|
Title: Virgin to Sue Networkrail for Late Running Post by: eightf48544 on June 08, 2013, 22:19:47 Small piece in today's (Saturday) Guardian that Virgin may sue Networkrail for all the delays they are experiencing.
What's the point it's just more of my money going to the bearded one! Title: Re: Virgin to Sue Networkrail for Late Running Post by: SandTEngineer on June 08, 2013, 22:32:29 Small piece in today's (Saturday) Guardian that Virgin may sue Networkrail for all the delays they are experiencing. What's the point it's just more of my money going to the bearded one! ......but. If you had ordered something from a supplier and it only delivered 80% of what you ordered wouldn't you be chasing them for the missing bit or compensation if they couldn't supply it..... ::) Title: Re: Virgin to Sue Networkrail for Late Running Post by: eightf48544 on June 09, 2013, 10:40:46 If it were purely a commercial transaction. But there is so much of my money sloshing around in the railways I object to it being paid to commercial enterprise that is already extracting money from the railways.
The frachising system is broke and probably cannot be fixed. Title: Re: Virgin to Sue Networkrail for Late Running Post by: John R on June 09, 2013, 11:13:05 I think it's entirely reasonable. Virgin's reputation as a train operator is highly dependent on its reliability. And most passengers won't know or care if the reason they are horribly delayed is actually down to NR. And whilst NR will pay compensation for individual failures, it won't be paying compensation for passengers who get caught up in an incident and decide to drive next time, thus depriving Virgin of revenue.
To prove the point about reputational risk, a govt minister recently compared the performance of Virgin against East Coast (in an attempt to prove that the private sector was better, and why EC should be privatised). Did he split out the element of performance that related to the infrastructure provider in providing those figures? No, he used the headline numbers. So if the govt don't care who causes the delay (at least in their posturing to the public), you can understand why Virgin are unhappy when NR don't deliver. Title: Re: Virgin to Sue Networkrail for Late Running Post by: SandTEngineer on June 09, 2013, 11:33:01 If you spend a bit of time and watch the Open Train Times TD maps for the WCML Rugby (Kings Langley to Wolverton) area you see very often some very poor regulation of trains where locals are put out from the slows to the fasts right in front of on time fast trains. If you then check the schedules you will often see the local is late and anyway it could have proceeded on the slow line to the next junction without any further loss of time (and in lots of cases can actually make up time because of the way the junction signalling is designed).
Personal opinion from past experience of the signalling of trains on the WCML in the late 1970s shows that there would have been signaller freedom to make these choices but I think that the current NR train regulation rules must say that if a train is booked a certain route then it must go that way regardless of the overall knock on effect delay that will cause. ...and before anybody mentions it the WCML was far busier in the 1970s with (slow) freight traffic than it is now and it was a regular requirement to divert local passenger services to the fast lines to get around them. TD= Train Describer Open Train Times TD Maps http://www.opentraintimes.com/maps Train Schedules http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced Title: Re: Virgin to Sue Networkrail for Late Running Post by: JayMac on June 09, 2013, 11:48:54 From The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/network-rail-breached-contract-over-punctuality-complains-virgin-trains-8649263.html):
Quote Network Rail breached contract over punctuality, complains Virgin Trains West Coast main line company Virgin Trains is to take action against Network Rail (NR) over what it claims is breach of contract concerning train punctuality. Virgin's parent company Virgin Rail Group (VRG) said that any fine imposed on NR by rail regulators for failing to meet punctuality targets should be in the form of customer improvements. Both the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) and Virgin have been unhappy with NR's recent punctuality record, with the ORR announcing today that NR missed its long-distance train punctuality targets for 2012/13 by 4.5 percentage points. Virgin said it was "preparing enforcement action to bring punctuality improvements, following sustained poor performance by Network Rail, which we believe is a breach of contract and has deterred some customers from travelling and damaged our business". The case will be heard by a rail industry body - the Access Disputes Resolution Committee. VRG chief executive Tony Collins said: "NR has consistently failed to deliver what it is contracted to deliver. That has directly affected customers' experience, and their impression of rail travel. "So any penalties levied on NR should be in the form of tangible improvements that customers benefit from. There is really no benefit to NR, customers or VRG in having money leave the industry." He went on: "We have spent hundreds of millions of pounds on a fleet of reliable trains and we pay NR nearly ^200 million a year to maintain the West Coast line for us. We feel that we are not getting value for money in this respect and our customers have been let down and deserve more consistency. "We have made our case strongly over many years to NR, the ORR and government. But reluctantly we have taken this difficult decision on behalf of our customers." Virgin said NR had missed targets agreed with Virgin Trains over the last two years, and punctuality stood at 85.7 per cent in the most recent four-weekly period ending May 25, against a target of 88.0 per cent. Virgin said that more than 70 per cent of delays were as a result of NR infrastructure issues, with fewer than 15 per cent caused by Virgin Trains problems. The remaining delays were caused by other freight and passenger operators, Virgin said. It added that in the current financial year, starting in April, NR delays had added more than 1,000 hours (65,000 minutes) to Virgin Trains' customer journeys. A Network Rail spokesman said "We are not satisfied with the current performance of our infrastructure on the southern end of the West Coast line, which is one of Britain's most vital rail arteries, and we are working closely with Virgin and our other customers to improve the situation. "Today, there are twice as many trains using this line as a decade ago and, just like a busy motorway during rush hour, more trains mean that if something goes wrong, the knock-on effects can be significant." The spokesman went on: "Last year, we invited Virgin's chief operating officer Chris Gibb to join us on secondment so that he could better understand the operational challenges we face in running ever more trains on what is Europe's busiest mixed-use rail line. "His hugely insightful report made a number of recommendations, all of which we have accepted and will implement." The NR spokesman continued: "We have identified almost ^40 million of investment aimed at improving performance by targeting some of the most common causes of delay and our engineers have commissioned Siemens, one of Europe's leading engineering and technology companies, to work with us to implement a programme of improvements to overhead power lines. "We have also begun to erect better security fencing to cut delays caused by trespass and vandalism, which is a key concern. Some of the measures will benefit passengers in the next few months while others will require work over a sustained period of time." Network Rail make the good point that the assets are being heavily sweated by Virgin's very high frequency service. NR have less and less time to carry out maintenance. Also, despite the ^9 billion spent on the West Coast route to 2008, some parts of the southern end of the route received little modernisation due to cuts in the funding by government. There are parts of the route that still have 1960s signalling and overhead line equipment. It's doubtful though that Virgin will criticise the government. Won't do to upset them in the run up to a franchise renewal. So whilst Network Rail are certainly not blameless, I think the issues are more complex than merely NR failing in their duty to offer robust infrastructure to the train operators using the West Coast Main Line. Virgin need to understand that their very high frequency timetable leaves little room for routine maintenance. They also need to understand that those in government that hold the purse strings share some of the blame. I don't think legal action is the answer, Working together to resolve the issues is far better. I worry also that focus and funding is on HS2 to the detriment of the west Coast Main Line. This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |