ORR Press Release - Late-Notice Cancellations

[Taunton]

Unfortunately, that’s not the case, hence the problem. Any train cancelled from the timetable before 2200 the night before, for any reason (and regardless of what code is entered) is automatically removed from the timetable system for the next day and does not appear.

Also lots of services are cancelled at short notice for other reasons, including resource reasons as I mention above. What should happen with those?

I can't see what is so difficult here. The current timetable is 11 December 2022 to 20 May 2023. If it's in there and doesn't run, it's a cancellation. We are regularly told that new facilities completed etc cannot be introduced "except at the next timetable change". So there it is.

SWR have gross cancellations all this week because the track has fallen in. That needs to be counted in their cancellation figures because the trains ACTUALLY ARE CANCELLED.

 

[Starmill]

20 years ago, I used to ride around the country planning trips with nothing but a National Rail Timetable for information. The majority of trips went as planned. Imagine trying to do that now. Fine on some TOCs but certainly not Avati, Northern or TPE.

Indeed. A paper timetable and the information from station posters about the relevant engineering work or other special amendments should still be fine today. Alas.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

20 years ago, I used to ride around the country planning trips with nothing but a National Rail Timetable for information. The majority of trips went as planned. Imagine trying to do that now. Fine on some TOCs but certainly not Avati, Northern or TPE.

Exactly. There were still engineering alterations not always shown in the big book but they were 'whole day service' alterations, not chopping out a few random trains whilst most of the service still runs as per timetable.

 

[Bald Rick]

I feel like you're not really listening to the thing people are saying here. That's fine if you want to stick with whatever you understand the situation to be but there's little purpose in discussing the matter if so. I've explained above that ORR really are explicit about this, they don't want customers to see their trains vanishing a few hours before they're due to travel. They should be marked as cancelled, as this will allow them to claim compensation for delays, it will push notifications through to apps and on email from retailers who have scripts which do that (while simply deleting the train often won't trigger that), and it will not result in the station staff simply shrugging at the customer and saying "there's no train at that time, you're just mistaken". How you can object to this I don't understand.

I’m not objecting to it at all, in fact I agree with you. All I’m saying is that short of banning TOCs from cancelling trains at x days out before the day of service, it is going to be very complicated to do, and will have unintended consequences that may not be good for passenegrs.

(as an aside, it’s not clear what the ORR wants, actually)

Surely this is simple, take away p coding etc. Apply a simple measure of did the train run, as a passenger it doesn't help me if the reason was planned engineering works, weather or just that the TOC can't be bothered to run it.. i.e. no staff or technical failures.

Based on what timetable?

I can't see what is so difficult here. The current timetable is 11 December 2022 to 20 May 2023. If it's in there and doesn't run, it's a cancellation. We are regularly told that new facilities completed etc cannot be introduced "except at the next timetable change". So there it is.

Fair enough, that’s clear.

What happens if, say, a train operator needs to make minor amendments and cancels a service group due to run at, say xx10 each hour, and puts in an exact same service but running 2 minutes later throughout. Is that canclled? Because that is how it is often done in timetabling systems.

Or a train operator is instructed by its funder to reduce its base timetable mid timetable period?

 

[WelshBluebird]

What happens if, say, a train operator needs to make minor amendments and cancels a service group due to run at, say xx10 each hour, and puts in an exact same service but running 2 minutes later throughout. Is that canclled? Because that is how it is often done in timetabling systems.

Or a train operator is instructed by its funder to reduce its base timetable mid timetable period?

Surely this just needs a bit of a "what would a reasonable person" think test?

Your first example, no because the train still runs.
Your second example, yes because the timetable is literally being reduced.

 

[The Ham]

I’m not objecting to it at all, in fact I agree with you. All I’m saying is that short of banning TOCs from cancelling trains at x days out before the day of service, it is going to be very complicated to do, and will have unintended consequences that may not be good for passenegrs.

(as an aside, it’s not clear what the ORR wants, actually)




Based on what timetable?

Which is why I suggested a variable penalty depending on how close, for example anything cancelled less than 3 days from travel is counted in the cancellation but it scores 0.75 rather than anything on the day scoring 1.

As such it should encourage TOC's not to cancel too late, but also doesn't mean that they cancel stuff on the off chance that it needs to be removed due to unexpected circumstances.

What happens if, say, a train operator needs to make minor amendments and cancels a service group due to run at, say xx10 each hour, and puts in an exact same service but running 2 minutes later throughout. Is that canclled? Because that is how it is often done in timetabling systems.

Or a train operator is instructed by its funder to reduce its base timetable mid timetable period?

If they change it within 3 days of travel they may well suffer a penalty in either case, however in the case of the first it may well be that is managed on a case by case basis.

However on the latter, I'd seriously how that funders gave more than 3 days notice to reduce timetables. However even if that wasn't the case, after a maximum of 3 days it would no longer show up as an issue.

 

[Starmill]

All I’m saying is that short of banning TOCs from cancelling trains at x days out before the day of service, it is going to be very complicated to do, and will have unintended consequences that may not be good for passenegrs.

Why would that actually be a problem if that were the preferred solution? Changes must be notified at least 14 days before the date of departure wouldn't be too difficult to work around, as problematic as any kind of change after booking can be.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jan 2023 ==

as an aside, it’s not clear what the ORR wants, actually

Seems pretty clear to me. They don't want trains to be withdrawn from the schedule, but rather to be cancelled, if the only reason for their not running is a shortage of staff or trains. What they've written isn't "unclear" in this regard. But I've explained that several times now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why would that actually be a problem if that were the preferred solution? Changes must be notified at least 14 days before the date of departure wouldn't be too difficult to work around, as problematic as any kind of change after booking can be.

And nobody's saying trains can't be cancelled the day before. They just need to be shown in the timetable as cancelled, and Delay Repay and replacement transport to be applicable to them.

The issue is TOCs pulling the rug out from under peoples' plans when they've gone to bed the night before and providing no recompense nor alternatives for it, not that trains get cancelled, which even on a perfect railway they will from time to time.

Secondarily, it's also fine for a TOC to implement an emergency timetable with a bit of notice if they can't run their existing one for whatever reason.

 

[Starmill]

And nobody's saying trains can't be cancelled the day before. They just need to be shown in the timetable as cancelled, and Delay Repay and replacement transport to be applicable to them.

Exactly. And that's already done fairly often where trains are on social media and journey check as cancelled the day before but don't mysteriously vanish on the day. Just not on TPE.

 

[Taunton]

"The timetable should be a promise. Not a hope".

- Gerry Fiennes

 

[BenS123]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet but the ORR have posted the data of operators using p-codes and their effect on official cancellation scores between the 8th January and 4th February: https://twitter.com/railandroad/status/1626515705087639554

We have published data on pre-cancellations due to shortage of train crew or rolling stock ('p-coding'). The chart shows the operators reporting p-coded pre-cancellations and the impact on their official cancellations score for 8 Jan to 4 Feb 2023

 

[Snow1964]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet but the ORR have posted the data of operators using p-codes and their effect on official cancellation scores between the 8th January and 4th February: https://twitter.com/railandroad/status/1626515705087639554


View attachment 129199

Unbelievable Transpennine at 23.7 percent cancellations

But more marked is no P canx for others like GWR which just reflects how different they are

 

[James90012]

Caught out by the P-coding nonsense today. LNER train completely removed from the timetable before all the chaos today. No information from LNER to inform it had been cancelled and didn't show up on the boards at KGX as cancelled.

Not customer focused at all.

 

[Watershed]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet but the ORR have posted the data of operators using p-codes and their effect on official cancellation scores between the 8th January and 4th February: https://twitter.com/railandroad/status/1626515705087639554


View attachment 129199

Just goes to show what people have been saying for a long time, about the utterly misleading statistics and information TPE are giving out.

GC are also at it, and given their general stinginess, it wouldn't surprise me if they also wrongly refuse delay compensation claims - (note, they don't even offer Delay Repay!) for P-coded trains.

 

[hello]

Cross country are not on that chart

 

[Watershed]

Cross country are not on that chart

They were evidently one of the TOCs that told the ORR they did not P-code any trains due to resource unavailability.

 

[Snow1964]

The data shows all 56 P-coded Grand Central were due to lack of rolling stock, none due to lack of staff

For Transpennine, none due to rolling stock, but 312 part P-codes due to lack of staff and a whopping 1048 P-codes due to lack of staff.

The 1360 P-codes for Transpennine works out at 48.6 trains per day due to staff shortages, as data is 28 day period.

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/2180/passenger-rail-performance-cancellations-data.pdf

 

[Watershed]

The data shows all 56 P-coded Grand Central were due to lack of rolling stock, none due to lack of staff

For Transpennine, none due to rolling stock, but 312 part P-codes due to lack of staff and a whopping 1048 P-codes due to lack of staff.

The 1360 P-codes for Transpennine works out at 48.6 trains per day due to staff shortages, as data is 28 day period.

