FCC fined £75k over "absolute shambles"

[cjohnson]

Sorry no link yet, but BBC London's transport correspondent is reporting that FCC have been fined £75k+costs over the St Pancras/Kentish Town incident from 2011 which left passengers stuck for three hours.
The judge apparently called the incident an "absolute shambles" and that there were "litany of mistakes and poor judgements".

 

[O L Leigh]

And what of the role that passengers played in undermining the efforts of traincrew and others to get the situation resolved...?

BTW, where has this fine originated?

O L Leigh

 

[PR1Berske]

I do like it when certain members of this forum automatically leap to "And what role did the passengers play, eh?"

 

[O L Leigh]

Even the RAIB cite passenger action as a problem that hampered the rescue operation.

O L Leigh

 

[WillPS]

Clearly they don't place the majority of blame on them, though, hence the fine.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I do like it when certain members of this forum automatically leap to "And what role did the passengers play, eh?"

Well have you considered that that information is actually quite important to know?

Not everything is black-and-white, with one person/group to blame entirely.

 

[Yew]

Thats an awfully long time to be faffing about trying to get a train sorted, I can understand the irritation of the passangers, especially with no PA to inform them.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Oh, I didnt realise the passangers opened the doors in order to stall the rescue effort...

Maybe once you have been stuck on a packed commuter train for three hours in hot conditions without any toilet facilities, you will realise that not everything a passenger does is out of spite in order to hinder train crew.

People get prosecuted for manslaughter, which by definition is something you don't intend to commit. It doesn't mean it's not their fault, however.

 

[stut]

My experience with FCC on a failed train is a similar delay (over 2h, between Biggleswade and Arlesey on a 317 which was thankfully not crowded) and lack of communication (not from the driver, who did his best, but he was told absolutely nothing).

On the plus side, they had managed to rustle up a whole army of staff to meet us at Arlesey with...


...Delay Repay leaflets.

 

[broadgage]

I agree with the verdict of the court.
Although not innvolved in this incident, I have been caught up in several similar FCC shambles.
I have NEVER known the emergency lighting to work for more than a few minutes.
I have NEVER known the PA to work throughout any prolonged breakdown.

Whilst leaving a train without permission is not to be undertaken lightly, there is a limit as to long it is reasonable to expect passengers to stand in the dark, in sweltering heat on a crush loaded train.
How long is reasonable ? no more than an hour in my view.

These episodes seem to be regular feature of FCC, who seem to regard a few thousand passengers trapped below ground in the dark as "just one of those things"
After previous cases, reviews have been promised but not much seems to change. A prosecution may concentrate their minds a bit.

 

[O L Leigh]

Thats an awfully long time to be faffing about trying to get a train sorted, I can understand the irritation of the passangers, especially with no PA to inform them.

A lot of that time would have been wasted by traincrew having to go up and down the train resetting PASSCOMs, securing doors and mopping up the passengers who leaked out of the train onto the track.

O L Leigh

 

[Squaddie]

Even the RAIB cite passenger action as a problem that hampered the rescue operation.

It was a factor, but their actions were entirely justifiable. Passengers were driven to opening doors and activating passenger alarms because in the two hours that it took another train to arrive they had no air-conditioning or toilets, and hardly any information regarding the situation. Some passengers began to leave the train and walk along the tracks. What do you think they should have done? Just sat there?

 

[Carlisle]

Whilst this was a poorly managed incident we should not single out FCC all the time as I believe in the last year people have been stuck for longer than this on trains operated by Virgin and East Coast amongst others

 

[jon0844]

Given the fact that some passengers will just do what they want, and there's little to stop them even on a train with a TM/guard, perhaps TOCs will just have to stop working on the basis that if there's a fault, it's acceptable (and sensible) to try certain things in turn to rectify the situation and just go into 'passenger rescue' mode - even if the train might be fixable.

It would cost loads, could cause even more grief for passengers, but it might have to be the only sensible option as it seems that some people are clearly going to just get off the train no matter what - and if anyone dared take action against them, the press would have a field day (that is, at least, until someone was seriously injured or killed and even then the TOC would likely be blamed).

Question is; what's the maximum time before you say 'right, no matter, get everyone off'?

Perhaps on new trains, or even to be retrofitted, staff could have radios or headsets that could be relayed to the onboard PA system so they can carry on doing their duties and still communicate with passengers? Presumably they could also communicate with signallers etc while being out of the cab.

Finally, low-powered LED emergency lighting should be fitted as a means to keep the carriages illuminated after the batteries fail - likely being able to last for many hours instead of a 'few minutes' (but that I put down to poor maintenance of said batteries as I doubt that's what is expected).

