Class 222 withdrawal from EMR and future use (non-speculative)

[cj_1985]

I can't see the DfT/Treasury ever laying out tens or hundreds of billions of pounds on stock, (especially not with the debt our current chancellor has landed us with, in 12 months, on top of what the Tories left us with) I'd imagine they will continue with Roscos (even though likely not to be with the original group), or similar agreements like the DfT tied us into with the 80X finance agreements.

 

[thecrofter]

Class 222 move planned to Polmadie next week.
5Q10PC - Traveling From: Barton Under Needwood RSMD to: Polmadie Car M.D. on: MO

Trip cancelled this morning about an hour after departure time.

 

[Trainman40083]

A short term lease extension would be no good for the leasing company if they can get longer new leases with other operators.They are leasing the six Meridians to Lumo until the track access agreement ends in 2030.Any extensions with EMR will only be short term until the 810s enter service and then they have no work.The DFT would be better off purchasing any new stock for the Nationalised train operators then we would never have this problem again in the future.

Has the DfT actually got enough, even any, money to buy any trains?

 

[Wyrleybart]

Has the DfT actually got enough, even any, money to buy any trains?

Good question. I guess it depends what the beancounters would find. Technically EMR are only paying for 2 or 3 class 810s but are paying for class 222s which should have been handed back. In the same way SWR should be paying for 90 class 701s instead of keeping the 455s running class 197s ?

Etc etc

 

[Potteries 323]

Has the DfT actually got enough, even any, money to buy any trains?

Of course it has.British Rail and its predecessors GWR,LMS,LNER and SR all owned their stock just like most of the State owned railways in the world do.This leasing game is a joke.As I said 40 year old sprinters being rented at £200000 a year is scandalous they would have had a nil value now under BR so could be kept at depots as spare stock for busy periods just like in the good old days.Thats precisely why there is no spare stock anymore.If the DFT purchased future stock for the railways then the leasing companies would have to buck their ideas up and stop ripping the Country off as they would have no business left.

 

[GoneSouth]

Of course it has.British Rail and its predecessors GWR,LMS,LNER and SR all owned their stock just like most of the State owned railways in the world do.This leasing game is a joke.As I said 40 year old sprinters being rented at £200000 a year is scandalous they would have had a nil value now under BR so could be kept at depots as spare stock for busy periods just like in the good old days.Thats precisely why there is no spare stock anymore.If the DFT purchased future stock for the railways then the leasing companies would have to buck their ideas up and stop ripping the Country off as they would have no business left.

Yup, this is exactly the problem. We’re paying too much for leasing old outdated stock. The leading companies are laughing at the dft knowing there is no alternative. Oh how well thought out this privatisation was !

 

[BlueLeanie]

Of course it has.British Rail and its predecessors GWR,LMS,LNER and SR all owned their stock just like most of the State owned railways in the world do.This leasing game is a joke.As I said 40 year old sprinters being rented at £200000 a year is scandalous they would have had a nil value now under BR so could be kept at depots as spare stock for busy periods just like in the good old days.Thats precisely why there is no spare stock anymore.If the DFT purchased future stock for the railways then the leasing companies would have to buck their ideas up and stop ripping the Country off as they would have no business left.

Not strictly true.

BR weren't averse to leasing stock. I'm sure the class 50s were originally on a lease from English Electric.

We can't make that assumption that the same level of funding would have been available to that Network under different scenarios.

I've often wondered if BR had been allowed to lease the 15X series units, would we have never seen the Pacers, and would XC have had six coach 158s to retire much of that legacy MK2 coaches and would we have seen a rail renaissance ten years earlier?

 

[cj_1985]

Yup, this is exactly the problem. We’re paying too much for leasing old outdated stock. The leading companies are laughing at the dft knowing there is no alternative. Oh how well thought out this privatisation was !

And you think the DfT wouldn't be beyond using stock beyond its serviceable best if it means saving a few million a year?!

 

[Clarence Yard]

Of course it has.British Rail and its predecessors GWR,LMS,LNER and SR all owned their stock just like most of the State owned railways in the world do.This leasing game is a joke.As I said 40 year old sprinters being rented at £200000 a year is scandalous they would have had a nil value now under BR so could be kept at depots as spare stock for busy periods just like in the good old days.Thats precisely why there is no spare stock anymore.If the DFT purchased future stock for the railways then the leasing companies would have to buck their ideas up and stop ripping the Country off as they would have no business left.

A class 150 unit lease at £200k a year - they aren’t that cheap! Leasing got assets off the public books and the MEAV leasing regime gave the DfT (and the TOCs) financial certainty and avoided the large variance in costs and cash demands you get when you have to pay for all the overhauls yourself. They alone form about half the lease cost.

In BR days all our passenger stock was on 25 year book life but the death of spare stock had more to do with avoiding the need for maintenance expenditure than anything else. What value it had in the books was largely immaterial to it being kept for spare work. There was either work for it or it got scrapped.

Where book value had an effect was in trying to replace stock. BR had to get Treasury approval for all replacements and the disparity in book value between old and new did cause issues because of the effect it had on the balance sheet. Incidentally, the Treasury also forced BR to borrow from the Treasury at Treasury interest rates, which were often at a greater rate than you could get from the market. Nothing came from the Treasury for free!

Where the current MEAV leasing model has worked well has been in procuring new stock. With the value of new vs old being much closer, it has been relatively easy to make replacing stock work financially. You haven’t got to do 2 (new) for 3 or 4 (scrapped) deals with the Treasury either.

 

[Trainman40083]

A class 150 unit lease at £200k a year - they aren’t that cheap! Leasing got assets off the public books and the MEAV leasing regime gave the DfT (and the TOCs) financial certainty and avoided the large variance in costs and cash demands you get when you have to pay for all the overhauls yourself. They alone form about half the lease cost.

In BR days all our passenger stock was on 25 year book life but the death of spare stock had more to do with avoiding the need for maintenance expenditure than anything else. What value it had in the books was largely immaterial to it being kept for spare work. There was either work for it or it got scrapped.

Where book value had an effect was in trying to replace stock. BR had to get Treasury approval for all replacements and the disparity in book value between old and new did cause issues because of the effect it had on the balance sheet. Incidentally, the Treasury also forced BR to borrow from the Treasury at Treasury interest rates, which were often at a greater rate than you could get from the market. Nothing came from the Treasury for free!

Where the current MEAV leasing model has worked well has been in procuring new stock. With the value of new vs old being much closer, it has been relatively easy to make replacing stock work financially. You haven’t got to do 2 (new) for 3 or 4 (scrapped) deals with the Treasury either.

I well remember, 3 cars of old stock, replaced by 2 cars of new stock. Of course that new stock also saw an increase in passengers.

 

[BlueLeanie]

I well remember, 3 cars of old stock, replaced by 2 cars of new stock. Of course that new stock also saw an increase in passengers.

In some circumstances that would be a three x 17.4 metre 101 with guard's area (approx a third of one of the cars) being replaced by a two x 23 metre car 156s?

There's not much in it.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The Treasury always wanted to see a reduction in rolling stock so going for new, longer vehicles was something that BR used to try, to great effect in retrospect.

 

[Potteries 323]

I well remember, 3 cars of old stock, replaced by 2 cars of new stock. Of course that new stock also saw an increase in passengers.

I remember the summer holiday trains in the 1980s and early 1990s with 7 or 8 Mk2 coaches in different liveries hauled by a pair of Class 20s.No heating but who cared.All that stopped with privitisation.Never saw any holiday trains afterwards.I also remember 7 and 8 coach Mk 2 stock and HSTs replaced by 4 and 5 car Voyagers on Cross Country services by Virgin after privitisation.We still have to suffer these inadequate Voyagers today but at what cost to the taxpayer in lease costs on 24 year old vehicles?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2025 ==

Not strictly true.

BR weren't averse to leasing stock. I'm sure the class 50s were originally on a lease from English Electric.

We can't make that assumption that the same level of funding would have been available to that Network under different scenarios.

I've often wondered if BR had been allowed to lease the 15X series units, would we have never seen the Pacers, and would XC have had six coach 158s to retire much of that legacy MK2 coaches and would we have seen a rail renaissance ten years earlier?

THe Class 50s were initially leased, but were purchased shortly sfterwards.Cant think of any other BR stock or locomotives that were leased.

 

[Trainman40083]

I remember the summer holiday trains in the 1980s and early 1990s with 7 or 8 Mk2 coaches in different liveries hauled by a pair of Class 20s.No heating but who cared.All that stopped with privitisation.Never saw any holiday trains afterwards.I also remember 7 and 8 coach Mk 2 stock and HSTs replaced by 4 and 5 car Voyagers on Cross Country services by Virgin after privitisation.We still have to suffer these inadequate Voyagers today but at what cost to the taxpayer in lease costs on 24 year old vehicles?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2025 ==


THe Class 50s were initially leased, but were purchased shortly sfterwards.Cant think of any other BR stock or locomotives that were leased.