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/2180/passenger-rail-performance-cancellations-data.pdf

That sounds about right. When you consider the fact that their Sunday timetable has been heavily reduced for well over a year now, the true statistics on Monday-Saturdays are even worse.

 

[Iskra]

A BBC article has arisen on the same topic- good to see the BBC piling on the pressure and MP's from both main parties calling for the franchise to end with no extension. (I appreciate that won't solve the problem however).

Transpennine: True extent of cancellations revealed

The rail franchise pulled far more trains than any other operator, figures released by the regulator show.

www.bbc.co.uk

Transpennine: True extent of cancellations revealed​

• • Published
    3 hours ago

Share

IMAGE SOURCE,PA MEDIA
By Karen Hoggan & Katy Austin
Business reporter & Transport correspondent

The true extent of cancellations made by the Transpennine Express rail franchise has been revealed in figures published by the rail regulator.
In a four-week period the company cancelled 1,048 trains before 22:30 GMT on the day before they were due to run, and part of the route on a further 312.
Because the announcements were not made on the day, these cancellations were not included in official statistics.
Transpennine has said such decisions were "not taken lightly".
Usually these pre-planned cancellations - also called P-coding advance cancellations - are used when an emergency timetable is needed in response to poor weather or damage to rail infrastructure.
However, in each case the Transpennine trains, which operate across the North of England and into Scotland, were cancelled due to a shortage of available train crew.
The number of cancellations it made in this way far outstripped any other rail operator in the four weeks to 4 February. For example, government-owned Northern recorded 182 full cancellations, Transport for Wales 30 and LNER 17 - all attributed to staff shortages.

• Labour: Remove Transpennine Express rail contract
• Under-fire train boss apologises for poor services

Releasing the figures the Office of Road and Rail (ORR) regulator said Transpennine's cancellations score for that period jumps from an official 8.9% to 23.7% when P-coding was taken into account.
Transpennine has previously said it only resorted to pre-planned cancellations "when resources are not available to cover advertised services in order to maximise advance notice of service changes for customers".
It blamed the "combined impact of prolonged higher-than-usual sickness levels, the significant driver training programme to facilitate the delivery of the Transpennine route upgrade and an aligned lack of a driver overtime agreement"
"[This has] led to the need to remove services from the timetable on a day-by-day basis through pre-planned cancellations."
However, the practice has come under fire from the ORR which published these figures for the first time on Friday.
In January the regulator said cancellations were at "record levels" and its investigation had "confirmed a further gap between cancellations statistics and the passenger experience".
It said this was "driven by an increased number of unrecorded 'pre-cancellations'".
"For a passenger this could mean that a train they expected to catch when they went to bed can disappear from the timetable by the time they leave for the station unaware that the train has been cancelled."
Labour and some Conservative MPs have called for Transpennine's contract, which expires on 28 May, to be withdrawn.
Last month Labour's shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh said the service had "never been worse".
Anthony Smith, chief executive of the independent watchdog Transport Focus, said passengers were left "confused and frustrated" when a train they expected to catch was cancelled the day before they were due to travel, and may well be surprised to find that this doesn't count as a cancellation.
"Things like this leave a sour taste in the mouth - and damage trust in the railway. The scale of this so-called 'P-coding' on some operators in recent months has highlighted the problem. We are pleased to be contributing the passenger voice in industry discussions about how to address the regulator's

 

[Parjon]

We still need a full audit of the financial implications of prior misreporting of cancellations.

We need to know if more public money than was due found its way into private hands as a result of these figures.

 

[PG]

We still need a full audit of the financial implications of prior misreporting of cancellations.

We need to know if more public money than was due found its way into private hands as a result of these figures.

Indeed. There are certainly striking similarities with the misreporting which went on at Southeastern resulting in the OLR taking over.

 

[Watershed]

We still need a full audit of the financial implications of prior misreporting of cancellations.

We need to know if more public money than was due found its way into private hands as a result of these figures.

The financial implication is that larger performance fees have been paid, and will continue to be paid, to FirstGroup than would otherwise be the case.

But don't get too excited. Firstly, performance fees under the NRCs are loose change in the grand scale of things - we are talking about something in the region of perhaps £0.5-1m per year. In other words, the amount in question is nowhere near the irregularities that happened over at SE.

More importantly, whilst TPE misrepresented the public statistics, the DfT has fully sanctioned this practice and so there is no misrepresentation as far as the DfT is concerned.