 

[broadgage]

It was a factor, but their actions were entirely justifiable. Passengers were driven to opening doors and activating passenger alarms because in the two hours that it took another train to arrive they had no air-conditioning or toilets, and hardly any information regarding the situation. Some passengers began to leave the train and walk along the tracks. What do you think they should have done? Just sat there?

SAT there, stood more likely ! FCC trains have had seats removed in order to give more standing more.
The modern trend for commuter trains is towards "metro style" interiors that are optimised for standing and with only limited seating.

 

[TheKnightWho]

SAT there, stood more likely ! FCC trains have had seats removed in order to give more standing more.
The modern trend for commuter trains is towards "metro style" interiors that are optimised for standing and with only limited seating.

Anecdotal evidence and assumptions are not making a strong case for your side. Can we please all look at the facts instead of making needless emotional arguments that only cause strife and teach nobody anything?

 

[Squaddie]

Can we please all look at the facts instead of making needless emotional arguments that only cause strife and teach nobody anything?

The report into the incident is damning. It identifies many factors that contributed to the problem, almost all of which were the fault of FCC.

The driver moved train 1W95 when it was not safe to do so, with passengers standing in the vicinity of one or more sets of open doors.

Despite the problems experienced on train 1W95 at St. Pancras, FCC allowed it to continue to Kentish Town with passengers on board, despite the risk that the train might fail. This was a causal factor in the incident.

FCC gave only limited consideration to a range of possible strategies for rescuing train 1W95 and its passengers and at an early stage focused solely on the use of an assisting train for moving train 1W95 and its passengers to Kentish Town. This was a causal factor in the incident.

The arrival of the train provided to assist train 1W95 into Kentish Town was affected by a series of delays. This was a causal factor in the incident.

The conditions for passengers within train 1W95 became increasingly uncomfortable as time wore on. In an attempt to make conditions more tolerable, some passengers opened doors and, later, some alighted from the train. This was a causal factor in the incident.

Only limited information was provided to the passengers on train 1W95 during the first 45 minutes of the incident, and no information was provided after that time. This was a causal factor in the incident.

FCC’s policy for handling incidents involving stranded trains was not applied. This was a causal factor.

The driver of train 1W95 was not given adequate support during the incident which affected his ability to manage the conditions on board the train. This was an underlying factor in the incident.

And so it goes on.

 

[OxtedL]

BBC article www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24107132

A rail firm has been fined £75,000 after passengers were stuck on a train in London for more than three hours.

The incident happened on a First Capital Connect between St Pancras and Kentish Town stations in north London in May 2011.

The Brighton to Bedford train with 700 people on board was stuck due to power supply problems.

Sentencing at Blackfriars Crown Court, the judge said the incident was "an absolute shambles".

The company had already pleaded guilty.

What role the passengers played in the incident is entirely irrelevant in a judgement of FCC's response. Since we discussed it to death at the time, I reckon it's entirely unhelpful to do so in this setting.

 

[cjohnson]

Here's the story...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24107132

A rail firm has been fined £75,000 after passengers were stuck on a train in London for more than three hours.

The incident happened on a First Capital Connect between St Pancras and Kentish Town stations in north London in May 2011.

The Brighton to Bedford train with 700 people on board was stuck due to power supply problems.

Sentencing at Blackfriars Crown Court, the judge said the incident was "an absolute shambles".

The company had already pleaded guilty.

Some passengers who were stranded later claimed on Twitter they had been left in a tunnel with little ventilation, no water, no toilets and limited information.

Up to 40 passengers eventually forced open the doors and walked down the track.

The judge also said there was a "litany of mistakes and poor judgements" by the firm and said the risk was "substantial".

 

[martinsh]

Thats an awfully long time to be faffing about trying to get a train sorted, I can understand the irritation of the passangers, especially with no PA to inform them.

You should have stuck to your guns and not edited this post !

 

[jon0844]

SAT there, stood more likely ! FCC trains have had seats removed in order to give more standing more.
The modern trend for commuter trains is towards "metro style" interiors that are optimised for standing and with only limited seating.

Which FCC trains have had seats removed?

Maybe some of the single seats on some 319s went to allow for a small luggage rack but to the best of my knowledge that's it.

The 319s are as they were, some are 2+2 and some 3+2.
The 377s are as they were specified by Southern as they're on loan.
The 317s on GN are 3+2 as they've always been. Ditto the 313s and 321s.
The 365s are 2+2 and have been since they were built.

Have I missed anything?

Also, to add my own experience - although it didn't lead to anything disastrous; last week (Thursday night) I was on a train out of King's Cross. A 365 that came in as 8-cars and split.

The driver came over the PA to say there was an electrical problem and he'd have to restart the train (exact words) and that the doors would be closed and the lights would go out.

