise refund claims. Not once, never, not ever. Rather, Control, whether BR, TOC, Railtrack or Network Rail, try to maintain the best overall service possible, given the infrastructure and resources available in an ever changing situation (or, far more likely during bad weather, a considerable number of ever changing situations), without having the benefit of a crystal ball to foresee how each situation will develop and eventually be resolved.

The one major issue where I agree the railway could and should do far better is communication, in this particular case a major problem was the lack of staff at Yeovil Junction, to keep buildings open for passenger comfort and safety but mainly to assist with onward travel. Maybe SWR did try and get staff to site, we don't know ? But, as has already been asked, what more could have been done, when the railway beyond was blocked, and no bus or taxis could be arranged - Perhaps the lack of any onward transport only became known after the train had terminated and returned to Salisbury ?

And regarding Delay Repay, my only experience was a family member whose ticket I had booked being delayed 45 minutes, we did not even have to claim, the Repay was paid automatically. And do airlines not only pay out for delays over 3 hours and which are their responsibility ?

 

[Horizon22]

My guess is the most important thing for Control was to tip out and reverse the train, any train, to depart back from Waterloo as 1L80 departing Yeovil at 2127, which it apparently did, thus preventing large numbers of substantial delay repay claims on the eastbound journey. The westbound final bit to Exeter was already blown, nothing they could do about that, but as the eastbound, far more passengers affected, had not made it through from Exeter the need was to protect that.

The key Control "game" is to maximise the compensation from NR for blockages etc, but to minimise the claims for refunds from passengers.

What utter nonsense. Why is everything a conspiracy to you?

 

[driverd]

Are you intentionally misunderstanding my very clear posts? This discussion - which you entered into with me, not the other way around - is about why

1) the regulations governing airlines are not suitable for the railway, and are in fact, mostly inferior given the average passenger experience, and
2) why those regulations are different - which is because, for the third time, those rules cover every air fare possible under EC261, not just ones which are 400 miles long in the UK, but all of them. The average ticket price covered by EC261 is vastly more expensive, and saying "well it's cheap to fly to Inverness with easyjet" is like saying "well going from Woolwich Arsenal to St Pancras isn't expensive".

Actually, this discussion is about SWR abandoning passengers at Yeovil, if we're going to be pedantic...

On point 1, I don't think anyone is implying we should simply port over airline T&Cs. Obviously they're different for all the reasons you highlight in point 2. My point, which I think you are missing, is there is little benefit to comparing European flights to domestic rail. My earlier post on the matter, was that comparing the service received during disruption from Caledonian Sleeper and easyjet a few weeks ago, easyjet came out trumps. That's all - if you want to talk about how a flight from Berlin to Amsterdam is managed during disruption, by all means go ahead, but forgive me for not seeing how this in anyway relates to stranded pax at Yeovil.

But that is far, far worse than the railway's own entitlement to simply not travel and refund! On the railway, there is no lower limit on the length of delay at all. That is called, on the railway, an abandoned journey and you will get your money back.

I'm not making an argument compared to the railways provision for abandoned journeys. I'm suggesting that the idea that you'd get "zero pounds and zero pence" refund or compensation (apologies if I worded incorrectly earlier), if an airline abandoned you at an airport that you didn't want to be at, is simply false.

I'm talking about compensation, not your right to a refund for deciding not to go. This again, was abundantly clear from the quote you are responding to and I am not sure how much more simply and plainly I can write that I am literally talking about Delay Repay, not a customer's right to abort their journey and claim a refund.

So again, I apologise if I've used refund and compensation interchangeably, my wording was "compensation for the ticket", which to me implied a refund or partial refund - but I do acknowledge the difference.

What I would say is that food costs, hotel accommodation, taxis etc, provided by airlines, are compensation of sort, if not financial. How much better handled would this incident have been, if SWR had offered a £10 spend at a coffee shop. Go keep warm in Pret/a pub (etc), we'll sort the onward transport and a member of staff/app will notify when it's due.

I'd rather this over Delay Repay and a 3 hour stand in the cold.

No, I did not. This was entirely my point, hence me pointing out that the passengers shouldn't have been simply tipped out at Yeovil Junction which has precisely the conditions you describe, and then you agreeing with me.

Glad we're in agreement, then.

Of course an anecdote is not data.
No, you are saying you made an EC261 claim once and it was fine. I claim Delay Repay all the time and it's mostly fine but I wouldn't think to use that as a defence of the system.

Right - and I'm upfront in saying this is from personal experience. As I pointed out earlier in this post and earlier in the thread.

 

[43066]

Tough.

Tough on the tax payer and fare payers when someone travelling against advice on a £25 ticket is put into a £200 taxi? I’d agree with you.

 

[nanstallon]

Tough on the tax payer and fare payers when someone travelling against advice on a £25 ticket is put into a £200 taxi? I’d agree with you.

Why should the taxpayer bale out a TOC, which fails to run its service properly? And if the TOC puts up its fares, it becomes less competitive, so less money to give to its shareholders. I thought the point of privatisation was to lessen the burden on taxpayers. Clearly, it hasn't worked out that way.

 

[Taunton]

What utter nonsense. Why is everything a conspiracy to you?

I'm not aware of being a conspirator at all, let alone in everything. And the fact that the train just conveniently fitted into discharging its passengers mid-journey into the staffless and transportless inky blackness, and heading the other way in a convenient path, I only put down to a Remarkable Coincidence.

 

[baza585]

I've read this thread with a mixture of amusement and incredulity.

I am the parent of a 16 year old child. I have never worked in the railway industry nor for First or MTR worldwide.

In the circumstances that occurred that day, I would have checked routinely during the day that SWR trains were running to Exeter, would this have spotted the "Do not travel" warning, would have checked that GWR were running normally, would have contacted my child and told them to travel to Exeter on GWR and I would pay any difference required.

I'm not saying SWR had a great day, but the only real dereliction of duty I can see is the Guardian journos lack of common sense and care as a parent. I strongly suspect the article was written in part to assuage her conscience about her lack of parental care when things went wrong.

Journalists pursuing personal agendas is one of the reasons I no longer read said paper. Their first angle is always to find someone else to blame when s*it happens because it is never their fault.

 

[Annetts key]

The cost of doing business, be better at dealing with things and you’ll reduce the problem, even when the issue is caused by the weather.

Less Network Rail staff available to deal with weather related incidents is certainly part of the problem. Plus less TOC staff to deal with passengers. From what I can tell, Network Rail were as ready as they could be (see later). But only with the normal levels of staff.

Unfortunately whilst I’d like to agree, in the real world it appears to be used as a get out of jail free card more and more. Operators are throwing the towel in earlier and earlier into developing situations because they have out their toes in the water and got away without being bitten by that family of crocodiles.
That family of crocodiles are the ORR, The Rail Ombudsman, The Rail Delivery Group, Transport Focus, the DfT. They’re made of plastic and just bob about aimlessly in the water.

Yes, there do appear to be more ‘do not travel’ events than in the past. Or at least, that is the perception. It’s a right pain when you have already started your journey, or want to return home. Or if you are trying to get to work, or go home after work.

I feel that at least sometimes the railways appear to give up trying to run a railway service more often. Obviously completely wrecking the timetable for everybody is not the answer. But where possible, on the already affected areas, running a late train is better than no train. However it’s extremely hard to second guess the decisions that have been (or are being) made, because outside ‘control’, we don’t have access to all the information. But the perception is there. Maybe it’s because some of us remember BR staff going above and beyond and managing to find spare trains and crew to run special extra trains.

Having said that, certainly some TOCs do sometimes run special extra trains (I know of GWR and CrossCountry), although most of the time, this is making use of trains that happen to be in the wrong place.

Also, most of the time the TOCs do appear to be able to sort out transport for their own staff such as train crew and fitters. Yes, this is obviously a much smaller scale than getting transport for passengers. And often most of the taxis are booked in advance. It is obviously not practical to book taxis in advance in case of train delays or cancellations.

However, if it is strongly suspected that there will be disruption, should at least some extra buses be booked above the normal standby requirement?

There are two parts of the ORR, that bit that oversees safety, and the bit that deals with funding. I don’t see any help coming from the bit that deals with funding.

The Rail Delivery Group is owned by the TOCs, so don’t expect much help from them.
And I’m not sure what you expect to get from the DfT.

It appears there was a land slip and flooding at Chard which prevented trains continuing west. 1L80, 1L84 and 1L88 all appear to have started from Yeovil that evening.

I don’t know about the Wessex route. It being away from my patch. However, on Wednesday 20th to Thursday 21st October in the South West, there was a weather warning of heavy rainfall with a risk of flooding. Further, strong winds gusting 40-45mph were expected.

On Wednesday 20th, 1L53 (17:20 Waterloo to Exeter St David's) reported water cascading down the embankment between Feniton and Whimple. As a result, the line was closed to all traffic between Honiton and Exeter. Could this be the cause of all trains on the 20th after this being terminated short at Yeovil Junction station?

However, the line was reopened here around 08:00 on Thursday 21st, at least as far as the Western was concerned.

There may have been other problems on Thursday. Or Trains from Waterloo were being planned to terminate at Yeovil due to running at reduced speed. Therefore giving them a chance to run back to Waterloo in their booked path.

On Thursday 21st the Great Western main line was affected by flooding at Hele near Bradninch between Exeter St David's and Tiverton Parkway. This is thought to be caused by the River Culm.

This closed the line from the early morning until 13:30. But the knock on cancellations and delays continued for many hours afterwards. So no diversions we’re possible by using this line.

During this incident, for a time GWR had trouble getting taxis causing difficulty in moving crews to work services. Apparently due to a two hour wait.

Overall, it does look like there was not enough joined up thinking around alternative arrangements, such as Western/Wessex and GWR/SWR working together. Or having enough alternate transport available throughout the time that it may have been required.

Obviously at first, it may not have been possible to run special diverted trains. But where were the contingency plans. The railways knew about the weather warning on the 18th.

 

[Horizon22]

I'm not aware of being a conspirator at all, let alone in everything. And the fact that the train just conveniently fitted into discharging its passengers mid-journey into the staffless and transportless inky blackness, and heading the other way in a convenient path, I only put down to a Remarkable Coincidence.

You were claiming Control just do their jobs as a "game" to maximise refunds fron NR yet not passengers which is one of the most ludicurous railway claims I've heard!

It may well have been a coincidence; these things can regularly happen when a train is running late. In fact that is why often times trains are turned around short - to ensure that services return back to the booked timetable as close as possible; running late services all day helps nobody. Countless posters have told you the line ahead was blocked and this was the best place to turn the train around (besides Salisbury, or would you want everyone between Salisbury - Yeovil Junction to have been incovenienced uncessarily too?) and SWR had been doing this for most of the day.

 

[pompeyfan]

I'm not aware of being a conspirator at all, let alone in everything. And the fact that the train just conveniently fitted into discharging its passengers mid-journey into the staffless and transportless inky blackness, and heading the other way in a convenient path, I only put down to a Remarkable Coincidence.

It terminated at Yeovil and then went ECS into Yeovil sidings or worked 1L88. I don’t understand why this is an issue, the train could not proceed further towards Exeter.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Dec 2021 ==

I don’t know about the Wessex route. It being away from my patch. However, on Wednesday 20th to Thursday 21st October in the South West, there was a weather warning of heavy rainfall with a risk of flooding. Further, strong winds gusting 40-45mph were expected.

On Wednesday 20th, 1L53 (17:20 Waterloo to Exeter St David's) reported water cascading down the embankment between Feniton and Whimple. As a result, the line was closed to all traffic between Honiton and Exeter. Could this be the cause of all trains on the 20th after this being terminated short at Yeovil Junction station?

However, the line was reopened here around 08:00 on Thursday 21st, at least as far as the Western was concerned.

There may have been other problems on Thursday. Or Trains from Waterloo were being planned to terminate at Yeovil due to running at reduced speed. Therefore giving them a chance to run back to Waterloo in their booked path.

On Thursday 21st the Great Western main line was affected by flooding at Hele near Bradninch between Exeter St David's and Tiverton Parkway. This is thought to be caused by the River Culm.

This closed the line from the early morning until 13:30. But the knock on cancellations and delays continued for many hours afterwards. So no diversions we’re possible by using this line.

During this incident, for a time GWR had trouble getting taxis causing difficulty in moving crews to work services. Apparently due to a two hour wait.

Overall, it does look like there was not enough joined up thinking around alternative arrangements, such as Western/Wessex and GWR/SWR working together. Or having enough alternate transport available throughout the time that it may have been required.

Obviously at first, it may not have been possible to run special diverted trains. But where were the contingency plans. The railways knew about the weather warning on the 18th.

Having done some more digging I’m confident that the son of the journalist travelled on the 20th on 1L57 1820 WAT - EXD. The line appears to have closed after 1L53 which reported several issues between Yeovil and Exeter.

 

[robbeech]

It makes a lot of sense to do something useful with the train, in a convenient path or otherwise. Terminating short at Salisbury would have left passengers for stations between there and Yeovil Junction stranded so it makes perfect sense to go as far as you can with the train then turn around and go back. What doesn’t make as much sense is why passengers weren’t told the bus was a myth and that travelling back to Salisbury would yield better hope of them getting home.