I had to crawl on my hands and knees to get off train, says disabled woman

[mmh]

IIRC the floor is lower in the end cars of 80x as they don't have engines underneath. They also have the accessible toilets in those cars.

But the lower floor is irrelevant when you need a ramp to get onto the train in any car. Putting them in the end cars was a silly decision.

 

[AlterEgo]

But the lower floor is irrelevant when you need a ramp to get onto the train in any car. Putting them in the end cars was a silly decision.

Indeed. The floor is only about 6 inches lower, hardly an obstacle over 10-15 feet or so to the wheelchair space. A very gentle ramp would do it.

 

[Chiltern 165]

Do you know under what circumstances such a move can be authorised? Do you know if the IET can be driven in reverse anyway?

I believe every train in the UK can reverse, though some may require circuit breakers/safety ties to be removed first.

A move to reverse is not what I suggested, I suggested the driver could've changed cab to the other end. To propel (reverse from the leading end) you need a shunter, and according to the western region sectional appendix (local area rules) you can only propel empty trains in that area.

 

[JamesT]

Indeed. The floor is only about 6 inches lower, hardly an obstacle over 10-15 feet or so to the wheelchair space. A very gentle ramp would do it.

What does 6 inches do to the length of ramp to the platform, which is the more important bit?

 

[mmh]

What does 6 inches do to the length of ramp to the platform, which is the more important bit?

Nothing, as the external doors are at the same height throughout the train.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

What does 6 inches do to the length of ramp to the platform, which is the more important bit?

Aren't all the doors the same size and height from the platform and the higher floor above the engines is an internal ramp?

Designing the wheelchair spaces into an end vehicle does seem to ignore potential problems with short platforms. Also it's been a convention since perhaps even before the HSTs to put first class at the end of the train.

 

[Snow1964]

Do you know under what circumstances such a move can be authorised? Do you know if the IET can be driven in reverse anyway?

deleted,

thought back of of train wasn't in platform, not that someone had assisted a passenger into part of train that wouldn't be in platform at destination

 

[Wolfie]

Nevertheless, I still consider that this event is never acceptable. There is a LOT of work to be done by the railway

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2026 ==


The railway needs to do better than "normally quite good"

To be clear, l wasn't for one moment saying that it was acceptable - see my previous posts - far from it in fact.

 

[AlterEgo]

A move to reverse is not what I suggested, I suggested the driver could've changed cab to the other end.

Yes, that is required if setting back, or rather, making a wrong direction movement. All drivers know this. The major problem here is that the train stopped in the correct position and had not actually overshot; there is not a railway operational reason to perform the move, but one which is predicated on customer service and accessibility. The signaller can use their discretion to permit a wrong direction move, but the conversation to do this can often be lengthy and the answer is very often "no" even when an overshoot has occurred. Remember that if an incident happens during the move (all wrong direction moves carry an elevated element of risk), the decision to set back will be part of the investigatory process

We can argue that they might have tried to do this, but such a decision would inconvenience hundreds of other people on the same train (including probably another wheelchair user, as we know at least one ofher space on that train was probably occupied!), cause them to miss connections, as well as causing other knock on delays.

If you say to the complainant here "okay the driver who you cannot see or hear is going to call the signaller, can't make any promises, setting back might take half an hour" it's very likely they will just take the same actions they took in the incident, which is to say oh bugger it, I will crawl off. Which leads to the same undignified outcome.

My instinct tells me that the real failing at Bath was a lack of compassion or communication and that the passenger felt helpless or had lost faith in the railway following the error. My solution here is soft skills - talk to the passenger and reassure them, phone Control or a duty manager on front of the passenger, ask the passenger if they can accept going back to Bath from Bristol, and if not, get them an accessible taxi to their home and capture details for customer services for further follow up. And anyone not signing off on a taxi in lieu of a very expensive delay minutes bill for setting back is a fool.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2026 ==

It's not about going in reverse, the process is (maybe was in past tense) called drawing up. Doors are closed, special signal is given (which was certain flags, or in multiple units a bell code), train is moved forward so previously unplatformed carriages are now in the platform.

Probably even easier to coordinate now that guards have intercoms to drivers and platform staff at places like Bath Spa have radios, than in the days of waving flags at each other.

This is not drawing up, this is a wrong direction move. The lead vehicles were (correctly) off the platform.

 

[norbitonflyer]

It's not about going in reverse, the process is (maybe was in past tense) called drawing up. Doors are closed, special signal is given (which was certain flags, or in multiple units a bell code), train is moved forward so previously unplatformed carriages are now in the platform.