I assumed he meant emergency lights, but no - it was in fact ALL the lights.



This was done twice and both times the train 'restarted' with the BRB CLASS 465 message on the internal displays.

Passengers weren't bothered, but a few people had to wait outside wondering what was going on.

The driver then came from the rear cab and got on at the front and announced the train as normal, which left about 5 minutes late.

As we left the station, it was quite clear that he was having trouble and it sounded like it kept cutting out and we weren't really moving hardly at all. We then entered the tunnel and continued to crawl for some distance before, thankfully, the train did proceed.

From then on, the train ran okay but never regained the time before I alighted.

Anyway - what would have happened if the train had broken down just inside the tunnel? Would we then be demanding to know why the driver (and/or FCC) let the train proceed when there had been a problem?

If so, how many trains would be cancelled unnecessarily every day - and is that what passengers would want instead?

 

[O L Leigh]

It was a factor, but their actions were entirely justifiable. Passengers were driven to opening doors and activating passenger alarms because in the two hours that it took another train to arrive they had no air-conditioning or toilets, and hardly any information regarding the situation.

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that FCC were blameless in this situation. The poor driver was basically left to fend for himself, deal with the failure, attend to the passengers and everything else.

What I am trying to highlight is that even the RAIB identify passenger action as causing delay and introducing risk. If they had decided to stay put and allowed the traincrew to prepare the train for movement by leaving the doors alone the train could have been moved sooner and much more safely. Just as the TOC has a role to play in facilitating the rescue, so do the passengers.

O L Leigh

 

[TheKnightWho]

The report into the incident is damning. It identifies many factors that contributed to the problem, almost all of which were the fault of FCC.







And so it goes on.

I don't disagree - I'm just saying that emotional arguments on either side are unhelpful and only serve to make people annoyed.

 

[O L Leigh]

The report into the incident is damning. It identifies many factors that contributed to the problem, almost all of which were the fault of FCC.

And so it goes on.

You are quoting selectively. I could just as easily do the same to illustrate the opposing view.

For example...

Such was the mood among passengers that doors were being re-opened as soon as the staff had returned to the front of the train. In turn, this resulted in further warning messages on the train management system display screen in the driving cab. This further delayed the movement of the train and increased the frustration of passengers, resulting in some of them leaving the train. Notices above the doors advise passengers to stay calm and not to leave the train unless instructed to do so, but there is also text and pictograms showing them how to evacuate themselves to track level (figure 15).

O L Leigh​

 

[broadgage]

IIRC, posters were put up at some FCC stations advising that some trains had been modified to give more standing room, this being done by replacing 2+3 seating with 2+2 in order not to provide larger seats, but to give a wider aisle for more standing.
Services from Catford certainly have fewer seats and more standing room than formerly.

It is an observed fact that new commuter trains tend to be optimised for standing, a good example being those presently used on London overground, and the proposed units for Crossrail.

My remarks regarding the emergency lighting failing after about 10 minutes was from personal observation, more than once, not conjecture or assumption.

The brief extinction of the emergency lighting sounds poor design, but is arguably acceptable if only briefly, especialy as passengers were warned it would happen.
My remarks, refer to the complete failure of emergency lighting which is a serious matter if for some hours in a tunnel.

 

[bronzeonion]

Some of you have probably predicted I'd say this!

That delay would be nowhere near as long if the train had a guard!

 

[yorkie]

Some of you have probably predicted I'd say this!

That delay would be nowhere near as long if the train had a guard!

We've had enough "DOO vs guards" arguments to last us a lifetime. But how far do you go, a guard in each 4-coach unit (so 3 on a 12-car train), or a guard at each pair of doors preventing people opening them? And how do you pay for all this, increased fares presumably...

 

[Lockwood]

A quick quotation for people quoting the report to justify thier position:

The RAIB does not establish blame or liability

Or, to quote newer reports:

Accordingly, it is inappropriate that RAIB reports should be used to assign fault
or blame, or determine liability, since neither the investigation nor the reporting
process has been undertaken for that purpose.

Therefore, something deep and meaningful. QED.

 

[jon0844]

Some of you have probably predicted I'd say this!

That delay would be nowhere near as long if the train had a guard!

If people were re-opening doors then, frankly, even a guard would have stood little to no chance of controlling these people.

It sounds like you'd need to scramble a lot of staff or BTP to manage things once people ignored what they were being told (and if they weren't told everything in this case, I refer more generally to the other incidents where people just got off).

 

[starrymarkb]

Clearly they don't place the majority of blame on them, though, hence the fine.

IIRC you can't use anything from the RAIB (or indeed the MAIB and AAIB) in evidence in a prosecution. This is to avoid those involved withholding evidence that could lead to an improvement in safety