Great Western Coffee Shop

All across the Great Western territory => The Wider Picture in the United Kingdom => Topic started by: Chris from Nailsea on August 17, 2010, 20:04:42



Title: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 17, 2010, 20:04:42
From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-11006018):

Quote
Fourteen people have been hurt, three critically injured, as a train derailed in a crash with a lorry on a level crossing in Suffolk.

The two-carriage diesel passenger train collided with the heavy goods vehicle on Bures Road in Little Cornard, Sudbury, at about 1735 BST.

Network Rail said the train driver of the 1731 service from Sudbury to Marks Tey was one of the three seriously ill.

A 38-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving.

A sewage tanker hit the train on the level crossing at Sewage Works Lane.

Suffolk Police have described it as a "major incident". Fire crews are also at the scene.

A police spokeswoman said there were three casualties who could not be moved from the train and it is believed they have suffered spinal injuries.

A fire service spokeswoman said it had been the rear of the train's two carriages which derailed in the crash. Both train carriages remained upright.

Network Rail said the level crossing is on private land and has a locked gate on it.

It said anyone wanting to go across the level crossing needed to call the signaller to raise the gates. However, it said it had not received any calls prior to the crash.

A doctor and medical team went on board the train to provide triage for casualties.

The train was believed to be carrying more than 20 passengers, about 10 of whom were initially described as "walking wounded".

Sharon Smith, 49, who was in her nearby garden when the crash happened, said: "I heard a massive bang. Everybody in the area ran to see what happened. At first I thought it was a car accident. But when I ran up the road I could see two carriages had hit a tanker."

She said many passengers got out of the train and gathered at the sides of the road.

Ms Smith said she stood in the road to help clear traffic.

Network Rail said in a statement: "The crossing is a user-worked crossing with gates and telephone. The Network Rail signaller did not receive a phone call from the user of the crossing. British Transport Police are on scene and co-ordinating the response."


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: inspector_blakey on August 17, 2010, 20:08:06
From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-11006018):

Quote
Network Rail said in a statement: "The crossing is a user-worked crossing with gates and telephone. The Network Rail signaller did not receive a phone call from the user of the crossing. British Transport Police are on scene and co-ordinating the response."

So, on the face of it another open-and-shut case of road user stupidity causing a rail accident then.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 17, 2010, 20:09:10
From the BTP press release (http://www.btp.presscentre.com/Media-Releases/LEVEL-CROSSING-INCIDENT-SUDBURY-SUFFOLK-UPDATE-20-05-10a1.aspx):

Quote
LEVEL CROSSING INCIDENT - SUDBURY, SUFFOLK - UPDATE 20.05

British Transport Police (BTP) can confirm that a train has struck a large tanker, believed to be a sewage tanker, at an unmanned level crossing in Sudbury, Suffolk.

BTP was alerted at 5.37pm today, Tuesday, 17 August, and police and emergency services are attending the scene.  BTP has a senior detective on scene.

It is believed that there are at least 10 walking wounded and three more seriously injured.

A 38-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving following the collision.

The train, the 1731 National Express East Anglia service, was travelling between Sudbury and Marks Tey with around 20 passengers on board.

The crossing is a user-worked crossing with gates and telephone.

This press release will be updated as soon as more information becomes available.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 17, 2010, 20:41:36
An update to the BTP press release:

Quote
LEVEL CROSSING INCIDENT SUDBURY, SUFFOLK - UPDATE 20.15

It is believed that there were 18 casualties, two with life threatening injuries.  Two more are described as ^serious^ and there are 14 walking wounded.  All Casualities are being treated at either Colchester General or Addenbrooke Hospital.

An update to the report, from the BBC:

Quote
Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk

Eighteen people have been hurt, four seriously injured, as a train derailed in a crash with a lorry on a level crossing in Suffolk.

Network Rail said the train driver of the 1731 service from Sudbury to Marks Tey was one of four seriously ill.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: eightf48544 on August 17, 2010, 20:44:57
Rather than just "Dangerous Driving" there should be a more specific offence of "Abuse of a Level Crossing Causing an Accident with a Train" or something on those lines, to emphasise the unique seriousness of the of the offence.



Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Electric train on August 17, 2010, 20:58:09
Rather than just "Dangerous Driving" there should be a more specific offence of "Abuse of a Level Crossing Causing an Accident with a Train" or something on those lines, to emphasise the unique seriousness of the of the offence.
A better one in this case, if the lorry driver is at fault, would be prosecution under the 1974 Health and Safety Act


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: JayMac on August 17, 2010, 21:39:34
Whether the prosecution is for dangerous driving under The Road Traffic Act 1988 or a breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, the sentencing options are almost identical:

Unlimited fine and up to 2 years imprisonment upon indictment to Crown Court.

or

Up to 6 months (12 for HSaW conviction) and unlimited fine upon summary conviction in a Magistrates Court.

Conviction for dangerous driving also comes with an obligatory minimum 1 year driving ban.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on August 17, 2010, 22:03:07
i know this is slightly off topic, however if there were any deaths would this be covered by section 1 of the road traffic act or manslaughter/murder charges


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 17, 2010, 22:22:32
Thankfully, there aren't any deaths - but it would be a charge of 'causing death by dangerous driving', rather than murder: no intent.  :-X


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: paul7575 on August 17, 2010, 22:32:53
There's also the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, Section 32-34 dealing with 'endangering the lives of persons on the railway'.  Max sentence 2 years by neglect, life with intent. 

AIUI this is the offence quoted on Network Rail's 'Trackoff' scheme literature for parents and teachers...

Paul


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Ollie on August 18, 2010, 00:33:52
It's incidents like this that piss me off.

My thoughts to those that were on the train and the families.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: JayMac on August 18, 2010, 00:43:56
The BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-11006018) story has been further updated with video and an eyewitness account from a passenger.

Also Sky News report including video can be found here (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Suffolk-Train-Crash-Two-Critically-Injured-After-Accident-Involving-Sewage-Tanker-At-Crossing/Article/201008315694385?lpos=UK_News_First_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15694385_Suffolk_Train_Crash%3A_Two_Critically_Injured_After_Accident_Involving_Sewage_Tanker_At_Crossing).


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 18, 2010, 02:56:39
In another incident, on the same day, in Germany - from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11004596):

Quote
German train crashes into rubbish truck

At least 15 people were hurt, one seriously, when a train crashed into a truck after it slid down a hill and onto railway tracks.

The inter-city train travelling between Frankfurt and Paris partially derailed when it hit the lorry carrying bins, officials said.

The train was not travelling at high speed when the collision happened, 80 miles (130km) southwest of Frankfurt.

The driver of the truck was seriously injured. He was flown to hospital.

A British citizen and employees of the railway were among those lightly injured, reports said.

Trains were being re-routed via Strasbourg and the line will be closed for at least a day, police said.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: grahame on August 18, 2010, 06:28:45
Many of train / road vehicle collisions at level crossings do turn out to be the negligent fault of person in charge of the road vehicle,  and indeed that line of enquiry appears to be being actively followed in this case. However, whilst we may talk about the generallity of how negligent people in charge of vehicles show be dealt with, we cannot at this point link those generalities to the specific case.   

Should it turn out - in the case of any road / rail collision - that someone was criminally negligent, then - yes - the full weight of the law should be thrown at them.  But there isn't always a negligent road driver - I'm sure regulars here will recall at least one incident in the last couple of years where causes turned out to be very different.   I also note that there's a contradiction (perhaps just a technical one) even in the reports so far - it's even unclear to me if the train ran into the road vehicle, or the road vehicle ran into the train.

Whatever it turns out to be ... of course ... huge sympathies to everyone who has been injured, and a very careful look to see how this incident can be learned from / used to help reduce similar future incidents.  Be that appropriate system changes, or throwing "the book" at someone.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: 158747 on August 18, 2010, 09:43:27
 

Should it turn out - in the case of any road / rail collision - that someone was criminally negligent, then - yes - the full weight of the law should be thrown at them.  But there isn't always a negligent road driver - I'm sure regulars here will recall at least one incident in the last couple of years where causes turned out to be very different.   I also note that there's a contradiction (perhaps just a technical one) even in the reports so far - it's even unclear to me if the train ran into the road vehicle, or the road vehicle ran into the train.

It would appear that the train ran into the road vehicle due to the damage to the front cab of the train.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: grahame on August 18, 2010, 10:48:29
It would appear that the train ran into the road vehicle due to the damage to the front cab of the train.

Indeed most probable, but quoting the BBC:

Quote
A sewage tanker hit the train ...

Let's not make assumptions!   I suspect that both might have been moving.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: vacman on August 18, 2010, 11:32:24
This accident sorry, negligent stupid act, is looking very much the fault of the lorry driver as he didn't phone the signalman, on the guardians website is a picture of the crossing showing the clear "Stop" sign for road users and underneath all the instructions for using the crossing, lets hope they throw the book at this idiot! It looks as if the unit could be a write off looking at the state of the cab, I believe NXEA are already short of DMU's!

Thank god no-one was killed!


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: grahame on August 18, 2010, 12:00:24
This accident sorry, negligent stupid act, is looking very much the fault of the lorry driver as he didn't phone the signalman, on the guardians website is a picture of the crossing showing the clear "Stop" sign for road users and underneath all the instructions for using the crossing, lets hope they throw the book at this idiot! It looks as if the unit could be a write off looking at the state of the cab, I believe NXEA are already short of DMU's!

Thank god no-one was killed!

The operators of this forum are in no position to pass judgement, and would appreciate it if members didn't pass judgement either until due process has been carried through.  I wonder if anyone who's commented has ever actually looked at the crossing involved ...

Having said that - yes - the majority of level crossing collisions between pedestrians or vehicles and trains do turn out to be caused by the vehicle driver or pedestrian, and if there's negligence there then the appropriate weight of the law should be brought to bear.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Electric train on August 18, 2010, 19:36:28
The tanker was full of "slurry"  :o   Looking at the footage of the BBC my assumption is the train hit the tanker more or less dead center of the trailer, a 30 tonne or so road trailer would be almost like hitting a brick wall, from the footage you can see how resilient modern(ish) rail vehicles are.

The what happened, were there any breaches of procedure etc and recommendations for this crossing and others with a similar levels of road and rail traffic will be addressed by RAIB, HMRI Police etc


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: JayMac on August 18, 2010, 20:56:45
I concur that this is not the place to speculate as to the causes/reasons for the collision. I may've contributed to the speculation by pointing out the possible charges and potential sentences that can be handed down. However, I did so, in generality, to compare the possible charges and show that the sentencing options for someone found guilty of these charges are very similar.

As others have said, in this case, and indeed others of a similar nature, the investigating authorities are tasked with finding out what happened, why, how and where to apportion blame etc. Speculating here on the forum or passing judgement will achieve nothing.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: JayMac on August 18, 2010, 23:15:28
BBC Look East led their evening bulletin tonight (18/08/2010) with a news report on the collision.

Video can be found here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/england/realmedia/lookeast/norwich/bb/lookeast_16x9_bb.asx).


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 19, 2010, 01:29:56
From the BTP press release (http://www.btp.presscentre.com/Media-Releases/SUDBURY-TRAIN-INCIDENT-ARREST-UPDATE-5-30PM-10b2.aspx):

Quote
SUDBURY TRAIN INCIDENT - ARREST UPDATE 5.30PM

The driver of the tanker involved in a collision with a train near Sudbury in Suffolk will remain in custody overnight after the court granted British Transport Police detectives more time to question him.

The 38-year-old man from Ely, Cambridgeshire is being questioned on suspicion of endangering safety on the railway.

A train struck a large sewage tanker carrying ^sludge^, at an unmanned level crossing near Sudbury, Suffolk on Tuesday, 17 August.  BTP was called to the incident at 5.37pm, where 21 people were injured.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 19, 2010, 16:03:11
A video news report, from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11026816):

Quote
Tanker cleared from Suffolk train crash site

The sewage tanker involved in a crash in which a train was derailed has been removed from the scene.

Work has been going on to re-open the rail line in Suffolk where a train crashed, injuring 21 people.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Tim on August 19, 2010, 16:36:14
When there is an accident that proves to be the fault of a train driver (a SPAD for example).  There is a clamour to prosecute the TOC and or NR.  Look at what happened to Thames Trains.  presumably here there is a case for prosecuting the lorry driver's employer.  If the rail crossing was a regular acess point to the sewage works then it was a known hazzard and the water company ought to have taken steps to mitigate it.  I wonder if their drivers had been told how to use the crossing and or whether their behaviour on it had been monitored.  If they were train drivers not following the correct procedure wrt the signallers would have been noted and severly dealt with/   


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Electric train on August 19, 2010, 18:20:45
When there is an accident that proves to be the fault of a train driver (a SPAD for example).  There is a clamour to prosecute the TOC and or NR.  Look at what happened to Thames Trains.  presumably here there is a case for prosecuting the lorry driver's employer.  If the rail crossing was a regular acess point to the sewage works then it was a known hazzard and the water company ought to have taken steps to mitigate it.  I wonder if their drivers had been told how to use the crossing and or whether their behaviour on it had been monitored.  If they were train drivers not following the correct procedure wrt the signallers would have been noted and severly dealt with/   

The HSE seem to be very reluctant to tackle what you mention, in part I think because operating a road vehicle is covered by it own legislation which is outside the remit of the HSE.  The defense of the employer is that this type or level crossing is in "common use" and that they check the competence of their drivers on a regular bases in accordance with the road traffic act


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: JayMac on August 19, 2010, 20:10:27
Further update from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-11021364).