Probably even easier to coordinate now that guards have intercoms to drivers and platform staff at places like Bath Spa have radios, than in the days of waving flags at each other.

Drawing up is what you do when the rear of the train is off the platform not, as here, where the front is off. That requires setting back, a much more complex maneovre. Either the driver has to drive in reverse from the front cab, which requires clear communication with a competent person at the other end of the train, or he has to

• shut down the cab: which as we have heard from other threads on IEPs, can require a reboot taking several minutes, during which time nothing works
• walk to the other end, which means - as the front of the train is off the platform, first either climbing down on to the ballast or walking through the passenger area
• power up the other cab
• drive forward as far as required
• repeat the first three steps

And with any wrong direction move, there is the risk of entering the section in rear, which is probably by now occupied by another train. An actual collision is unlikely, but the signalling system is not designed to cope with two trains in one section and may respond in an unusual way.

 

[Parallel]

Regarding the point about having wheelchair spaces in the end vehicles not being ideal, having wheelchair spaces in the middle is also not ideal on the GWR network. GWR has a reasonable number of stations that can only take 4 or 5 coaches of an IET, often with signals at the end of the platforms. Having wheelchair spaces in the middle could make accessibility worse in these cases. The GWR network is nothing like the Thameslink network. You’d have to spend millions, if not billions on the GWR network to make it fully accessible.

 

[mmh]

8xx weren't designed for GWR, they were intended to be a universal inter-city unit to replace hauled trains everywhere. As far as I'm aware, GWR is the outlier in having numerous stations where the train stops beyond the platform, on the other inter-city routes stopping at the end of the platform is the norm.

 

[etr221]

Something I am surprised has not been mentioned/raised is the extent to which the train was delayed at Bath, once it was discovered that the unfortunate lady was unable to alight as expected. It cannot have been trivial...

 

[Snow1964]

My instinct tells me that the real failing at Bath was a lack of compassion or communication and that the passenger felt helpless or had lost faith in the railway following the error. My solution here is soft skills - talk to the passenger and reassure them, phone Control or a duty manager on front of the passenger, ask the passenger if they can accept going back to Bath from Bristol, and if not, get them an accessible taxi to their home and capture details for customer services for further follow up.

Agree that once the mess of putting passenger in a carriage that wouldn't be off platform at destination was made, the way it was handled was rather poor.

Of course, if someone in the assistance team at Paddington was more savvy, it wouldn't have happened.

But possibly the initial failure was even earlier, did someone book the passenger into that space, if so whoever set up the database to allow a wheelchair booking for an unplatformed carriage is the initial culprit (along with their supervisors and managers for never checking the data)

 

[Towers]

But possibly the initial failure was even earlier, did someone book the passenger into that space, if so whoever set up the database to allow a wheelchair booking for an unplatformed carriage is the initial culprit (along with their supervisors and managers for never checking the data)

As has been covered previously, the accessible coach in question would have been somewhere around the middle of the platform had that portion of the train been the usual way around; alas it appesrs that on this occssion it sadly wasn’t. Presumably the space in the rear portion was already fully occupied, or unavailable for some other reason.

Presumably the customer assistance staff at various stations do not have an encylopedic knowledge of what fits where on every platform that GWR serve, and so the looming problem was missed?

 

[Snow1964]

As has been covered previously, the accessible coach in question would have been somewhere around the middle of the platform had that portion of the train been the usual way around; alas it appesrs that on this occssion it sadly wasn’t. Presumably the space in the rear portion was already fully occupied, or unavailable for some other reason.

Presumably the customer assistance staff at various stations do not have an encylopedic knowledge of what fits where on every platform that GWR serve, and so the looming problem was missed?

But you are missing a point, the database assumed the train would be certain formation, someone agreed to change it, but ignored the problems their decision forming it backwards caused.

It is just disjointed thinking, presuming it would be ok. Surely if make a stock revision affecting assessibility, then someone somewhere ought to be taking responsibility for creating this situation.

Whilst I don't expect an encylopedic knowledge, would expect them to be aware of major stations with short platforms, or look it up if they don't know, not just make assumption train will always fit

 

[speedy1]

Something I am surprised has not been mentioned/raised is the extent to which the train was delayed at Bath, once it was discovered that the unfortunate lady was unable to alight as expected. It cannot have been trivial...

What is the point you wish to make?

 

[MarlowDonkey]

But you are missing a point, the database assumed the train would be certain formation, someone agreed to change it, but ignored the problems their decision forming it backwards caused.

