50th anniversary of the Bressingham footplate ban (which was overturned the following year)

[Justin Smith]

Just read a fascinating article in my back volume of Railway Magazines (1977), April p180. It shows the 1970s weren't as free as we appear to think, though they came to the right decision in the end....
The potted version was that a Mr C.H. Hewison (Chief Employment Inspector at the Railway Inspectorate) had visited Bressingham (with his daughter actually ! ) on the 8 Aug 1976. He had seen passengers riding on the steam loco footplate and the very next day he contacted his boss who was Mr G.F.W Sincock at that moment because Major P.M. Olver was on holiday.
Together they issued a notice to Bressingham under section 22 of the 1974 H&S at work act imposing an immediate and total ban on the carrying of passengers on the footplate at Bressingham. But the inestimable Alan Bloom appealed it (not sure how many modern heritage railways would try that these days....) showing evidence that approximately 120,000 people had ridden on the locos' footplates over 8 years at Bressingham with only one minor injury (a woman slipped whilst alighting the engine and received a slight graze on her leg ! ) so, in a unanimous decision, an Industrial Tribunal overturned the ban ! YESSSSS ! !

I know Heritage railways run driver experience courses these days, but has a ban for "turn up and go" passengers on the footplate been reintroduced since 1977 ? And if so how was it made to "stick" ?

 

[John Webb]

I think it possible that insurance companies may have had more influence on this long-term than the Railway Inspectorate?

 

[Justin Smith]

I think it possible that insurance companies may have had more influence on this long-term than the Railway Inspectorate?

Or the ambulance chasing lawyers....
There really is no such thing as a free lunch is there ? Some think no win no fee lawyers are a Godsend, but we all pay for that with our increasingly regulated and restricted lives......

 

[DarloRich]

Some think no win no fee lawyers are a Godsend, but we all pay for that with our increasingly regulated and restricted lives

They are for people who lack the resources to instruct traditional solicitors to help them seek legal redress. I always wonder why some people want to limit access to law to those of means.

 

[43096]

Or the ambulance chasing lawyers....
There really is no such thing as a free lunch is there ? Some think no win no fee lawyers are a Godsend, but we all pay for that with our increasingly regulated and restricted lives......

It's not the lawyers that are the root. It's the provisions of the HASAW Act 1974 and the concept of risk being "as low as reasonably practicable". The above mentioned event was soon after the HAHSAW Act became law - things have moved on significantly in the 50 years since.

 

[Acathater]

I know that around ten years or so later a volunteer there (who I'd previous worked with in a different industry) was banned from driving at Bressingham for what was described as regular "furious driving" on the narrow gauge lines there
I never got told exactly what his misdeeds were but I presume they must have been significant

 

[Towers]

They are for people who lack the resources to instruct traditional solicitors to help them seek legal redress. I always wonder why some people want to limit access to law to those of means.

I think perhaps it’s more the nature of their approach which some may take issue with; there is for example one such outfit currently running advertisements on social media trawling for “victims” of the Bedford train crash. One may indeed be inclined to suggest that they are providing a service, however one might equally question the ethical angle of advertising for custom from victims. Regardless, they are of course entirely free to trade and to advertise as they please.

 

[Bill57p9]

An interesting anecdote.

I would be far more concerned with the potential for distraction or impaired visibility than any H&S risk, however that can be mitigated by having a minder, such as fireman/secondman who is tasked with ensuring the visitors don't affect the safety of the train. Bottom line in today's world is ensure your insurance covers it, complete a Risk Assessment and implement mitigations until the risk is extremely low.


No win no fee solicitors carry all the risk so will only pursue cases with a good likelihood of success. I would suggest that society's risk tolerance is the real driver, and that is backed up by court judgements.

 

[LittleRedTrain]

I know Heritage railways run driver experience courses these days, but has a ban for "turn up and go" passengers on the footplate been reintroduced since 1977 ? And if so how was it made to "stick" ?

I don't think there's any kind of ban on it these days, though, I suspect more thorough risk assessment is required:

The Ffestiniog & Welsh Highland often run footplate rides up and down the platform at Porthmadog/Caernarfon during holiday weekends, without any issues, quite often with kids onboard.

A lot of railways offer 'driver for a fiver' type experiences on a 'turn up and go basis' at special events.

My local line offers a 'footplate observer' option for a full trip on the line, but it must be pre-booked and participants must meet certain criteria around age/health/clothing etc. The GWSR does similar at their gala events.

 

[Steve B]

My recollection of a footplate ride on "Oliver Cromwell" at Bressingham is not very positive. They were basically allowing as many people on as possible with the result that nobody could get a view of the whole footplate - I'm not exaggerating, it was like travelling on the London Underground in the middle of the rush hour, and about as enjoyable.I thought then (as a young teenager) that it didn't seem safe for those close to the backplate, or by the open doors, with people squeezing against you, quite apart from the people, including children on their own running around, crossing the track as the loco moved slowly along it.
A bit more restriction, whether by management or regulation, would have been desirable, both for safety and for making the experience more enjoyable.

 

[DarloRich]

however one might equally question the ethical angle of advertising for custom from victims

alternatively one might say these firms, by advertising, are informing victims of their ability to claim and their right to ask for compensation.

The practical consequence of limiting or removing these firms is that those without money or means suffer. In my view your ability to secure compensation for damage caused by negligence or otherwise should not be limited entirely to the size of your purse imo.

I fully accept the moral angle point. I wouldn't use one of those firms and would find a slightly more upmarket firm but that is because I have some knowledge to rely on. If I didn't and was of limited means.............

