Network Rail to be prosecuted over Grayrigg crash

[michael769]

Network Rail is to be prosecuted over the Cumbrian rail crash at Grayrigg in which one passenger died.

The Office for Rail Regulation (ORR) said it had started criminal proceedings for a breach of health and safety law.

full article

 

[ainsworth74]

So what's the outcome if Network Rail are found guilty (which I would guess is likely)?

 

[Dave A]

A fine I'd imagine, that usually comes from the TOC's, Government or/and fare paying public...

 

[eMeS]

A fine I'd imagine, that usually comes from the TOC's, Government or/and fare paying public...

But, supposing the Board of Directors had to do Community Service in person, like the guys I've seen in Milton Keynes recently - I imagine the publicity would really sharpen up their act.

 

[michael769]

So what's the outcome if Network Rail are found guilty (which I would guess is likely)?

This is, of course, not its first offence for failing to maintain points properly so expect the fine to be somewhat higher this time around.

 

[amcluesent]

Surely it's down to the bloke who forgot to check the points?

 

[michael769]

Surely it's down to the bloke who forgot to check the points?

I am guessing that the ORR's role is to deal with offences by the industry rather than individuals.

This action would not prevent the CPS bringing prosecutions against individuals for their role in the incident. It all depends on what evidence is available.

Didn't some individuals end up in court over Potter Bar?

 

[HH]

Directors are responsible and can go to jail for such failures.

 

[sonorguy]

That would be the case if they being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter, but unless I've missed it that doesn't appear to be the case. NR are probably lucky if that's correct. The two managers held responsible for the Tebay incident got jailed for manslaughter.

Otherwise, and with the caveat that they may not be found guilty, expect a fine running into the millions.

 

[marks87]

Isn't there something a bit paradoxical imposing a fine on a company whose profits are used to make improvements to the very same infrastructure that led to the fine?

 

[tcm1106]

Isn't there something a bit paradoxical imposing a fine on a company whose profits are used to make improvements to the very same infrastructure that led to the fine?

Rather than being an outright fine where NR have to stump up the cash to the ORR, it is often the case that the money will be committed to an improvement project that is relative to the original 'offence'.
Forced improvements if you like.

 

[michael769]

That would be the case if they being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter,

The HSE don't seem to think so:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/corpmanslaughter/faqs.htm#directors
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Rather than being an outright fine where NR have to stump up the cash to the ORR, it is often the case that the money will be committed to an improvement project that is relative to the original 'offence'.
Forced improvements if you like.

I don't see how that is possible. All court imposed fines go to the general fund.

EDIT: ORR does have powers to impose penalties directly, in which case they would have discretion to decide what they did with the cash - but that is a very different process to a criminal prosecution where the courts are involved.

 

[sonorguy]

The HSE don't seem to think so:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/corpmanslaughter/faqs.htm#directors
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ooops my error, I meant the negligence manslaughter charge, which is what the two people involved in Tebay were charged with.

 

[HH]

Yes, it's about negligence. But negligence can be in the eye of the beholder...

http://www.hse.gov.uk/leadership/legislation.htm

 

[WelshBluebird]

Surely it's down to the bloke who forgot to check the points?

At the end of the day, the guy who forgot to check the points is just a small cog in the whole machine. From what I can remember from media coverage, is that there was a fair bit of talk about "pressure from above" and the people on the ground being rushed etc etc. While those things are not an excuse for not doing your job probably, they do give reasons.
Indeed, one of my current university modules is about safety critical systems, and there is an awful lot of emphasis on "organisational" factors and such. Mainly because if there are factors from above that formed part of the reason why the guy forgot to check the points, then it is likely that it will happen again with a different guy checking different points.

 

[Tin Rocket]

But, supposing the Board of Directors had to do Community Service in person, like the guys I've seen in Milton Keynes recently - I imagine the publicity would really sharpen up their act.

What guys did you see in milton keynes doing community service?

 

[Greeny]

I dislike commenting on issues of this nature but I’ll make an exception here.

Here is a prediction – NR will flood the Court with masses of impressive looking paperwork which will be managed by expensive lawyers, and the lowest graded person possible will be left to carry the can. If I’m wrong then I’ll just have to eat the old poo, won't I?.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

It's not strictly the crash they are being done for (hence not the workmen) but the fact that they were unable to provide enough resources to do the job (and hence endangered life).

....

Network Rail is facing a charge under section 3(1) of the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act.

The ORR said: "This results from the company's failure to provide and implement suitable and sufficient standards, procedures, guidance, training, tools and resources for the inspection and maintenance of fixed stretcher bar points."

....

However, are these not problems that the ORR has initiated by wanting NR to cut costs?

 

[IanXC]

However, are these not problems that the ORR has initiated by wanting NR to cut costs?

Yes but not costs that matter :roll: