Major Disruption through Purley 14/06/2026. Structural problem with rail bridge

[SECR 65]

The service is completely stuffed but both the up and down Quarry lines are open to traffic.

 

[trainhero]

As usual, GTR' response, from a customer service perspective, has been woeful.

Advising passengers "not to travel" is unacceptable, particularly when those passengers will be arriving at, or departing from, an airport. GTR are legally required to convey any passengers who has already purchased a ticket to the destination printed on their ticket. This includes, if necessary, via taxi. There has been no evidence of that today. Instead, passengers are being left to fend for themselves.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I know I would rather assume the worst than have the bridge fall down, or a train derail.

For sure but structures like this are subjected to meticulous examinations at a mandated frequency thats a requirement to allow traffic over it and was at line speed.

If one part of the bridge has failed, they should be sure that no other parts have failed in a similar way, or are about to fail.

Depends what element has failed or deteriorated. Years ago first line call out was often from one NRs examination contractors so if they werent competent then a it would have needed NR to get in one of the regions Structures Engineers at that just takes time.

Anyhow 1F57 has traversed through o/b and 1H59 following behind so looking more hopeful that its not a major issues on the Fasts at least.

 

[trainplaneauto]

Squeeky bum time approaching, croyden platform rammed, sardines in a tin can here we come

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jun 2026 ==

As usual, GTR's response, from a customer service perspective, has been woeful.

Advising passengers "not to travel" is unacceptable, particularly when those passengers will be arriving at, or departing from, an airport. GTR are legally required to convey any passengers who has already purchased a ticket to the destination printed on their ticket. This includes, if necessary, via taxi. There has been no evidence of that today. Instead, passengers are being left to fend for themselves.

Unfortunately this does not surprise me any more

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

3rd rail cant help matters!

Weve had 3rd rail for a 100yrs and surprisingly its never been a cause of metal structure electrolytic corrosion if thats where your coming from. Ill standy by my early assessment that a tamper tine has bashed this at some point and weakened the deck and its corroded over time. Im guessing this o/b could have been installed when the Quarrys were constructed in 1899.

 

[RJ]

As usual, GTR's response, from a customer service perspective, has been woeful.

Advising passengers "not to travel" is unacceptable, particularly when those passengers will be arriving at, or departing from, an airport. GTR are legally required to convey any passengers who has already purchased a ticket to the destination printed on their ticket. This includes, if necessary, via taxi. There has been no evidence of that today. Instead, passengers are being left to fend for themselves.

Trouble is there’s a finite supply of taxis in relation to the number of people that would need moving.

To help matters along it looks like there’s been a road traffic accident on the M23 Gatwick spur so the roads around the South Terminal are disrupted.

 

[trainplaneauto]

Will give it to the driver of the first train leaving, he has a sense of humour ,"the first train in 65 years"

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Trouble is there’s a finite supply of taxis in relation to the number of people that would need moving.

Which is why the railway should do everything in its power to provide a service. A route was available via Horsham but i get that its not as simple as that with crew knowledge these days but its another example repeated across the network where diversionary route knowledge has been weakened such that when an incident occurs we have to resort to Do Not Travel. Wont change because that costs money an even settling delay repay and extortionate taxi fares will still be less

 

[Surreytraveller]

For sure but structures like this are subjected to meticulous examinations at a mandated frequency thats a requirement to allow traffic over it and was at line speed.

Depends what element has failed or deteriorated. Years ago first line call out was often from one NRs examination contractors so if they werent competent then a it would have needed NR to get in one of the regions Structures Engineers at that just takes time.

Anyhow 1F57 has traversed through o/b and 1H59 following behind so looking more hopeful that its not a major issues on the Fasts at least.

And the examinations have been that malicious that it has got to this stage for this to happen.
What is mandated, and what happens in real life, are two different things .

 

[Horizon22]

As usual, GTR' response, from a customer service perspective, has been woeful.

Advising passengers "not to travel" is unacceptable, particularly when those passengers will be arriving at, or departing from, an airport. GTR are legally required to convey any passengers who has already purchased a ticket to the destination printed on their ticket. This includes, if necessary, via taxi. There has been no evidence of that today. Instead, passengers are being left to fend for themselves.

Whilst yes, that is correct and perhaps the wording is slightly off and could have been "you are strongly advised not to travel". This captures people who have not yet started their journey, may be able to defer it or seek alternative routes (hence do not travel on GTR services) and tries to prevent people being stranded who are preparing a journey. It allows the staff the capacity to those who must/need to travel without being overwhelmed with discretionary journeys, but the problem is I imagine many were trying to get to Gatwick and so needed to travel. This argument comes up every time a "Do Not Travel" is announced, the same explanation is given over and over.

There is also only so much alternative provision when your main route is shut for hours on end, particularly on a Sunday.

Which is why the railway should do everything in its power to provide a service.

Has there been a suggestion there wasn't? A via Horsham service started, shuttles were running - fairly reliably - from the South and no doubt challenges were made from the control team about opening the route. Sometimes there is a very unfortunate set of circumstances that combine (Redhill line closed, Sunday operations, challenge to resource a bus operation). When the BML is closed for a weekend a huge rail replacement bus operation runs from Three Bridges which is weeks/months in the planning. You can't conjure that up in a few hours.

A route was available via Horsham but i get that its not as simple as that with crew knowledge these days but its another example repeated across the network where diversionary route knowledge has been weakened such that when an incident occurs we have to resort to Do Not Travel. Wont change because that costs money an even settling delay repay and extortionate taxi fares will still be less

As you say, it is not simple (in fact extremely difficult). But some trains did run - albeit late and with delays. And this all has to be done with a handful of people.

 

[winks]

I Flew into Gatwick at 1.15pm this afternoon to find the entire upper concourse rammed with no trains to London. I cut my losses quickly and decided to book a Hotel at Haywards Heath for the night- catching the Ore service which was pretty much the only service running - luckily I’m off work tomorrow but I’m not paying £200 to get home when a Premier Inn is £52 !

 

[trainhero]

Trouble is there’s a finite supply of taxis in relation to the number of people that would need moving.

Taxis, yes. Ubers, not so much. The intended purpose of Uber's surge pricing is to encourage more drivers to make themselves available to accommodate periods of high demand.

 

[JonathanH]

Which is why the railway should do everything in its power to provide a service. A route was available via Horsham but i get that its not as simple as that with crew knowledge these days but its another example repeated across the network where diversionary route knowledge has been weakened such that when an incident occurs we have to resort to Do Not Travel. Wont change because that costs money an even settling delay repay and extortionate taxi fares will still be less

It is quite unfortunate that this happened on a day when there was an engineering block between Purley and Earlswood (although it was because of that that the problem was uncovered).

If the Redhill to Tonbridge and Redhill to Guildford routes had been open to trains, then 'DIY diversions' via Tonbridge and Dorking would have been possible.

There is an issue about how quickly trains can be set up to run on the line via Sutton to Horsham as well. Getting Thameslink drivers to sign this route so that London Bridge to Horsham services could go that way would be great from a people moving point of view (although there then becomes a question of what maintains Gatwick Airport to Horsham).

 

[trainhero]

I Flew into Gatwick at 1.15pm this afternoon to find the entire upper concourse rammed with no trains to London. I cut my losses quickly and decided to book a Hotel at Haywards Heath for the night- catching the Ore service which was pretty much the only service running - luckily I’m off work tomorrow but I’m not paying £200 to get home when a Premier Inn is £52 !

If you had already purchased your train ticket, you shouldn't be paying anything. The train company is legally obliged to pay, for dinner and breakfast, the £52 for your hotel and a taxi to your destination station. Gatwick Express might stay silent about all this. It doesn't change what the law says.

 

[winks]

There’s no way Southern will actually come this cost though when the response would be I’d have to wait hours in a queue for a rail replacement bus?

 

[Russel]

Which is why the railway should do everything in its power to provide a service. A route was available via Horsham but i get that its not as simple as that with crew knowledge these days but its another example repeated across the network where diversionary route knowledge has been weakened such that when an incident occurs we have to resort to Do Not Travel. Wont change because that costs money an even settling delay repay and extortionate taxi fares will still be less

This seems to be the way things are now, throw in the towel and book taxis for those who shout the loudest.

 

[Horizon22]

This seems to be the way things are now, throw in the towel and book taxis for those who shout the loudest.