When a business is run by Accountants, the mantra is probably "if it isn't earning, it is costing". So rakes of stock that only came out at weekends, was gone. Overcrowding? Put the fares up to dampen demand.

 

[43096]

I remember the summer holiday trains in the 1980s and early 1990s with 7 or 8 Mk2 coaches in different liveries hauled by a pair of Class 20s.No heating but who cared.All that stopped with privitisation.Never saw any holiday trains afterwards.I also remember 7 and 8 coach Mk 2 stock and HSTs replaced by 4 and 5 car Voyagers on Cross Country services by Virgin after privitisation.

There have been holiday trains post-privatisation: Cross Country ran them to the south west using hired in MML and GNER HSTs as well as (for one summer) loco hauled sets with Class 67s. Likewise, EMT ran holiday services to Skegness using HST sets that would otherwise have been not required at weekends.

THe Class 50s were initially leased, but were purchased shortly sfterwards.Cant think of any other BR stock or locomotives that were leased.

The Class 365s were ordered by BR under a leasing arrangement but delivered after privatisation.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The railway isn’t run by accountants and wasn’t in BR days. The decisions on locos and stock were/are largely taken by Commercial and Operating Management in conjunction with Engineering colleagues. Accountants are there to tell you where the business is heading, how much things cost and to compile a budget, based on the funding envelope the Business is either given or decides it can live with.

Loco Hauled Rolling Stock did not suddenly disappear at Privatisation. Most of it had gone before that date as the various businesses (& regions before them) decided that keeping spare stock for dated services was a waste of time, effort and money. Apart from the WC and XC Mk2/3 fleets and the day coaches for the Sleepers, very little got passed over to the ROSCOs and what was left wasn’t going to have a long life, even if BR had remained.

So, getting back to the 222 fleet, both Lumo and the Scottish Government will be leasing enough stock to provide 7 day a week ordinary timetabled services, not weekends extras to the seaside.

 

[Trainman40083]

There have been holiday trains post-privatisation: Cross Country ran them to the south west using hired in MML and GNER HSTs as well as (for one summer) loco hauled sets with Class 67s. Likewise, EMT ran holiday services to Skegness using HST sets that would otherwise have been not required at weekends.

The Class 365s were ordered by BR under a leasing arrangement but delivered after privatisation.

I'd always thought the 365s were owned by the Government.

 

[Potteries 323]

I'd always thought the 365s were owned by the Government.

I'd always thought the 365s were owned by the Government.

The Cross Country trains were not proper holiday trains,they only hired in HSTs from MML and GNER because they had foolishly got rid of their own HSTs and replaced them with inferior Voyagers which could not cope with the extra passengers.

I'd always thought the 365s were owned by the Government.

They dont even bother to do that anymore.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2025 ==

The railway isn’t run by accountants and wasn’t in BR days. The decisions on locos and stock were/are largely taken by Commercial and Operating Management in conjunction with Engineering colleagues. Accountants are there to tell you where the business is heading, how much things cost and to compile a budget, based on the funding envelope the Business is either given or decides it can live with.

Loco Hauled Rolling Stock did not suddenly disappear at Privatisation. Most of it had gone before that date as the various businesses (& regions before them) decided that keeping spare stock for dated services was a waste of time, effort and money. Apart from the WC and XC Mk2/3 fleets and the day coaches for the Sleepers, very little got passed over to the ROSCOs and what was left wasn’t going to have a long life, even if BR had remained.

So, getting back to the 222 fleet, both Lumo and the Scottish Government will be leasing enough stock to provide 7 day a week ordinary timetabled services, not weekends extras to the seaside.

At privitisation there were plenty of loco hauled trains on the West Coast Mainline,East Coast Mainline,Great Eastern services out of Liverpool Street aswell as the CrossCountry network.HSTs were also used on the Midland Main Line and Great Western aswell as Cross Country,East and West Coast. All this is now history apart from a few left on the East Coast.No cheap and nasty 4 or 5 car underfloor engined trains working so called Intercity services.BR wanted more Class 91+Mk4s for the West Coast and was developing the Class 93 +Mk5 coaches for its Inter City business.All these would have been owned by BR and would be a vast improvement to todays offerings like 5 car trains for the Midland Mainline,East Coast and Great Western causing overcrowding all the time.

 

[hexagon789]

BR wanted more Class 91+Mk4s for the West Coast and was developing the Class 93 +Mk5 coaches for its Inter City business.

IC250 was developed first.

When that was cancelled, a follow-on order of ten additional IC225 for the prime WCML business traffic was explored instead as a cheaper alternative.

Both were ultimately cancelled because of - early 90s recession; downturn in business traffic; inability to demonstrate financial viability.

 

[43096]

IC250 was developed first.

When that was cancelled, a follow-on order of ten additional IC225 for the prime WCML business traffic was explored instead as a cheaper alternative.

Both were ultimately cancelled because of - early 90s recession; downturn in business traffic; inability to demonstrate financial viability.

The additional IC225s was part of the competition for funding under a leasing arrangement. Ultimately the InterCity proposal lost out to NSE’s bid for more Networkers - what became Class 365.

 

[Sheldonian]

When the 222s go to Scotrail, and if the 810s not all delivered, there will be surplus HSTs that EMR might want to lease to fill the short term gap (joking before someone takes me seriously)

 

[Trainman40083]

When the 222s go to Scotrail, and if the 810s not all delivered, there will be surplus HSTs that EMR might want to lease to fill the short term gap (joking before someone takes me seriously)

More chance of local services being cancelled to release Class 170s to shuttle between Nottingham and Kettering.. where passengers can change for a Class 360 for London. (Nope, not joking)...

 

[3RDGEN]

Having lost the 222 units to Lumo did EMR/DfT get an extended lease signed on the remaining units so they stay until the 810's are in service, hence stopping them been taken by ScotRail?

 

[43096]

Having lost the 222 units to Lumo did EMR/DfT get an extended lease signed on the remaining units so they stay until the 810's are in service, hence stopping them been taken by ScotRail?

That rather depends if Eversholt think it is in their interests to sign a lease. If (say) a two year lease to EMR scuppers a seven year lease with ScotRail they won’t sign - both parties have to agree to extend the lease.

 

[Trainman40083]

That rather depends if Eversholt think it is in their interests to sign a lease. If (say) a two year lease to EMR scuppers a seven year lease with ScotRail they won’t sign - both parties have to agree to extend the lease.

Now you have to wonder if a lease company would sign a short term extension or a seven year lease. For a lease company, that would be called a no brainer.

 

[3RDGEN]

That rather depends if Eversholt think it is in their interests to sign a lease. If (say) a two year lease to EMR scuppers a seven year lease with ScotRail they won’t sign - both parties have to agree to extend the lease.

Now you have to wonder if a lease company would sign a short term extension or a seven year lease. For a lease company, that would be called a no brainer.

But did EMR get in before ScotRail issued their tender, although I guess Eversholt would have known of ScotRail's intention much earlier anyway. If ScotRail did lease them they could sub-lease back to EMR which saves them paying for the 222's and HST's for a period of time which may appeal to ScotRail.

 

[Falcon1200]

so could be kept at depots as spare stock for busy periods just like in the good old days.

When exactly were these good old days? In the 1980s, still under BR, there was an evening peak Glasgow C-Edinburgh via Shotts train booked for 6 cars; It rarely if ever actually ran with 6 cars because, not only did we not have spare stock, we did not even have enough DMUs for the normal diagrams.

 

[Carntyne]

But did EMR get in before ScotRail issued their tender, although I guess Eversholt would have known of ScotRail's intention much earlier anyway. If ScotRail did lease them they could sub-lease back to EMR which saves them paying for the 222's and HST's for a period of time which may appeal to ScotRail.

Why would they lease them back to EMR when the HSTs need to be removed from service as quickly as possible?

 

[3RDGEN]

Why would they lease them back to EMR when the HSTs need to be removed from service as quickly as possible?

They are stuck leasing the HST's anyway so why double up on leasing two fleets for longer than you need? Nothing has been confirmed for ScotRail yet so for now the 222's remain as they are but ScotRail quoted Dec 2026 so if that is to be achieved something will need to be announced soon.

 

[QSK19]

It is just such a sorry state of affairs - like the ex-LNER HST debacle, things shouldn’t have been allowed to get this bad. How many nightmares can EMR be expected to suffer!

Supposing things drag on for so long that SR takes the 222s before EMR gets the 810s, I’d be very interested to see how the DfT handle EMR having no IC fleet at all. Surely it couldn’t happen…