In essence, P-coding was agreed as the mechanism through which FG would be indemnified against the poor performance that has resulted from the financial decisions that the DfT has imposed (for example, barring TPE from offering a new RDW agreement on the same terms as before, and preventing them from making any pay offer at all to drivers up until very recently).

So although this means that the taxpayer is essentially just giving FG a load of money for nothing, you can hardly expect FG to be judged on its performance when the DfT has stopped it from taking the steps that would be necessary to improve things - i.e. increasing staff availability by getting RDW and a pay deal over the line, and/or reducing the timetable.

Essentially the DfT is wasting taxpayers' money because of indecision, parsimony, and the desire not to produce negative headlines, as happened when Avanti reduced their timetable.

 

[Horizon22]

They were evidently one of the TOCs that told the ORR they did not P-code any trains due to resource unavailability.

Only 7 of the 23 TOCs did, according to the report.

23 out of 24 train operators reported to ORR their number of “P*-coded” pre-cancellations in period 11. The only operator who did not report data by the specified deadline was Caledonian Sleeper.

Of the operators that supplied data, seven reported resource availability shortage “P*- coded” pre-cancellations. Only these operators are shown in the table and chart below as other operators’ official cancellations score is unchanged.

They should only really used for very late notice infrastructure / weather / extreme issues for Day B late on Day A. What TPE use it for is pretty shocking, so hardly surprising the ORR has stepped in.

 

[Parjon]

This has been going on so long that the question of the ORR is why they only stepped in when the press attention was focused. And why their intervention has been so weak and indulgent.

The press need to once again take this out of their hands by now asking the money related questions.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Feb 2023 ==

The financial implication is that larger performance fees have been paid, and will continue to be paid, to FirstGroup than would otherwise be the case.

But don't get too excited. Firstly, performance fees under the NRCs are loose change in the grand scale of things - we are talking about something in the region of perhaps £0.5-1m per year.

And someone claiming £35 a week in benefits they are not entitled to is also spare change. It doesn't mean they don't get prosecuted for claiming what they know they are not entitled to.

Whether the amount involved is "exciting" is irrelevant. Whether there has been any wrongful claim on public money needs to be established or ruled out. There are follow up questions depending on the answer.

 

[PM77]

Just goes to show what people have been saying for a long time, about the utterly misleading statistics and information TPE are giving out.

GC are also at it, and given their general stinginess, it wouldn't surprise me if they also wrongly refuse delay compensation claims - (note, they don't even offer Delay Repay!) for P-coded trains.

You can still claim, but you have to manually input the train times as their system only shows "timetabled" trains. I've only been disputed once, when they stated I could have caught another cancelled service!! CCF and Trust to the rescue, although open train times shows the same details.

 

[gazzaa2]

Anyone know why Northern are so up and down? Cancellations galore this week (and today) after running a relatively good service the last month or so.

At least with TPEX you know it's awful day in day out. I think it's mad people actually buy tickets with them.

 

[Iskra]

Anyone know why Northern are so up and down? Cancellations galore this week (and today) after running a relatively good service the last month or so.

At least with TPEX you know it's awful day in day out.

Possibly related to staff being prepared to work overtime in the wake of strikes in order to make up their pay-packets. It's also half-term week, so people may prefer their days off with their children rather than working.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

This practice used to aided and abetted by NR as it improves PPM and that used to drive the bonus scheme but that was a few years back so may no longer be in play.

Cant see how TPE will earn any performance fees but DfT haven't published and financial data for over six months and i suspect now covid is in the background they wont update the tables that used to show this information.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Performance fees in an NRC are not train performance fees - they are contract performance fees.

There are several elements to that performance fee - co-operating with NR/DfT being one and then there is one about keeping to the DfT budget. Train performance is not the dominating factor in whether you get a performance fee.

And the fee is only one way - there are no penalty fees levied on the operator.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Performance fees in an NRC are not train performance fees - they are contract performance fees.

There are several elements to that performance fee - co-operating with NR/DfT being one and then there is one about keeping to the DfT budget. Train performance is not the dominating factor in whether you get a performance fee.

And the fee is only one way - there are no penalty fees levied on the operator.

Indeed but the criteria are Operational Performance, Customer Experience and Financial Performance and all three of those are inter related I would suggest. I know there are some "soft" metrics as well which will be very subjective and one would imagine introducing the new stock was probably in there. Then will the industrial disputes be excluded as driven by DfT restraints on pay awards means they will say its been out of their control.

As i say its speaks volumes that teh DfT haven't released any financial data sine July 22.