Do you have a genuine alternative solution, given the normal contingency route was closed and it was a Sunday which is challenging for sourcing ad-hoc buses? There was an extremely circutious route via Havant or Hastings to London, but ticket acceptance was agreed.

Sometimes the alternative is taxis.

 

[MrJeeves]

Advising passengers "not to travel" is unacceptable

A "Do Not Travel" warning is perfectly acceptable, and a great tool to pull out during major disruption like this. It allows blanket refunds for passengers, even if their train does end up running without disruption.

The issue is really washing hands of any legal obligations under PRO, which you rightly identify. For people who do have to travel, they will despite any Do Not Travel warning. For people who don't necessarily need to, it gives them the choice.

GTR have been posting on Twitter indicating that alternative transport costs may be refunded in certain circumstances. I've had success with a taxi refund in the past without any pushback from them. The real problem is that they try not to tell passengers what they are legally entitled to!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

This seems to be the way things are now, throw in the towel and book taxis for those who shout the loudest.

Three trains just left Victoria heading to the coast via Gatwick albeit most planes have gone for the night now! Anyhow at least everyone will get home now

 

[trainhero]

There’s no way Southern will actually come this cost though when the response would be I’d have to wait hours in a queue for a rail replacement bus?

Most likely. But the law is clear. If your journey is delayed or expected to be delayed by more than 60 minutes, whatever the reason, you are immediately entitled to the choice of a full refund or re-routing to your destination at the earliest opportunity. If the "earliest opportunity" is a taxi, taxi it is. You are also entitled to meals and refreshments, and hotel accommodation where necessary. The relevant laws have been in place for well over 10 years. Train companies have no excuse not to comply.

 

[Aaron2004]

VERY LIMITED service has resumed. Whether it will still be a very limited service tomorrow is yet to be seen, but a full service for tomorrow is not yet confirmed.

 

[trainhero]

A "Do Not Travel" warning is perfectly acceptable, and a great tool to pull out during major disruption like this. It allows blanket refunds for passengers, even if their train does end up running without disruption.

The issue is really washing hands of any legal obligations under PRO, which you rightly identify. For people who do have to travel, they will despite any Do Not Travel warning. For people who don't necessarily need to, it gives them the choice.

GTR have been posting on Twitter indicating that alternative transport costs may be refunded in certain circumstances. I've had success with a taxi refund in the past without any pushback from them. The real problem is that they try not to tell passengers what they are legally entitled to!

We would politely disagree. Passengers have an automatic entitlement to a refund in these circumstances, should they choose to request one. No "do not travel" warning is required. Putting out such messages misleads passengers into thinking that their only option is a refund which, if requested, "conveniently" terminates the passenger's contract with the train company and, with it, the passenger's ability to require the train company to pay for their taxi.

 

[Russel]

Do you have a genuine alternative solution, given the normal contingency route was closed and it was a Sunday which is challenging for sourcing ad-hoc buses? There was an extremely circutious route via Havant or Hastings to London, but ticket acceptance was agreed.

Sometimes the alternative is taxis.

In this instance, maybe not, but in general, TOCs have gotten a lot more relaxed about rolling out do not travel messages over the last few years.

 

[devon_belle]

Which is why the railway should do everything in its power to provide a service. A route was available via Horsham but i get that its not as simple as that with crew knowledge these days but its another example repeated across the network where diversionary route knowledge has been weakened such that when an incident occurs we have to resort to Do Not Travel. Wont change because that costs money an even settling delay repay and extortionate taxi fares will still be less

If there were Saturday evening/Sunday services between Dorking and Horsham the problem would be somewhat mitigated, although those would get very busy. I guess a counter point is that these would get in the way of the ad hoc 1Zxx that divert via Sutton during disruption, although that is true for the 5.5 days per week these services do run.

It is doubly unfortunate that today's incident happened when the GWR service through Redhill to Gatwick was suspended, as transfer from Dorking to Dorking Deepdene onto (presumably crammed) GWR trains would be possible.

Perhaps designing diagrams around being able to shuttle to/from Gatwick on any route would be a good future solution, as Gatwick is the most important destination on the GTR network. Since there are several alternative routes to Gatwick than via East Croydon (via Hastings, Sutton, Havant, or Dorking Deepdene), being able to run a service to/from Gatwick in at least one direction would be better.

 

[ox_chap]

Lots in the chat about having to book a hotel in the UK, and then attempt to travel tomorrow to get home. But what is the legal framework at the beginning of a trip, if someone misses a flight? Thinking someone going on their dream holiday. And maybe even if they were prepared to pay to catch the next flight, to some more exotic destinations, that flight might be really infrequent (so not just stay at Gatwick, and head off a day later instead).

In other threads on this forum, there is lots of chat about lines we'd like to see reopened - we probably all have our pet route. But I'm beginning to think we also need a period where any available funds are mainly put into making the current system as resilient as possible - and across all areas, including stopping the ongoing frequent collapses of the signalling system that cause massive delays both in time and people affected.

 

[Horizon22]

In this instance, maybe not, but in general, TOCs have gotten a lot more relaxed about rolling out do not travel messages over the last few years.

Ok, so now you are changing the goalposts or do you want to suggest that 'the railway' is still "throwing in the towel" today?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jun 2026 ==

Most likely. But the law is clear. If your journey is delayed or expected to be delayed by more than 60 minutes, whatever the reason, you are immediately entitled to the choice of a full refund or re-routing to your destination at the earliest opportunity. If the "earliest opportunity" is a taxi, taxi it is. You are also entitled to meals and refreshments, and hotel accommodation where necessary. The relevant laws have been in place for well over 10 years. Train companies have no excuse not to comply.

It would depend where you are and where you are trying to go. Re-routing, may be better and easier if you are still in London or can go back that way.

If you are a station on the Tattenham branch which has no service, then yes a taxi may well be best in the absence of bus replacement.

You are completely misinterpreting why "Do Not Travel" is advertised. If there is already a queue, taxis cannot be magicked out of thin air, especially if a lot more people are trying to get to Gatwick.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jun 2026 ==

Lots in the chat about having to book a hotel in the UK, and then attempt to travel tomorrow to get home. But what is the legal framework at the beginning of a trip, if someone misses a flight? Thinking someone going on their dream holiday. And maybe even if they were prepared to pay to catch the next flight, to some more exotic destinations, that flight might be really infrequent (so not just stay at Gatwick, and head off a day later instead).

Ultimately that is where travel insurance comes in. You buy a ticket from A-B and the various stipulations around delays, re-routing and alternative provision apply (as has been discussed in this thread). But then your railway ticket has zero bearing on whether you are at Gatwick in time for your flight, due to those delays. Otherwise the same would apply to someone stuck due to a crash on the M23. You may be able to get some goodwill gestures from your train operator, especially if you were trapped/stranded and had tried to get reroute to your destination at the earliest opportunity but were still unable to arrive in time.

You may also have to negotiate with your airline, which may not be forthcoming.

This is a negative view yes, but it also can easily happen. That flight is taking off whether you are on it or not.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Lots in the chat about having to book a hotel in the UK, and then attempt to travel tomorrow to get home. But what is the legal framework at the beginning of a trip, if someone misses a flight? Thinking someone going on their dream holiday. And maybe even if they were prepared to pay to catch the next flight, to some more exotic destinations, that flight might be really infrequent (so not just stay at Gatwick, and head off a day later instead).

In other threads on this forum, there is lots of chat about lines we'd like to see reopened - we probably all have our pet route. But I'm beginning to think we also need a period where any available funds are mainly put into making the current system as resilient as possible - and across all areas, including stopping the ongoing frequent collapses of the signalling system that cause massive delays both in time and people affected.

We dont know fully know the circumstances here but railway has become risk adverse and it also doesnt have the resources it once had to rapidly respond to incidents. Having standby resources and train crew that sign diversionary routes is the only short term palliative upgrading the infrastructure is a long term issue.

 

[trainhero]

You are completely misinterpreting why "Do Not Travel" is advertised. If there is already a queue, taxis cannot be magicked out of thin air, especially if a lot more people are trying to get to Gatwick.

Again, we politely disagree. We are aware of several county court cases where train companies have sought to argue that "do not travel" messages meant passengers were not entitled to taxis, only to refunds of their tickets.

 

[Russel]

Ok, so now you are changing the goalposts or do you want to suggest that 'the railway' is still "throwing in the towel" today?

My post wasn't referring specifically to this instance though was it, so no goalposts being moved...

 

[QueensCurve]

That's no way to refer to passengers waiting for a train......

Particularly not at Goring.