What are the rules and conventions about having IETs with the first class at the London end? If it's the wrong way round at Paddington they can send it out to West Ealing or even Greenford to turn it on the triangular junction there but that may take some organisation, particularly as it would only be half the 10 car train that needed to be turned.

 

[mikeb42]

It is just disjointed thinking, presuming it would be ok. Surely if make a stock revision affecting assessibility, then someone somewhere ought to be taking responsibility for creating this situation.

Serious question: Is anyone/anything even considering the arrangement of 10 car sets on a moment by moment basis?

There are 4 possible arrangements and trains turn up randomly in all of them. How they end up seems to be a fluke determined by ad-hoc events.

Meanwhile, set swaps, particularly at Paddington, happen frequently and seemingly on the spur of the moment.

Just for good measure, the passenger-facing formation displays are quite often wrong so it appears that data and reality easily get out of correspondence in this regard.

This all adds up to incidents like the one in question being an accident waiting to happen.

If ever there was a case for an automated system (and one which is assured to receive correct data about the formation of a train on a given service in real time) to spot edge cases like this before they happen, this is it. The whole thing is a house of cards dependent on way too many variables to be relying on fallible humans alone.

 

[Starmill]

If the passenger ends up at Bath 3 carriages off the platform, what other solution is there, given the operational constraints which might have been in play about setting back?

The problem was caused long, long before the passenger got to Bath, and ought to have been spotted several times.

It's almost always possible to draw forward or set back a few metres in order to solve these kinds of problems. It's uncommon as it's so time-consuming to authorise and carry out, but shunting of this kind is something the rules provide for. Many front line staff do incorrectly believe it won't be permitted by the signaller, when in fact it would be, if the correct procedure were followed. Of course, it's an absolute last resort because of how long it would take to arrange but it can be done.

Some wheelchair users have physically blocked doorways in order to prevent trains from leaving until this process has been carried out. Good on them I say.

 

[Snow1964]

Bath Spa is currently 195m for platform 1, and 279m for platform 2 (per Western sectional appendix route 105)

A planning application for listed Building consent was submitted earlier this year (Bath and North East Somerset ref 26/01549/LBA) to extend platforms 5.63m at Bristol end, but only 0.93m at London end which was permitted 26th August.

Planning Application Details

app.bathnes.gov.uk

There is a full background and info regarding the platform lengthening on this link, which includes

5.21 The proposed works to extend the platform will improve the operation of getting on and off a train by way of allowing the use of all the doors; this is especially helpful for persons of reduced mobility.

https://app.bathnes.gov.uk/publisher/docs/4B2E747106E9E76EE628C7FE9B6C765B/Document-4B2E747106E9E76EE628C7FE9B6C765B.pdf

Would the extra 6.5m platform have prevented this or could it still happen

 

[AlterEgo]

Bath Spa is currently 195m for platform 1, and 279m for platform 2 (per Western sectional appendix route 105)

A planning application for listed Building consent was submitted earlier this year (Bath and North East Somerset ref 26/01549/LBA) to extend platforms 5.63m at Bristol end, but only 0.93m at London end which was permitted 26th August.

Planning Application Details

app.bathnes.gov.uk

Would the extra 6.5m platform have prevented this or could it still happen

No. A 10 car IET is about 260m long.

 

[Starmill]

But the lower floor is irrelevant when you need a ramp to get onto the train in any car. Putting them in the end cars was a silly decision.

It would be a significant amount of work. The additional floor height would mean a much longer ramp. That would cut into turning circles and require lots of stations to have platform furniture moved.

 

[a_c_skinner]

So if they aren't difficult to sort out why on earth do they keep happening?

Easy as in (this time) someone senior meets you off the train, says they are very sorry, shouldn't have happened, in a moment a taxi will arrive to take you to Bath/In a moment I will come with you on the next train to Bath/can I get you a drink while...

That sort of easy to sort out.

 

[styles]

Easy as in (this time) someone senior meets you off the train, says they are very sorry, shouldn't have happened, in a moment a taxi will arrive to take you to Bath/In a moment I will come with you on the next train to Bath/can I get you a drink while...

That sort of easy to sort out.

Now now, you'll make a rod for your own back offering basic customer service like that.

 

[35B]

Serious question: Is anyone/anything even considering the arrangement of 10 car sets on a moment by moment basis?

There are 4 possible arrangements and trains turn up randomly in all of them. How they end up seems to be a fluke determined by ad-hoc events.

Meanwhile, set swaps, particularly at Paddington, happen frequently and seemingly on the spur of the moment.

Just for good measure, the passenger-facing formation displays are quite often wrong so it appears that data and reality easily get out of correspondence in this regard.

This all adds up to incidents like the one in question being an accident waiting to happen.

If ever there was a case for an automated system (and one which is assured to receive correct data about the formation of a train on a given service in real time) to spot edge cases like this before they happen, this is it. The whole thing is a house of cards dependent on way too many variables to be relying on fallible humans alone.

Serious question. When specific positioning of accommodation matters for a range of reasons, how are any operators not actively considering the detailed presentation of trains?

 

[bramling]

Yes, that is required if setting back, or rather, making a wrong direction movement. All drivers know this. The major problem here is that the train stopped in the correct position and had not actually overshot; there is not a railway operational reason to perform the move, but one which is predicated on customer service and accessibility. The signaller can use their discretion to permit a wrong direction move, but the conversation to do this can often be lengthy and the answer is very often "no" even when an overshoot has occurred. Remember that if an incident happens during the move (all wrong direction moves carry an elevated element of risk), the decision to set back will be part of the investigatory process

We can argue that they might have tried to do this, but such a decision would inconvenience hundreds of other people on the same train (including probably another wheelchair user, as we know at least one ofher space on that train was probably occupied!), cause them to miss connections, as well as causing other knock on delays.

If you say to the complainant here "okay the driver who you cannot see or hear is going to call the signaller, can't make any promises, setting back might take half an hour" it's very likely they will just take the same actions they took in the incident, which is to say oh bugger it, I will crawl off. Which leads to the same undignified outcome.

My instinct tells me that the real failing at Bath was a lack of compassion or communication and that the passenger felt helpless or had lost faith in the railway following the error. My solution here is soft skills - talk to the passenger and reassure them, phone Control or a duty manager on front of the passenger, ask the passenger if they can accept going back to Bath from Bristol, and if not, get them an accessible taxi to their home and capture details for customer services for further follow up. And anyone not signing off on a taxi in lieu of a very expensive delay minutes bill for setting back is a fool.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2026 ==


This is not drawing up, this is a wrong direction move. The lead vehicles were (correctly) off the platform.

I agree that, regardless of the wrongs of the situation, moving the train back isn’t really a viable option, especially at a busy location. Easily looking at a 15-20 minute delay while it all happens, and introducing a few disproportionate risks.

Unacceptable though the initial situation was, it isn’t appropriate to delay potentially hundreds of people on both the incident train and those which will be affected in consequence.

The resolution for these sorts of incidents really is ensuring they don’t happen in the first place.

If the industry can’t do that, then it should not attempt to provide such a critical service.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2026 ==

Serious question. When specific positioning of accommodation matters for a range of reasons, how are any operators not actively considering the detailed presentation of trains?

None of this is anything particularly new. Anyone who takes a cycle on trains will know that this sort of thing happens all the time, and those who do it regularly will find that they know the ropes better than many of the poorly trained staff.

Obviously the difference is that for other types of user it’s a nuisance, inconvenience or drama, whereas for someone with mobility problems it is much worse than that.

Even in the days of brake vans, there was always the issue of which end of the train it was going to be on. Situations were probably easier to resolve in those days as the staff had more clue what they were doing, and there were less people around most of the time.

 

[Swedenorer]

All this stuff about platform lengths etc is so pointless.These things will happen. All it needed was a member of staff with the nous to say there'd been a cock-up we can't do anything about it just all stay on the train and change at Bristol to come back - getting the guard who must have been present all the time to issue some kind of excess. On the SR where there was only step free access on one platform this was just accepted practice anyway. If staff on the ground can't think for themselves or maybe aren't allowed to - then something is very wrong.

 

[Krokodil]

I'm unfamiliar with the specifics of the location but certainly in my time as both an SSM and a signaller, permission to set the train back would have been given if the circumstances were explained.

There is reversible working through the station and a signal at the other end. I'm not sure how far down that signal is - if it is quite close to the platform end it may have been necessary to clear it. If a following train has already been signalled through Bathampton Junction then that would not be possible.

 

[Falcon1200]

All it needed was a member of staff with the nous to say there'd been a cock-up we can't do anything about it just all stay on the train and change at Bristol to come back -

Better IMHO would have been a taxi, arranged (and paid for of course!) by GWR from Temple Meads right to the passenger's home. But it is easier to think of such things afterwards rather than during the event.