 

[35B]

alternatively one might say these firms, by advertising, are informing victims of their ability to claim and their right to ask for compensation.

The practical consequence of limiting or removing these firms is that those without money or means suffer. In my view your ability to secure compensation for damage caused by negligence or otherwise should not be limited entirely to the size of your purse imo.

I fully accept the moral angle point. I wouldn't use one of those firms and would find a slightly more upmarket firm but that is because I have some knowledge to rely on. If I didn't and was of limited means.............

Fine, but the constant flood of spam that I'm getting about claiming against the interest on car purchases leaves me feeling that the access is coming at a high cost to society as a whole

 

[Justin Smith]

It's not the lawyers that are the root. It's the provisions of the HASAW Act 1974 and the concept of risk being "as low as reasonably practicable". The above mentioned event was soon after the HAHSAW Act became law - things have moved on significantly in the 50 years since.

I think it's both, but personally I think this whole "duty of care" stuff should be scrapped and replaced by the concept of a "reasonable degree of care", plus the notion of personal responsibility has been forgotten in modern society. Everybody seems to expect others, ultimately the state, to look out for them.

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

My recollection of a footplate ride on "Oliver Cromwell" at Bressingham is not very positive. They were basically allowing as many people on as possible with the result that nobody could get a view of the whole footplate - I'm not exaggerating, it was like travelling on the London Underground in the middle of the rush hour, and about as enjoyable.I thought then (as a young teenager) that it didn't seem safe for those close to the backplate, or by the open doors, with people squeezing against you, quite apart from the people, including children on their own running around, crossing the track as the loco moved slowly along it.
A bit more restriction, whether by management or regulation, would have been desirable, both for safety and for making the experience more enjoyable.

I vaguely remember having a footplate ride at Bressingham and I didn't think it was that bad, maybe you were just unlucky but it certainly sounds like there was an excessive number when you took yours.

 

[WestCountry]

I know Heritage railways run driver experience courses these days, but has a ban for "turn up and go" passengers on the footplate been reintroduced since 1977 ? And if so how was it made to "stick" ?

There is still no such ban. I visited the SVR a couple of years ago and they were running 'turn-up-and-go' steam footplate rides to the Bridgenorth limit of shunt on a light engine between trains.

 

[Justin Smith]

There is still no such ban. I visited the SVR a couple of years ago and they were running 'turn-up-and-go' steam footplate rides to the Bridgenorth limit of shunt on a light engine between trains.

Good news indeed. Though I do remember a few years ago on the SVR asking if I could walk down to the bottom of the platform ramp (at Bridgnorth) to take a picture of the loco (7812) which had just hauled us in, and being told "No" ! Sadly I have never felt the same way about the SVR since.....

 

[Justin Smith]

I am slowly reading* through my 1977 bound volume of the Railway Magazine and have got to Editorial for the August issue. It is, obliquely, more on this Bressingham Steam Footplate Ban, and is quite shocking really :

REST AND RELAXATION

In the aftermath of Alan Bloom's successful appeal to an industrial tribunal against a ban on footplate passengers at Bressingham, improperly imposed by the Railway Inspectorate (RM April 1977, pages 161 and 180), we recently heard of a British Railways driver who spends some of his spare time driving steam engines at Bressingham and who gave evidence to the tribunal. Not long after, the Railway Inspectorate wrote to his employers enquiring whether they were aware of this spare time activity of his, and whether they were satisfied that it did not interfere with his proper rest periods as a BR driver.
We would have thought that driving a steam engine at Bressingham might be regarded as a relaxation after driving on the BR main line, but it would seem that the railway Inspectorate does no share this view, even if BR does. To us the whole thing looks like the sordid pursuit of a personal vendetta on the part f civil servants incapable of accepting criticism.

OUCH !

* that should be re-reading, I first read it back in Jul 1999 just after buying it (from the Vintage Carriage Trust actually !)

 

[Wawanesa]

I had a footplate ride on Oliver Cromwell at Bressingham on May 16th 1971 for the princely sum of 15p and I'm still here to tell the tale!

 

[Justin Smith]

I had a footplate ride on Oliver Cromwell at Bressingham on May 16th 1971 for the princely sum of 15p and I'm still here to tell the tale!

Best 15p you've ever spent ? ! ?

 

[Cymroglan]

I am slowly reading* through my 1977 bound volume of the Railway Magazine and have got to Editorial for the August issue. It is, obliquely, more on this Bressingham Steam Footplate Ban, and is quite shocking really :

REST AND RELAXATION

In the aftermath of Alan Bloom's successful appeal to an industrial tribunal against a ban on footplate passengers at Bressingham, improperly imposed by the Railway Inspectorate (RM April 1977, pages 161 and 180), we recently heard of a British Railways driver who spends some of his spare time driving steam engines at Bressingham and who gave evidence to the tribunal. Not long after, the Railway Inspectorate wrote to his employers enquiring whether they were aware of this spare time activity of his, and whether they were satisfied that it did not interfere with his proper rest periods as a BR driver.
We would have thought that driving a steam engine at Bressingham might be regarded as a relaxation after driving on the BR main line, but it would seem that the railway Inspectorate does no share this view, even if BR does. To us the whole thing looks like the sordid pursuit of a personal vendetta on the part f civil servants incapable of accepting criticism.

OUCH !

* that should be re-reading, I first read it back in Jul 1999 just after buying it (from the Vintage Carriage Trust actually !)

Plus ça change!