Looks like the lorry driver has been charged under Section 34 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. I can't imagine its section 32 or 33, as they both require intent.


Section 34 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861:

Whosoever, by any unlawful act, or by any wilful omission or neglect, shall endanger or cause to be endangered the safety of any person conveyed or being in or upon a railway, or shall aid or assist therein, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, . .


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 19, 2010, 20:31:25
Agreed: that looks like Section 34 to me: 'Doing or omitting anything to endanger passengers by railway'.



Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: JayMac on August 19, 2010, 20:37:37
I'm wondering whether the police had to charge the driver under that act rather than The Road Traffic Act 1988 seeing as the level crossing wasn't on the public highway?


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Phil on August 19, 2010, 21:01:24
More here from the Daily Express

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/194264/Man-charged-over-crash-at-crossing/


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 20, 2010, 17:52:15
From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-11038305):

Quote
Driver of sewage tanker in Suffolk train crash in court

The 38-year-old driver of a tanker involved in a collision with a train in Suffolk has appeared in court charged with endangering safety on the railway.

Arvydas Bartasius, of Hawthorn Close, Ely, Cambridgeshire, appeared before Bury St Edmunds Magistrates' Court.

The incident happened at an unmanned level crossing near Sudbury when the first of the train's two carriages was derailed, injuring 22 people.

Mr Bartasius was remanded on conditional bail until 1 October.

The 1731 BST National Express East Anglia service was thought to be travelling between 50mph and 60mph as it made its way from Sudbury in Suffolk to Marks Tey in Essex when it was in collision with the tanker.

A 58-year-old passenger remains in a "serious but stable" condition at Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge. Twenty-one other people were injured.

The lorry was removed from the line shortly after midnight on Wednesday and railway services on the line resumed on Friday morning.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 25, 2010, 00:08:38
From the RAIB (http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/current_investigations_register/100817_sudbury.cfm):

Quote
Investigation into a collision between a passenger train and a lorry on a level crossing near Sudbury, Suffolk, on 17 August 2010

The RAIB is carrying out an investigation into a collision that occurred at Sewage Works Lane level crossing, 1.5 miles south of Sudbury in Suffolk, on 17 August 2010.

The accident occurred at around 17:35 hrs when train 2T27, the 17:31 hrs service from Sudbury to Marks Tey, struck the trailer of a loaded articulated tanker lorry on the crossing, causing the leading carriage of the two-car class 156 diesel multiple unit to derail.

There were about 19 passengers on the train and two crew members (driver and conductor).  It is reported that all persons on the train received injuries as a consequence of the impact with one passenger sustaining critical injuries.

The impact separated the tractor unit of the lorry from the tank causing a major spillage of the tank^s contents.  Some diesel fuel was also released during the accident.

Sewage Works Lane crossing is a ^user worked crossing^, as is often found at the intersections between the railway and minor (usually private) roads.  At all such crossings the road user is required to operate gates or barriers when crossing the railway.

No lights or audible alarms were provided at the crossing to warn of the approach of trains.  However, the crossing was provided with telephones to enable the drivers of vehicles to call the signaller to confirm if it was safe to cross.

The RAIB^s investigation is independent of any investigations by the British Transport Police and the safety authority (the Office of Rail Regulation).

The RAIB will publish a report, including any recommendations to improve safety, at the conclusion of its investigation. This report will be available on the RAIB website.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 30, 2010, 11:05:22
From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-11655183):

Quote
Driver of tanker in Suffolk train crash pleads guilty

The driver of a tanker involved in a crash with a train in Suffolk has admitted endangering safety on the railway.

The first of the train's two carriages was derailed, injuring 22 people, at an unmanned level crossing near Sudbury on 17 August.

Arvydas Bartasius, 38, of Hawthorn Close, Ely, Cambridgeshire, appeared at Ipswich Crown Court.

Bartasius will return to the court for sentencing on 26 November.

The 1731 BST National Express East Anglia service was thought to be travelling between 50mph and 60mph as it made its way from Sudbury in Suffolk to Marks Tey in Essex when it was in collision with the tanker.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Electric train on October 30, 2010, 12:46:32
My guess he gets a suspended sentence and or fine, he is unlikely to loose his license as the incident was not on a public highway


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 26, 2010, 13:09:10
It seems that, quite rightly, the courts have come down quite hard on the lorry driver as he's been jailed for 15 months, even after he plead guilt.

Quote from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11845696
Suffolk train crash tanker driver jailed

The driver of a sewage tanker which collided with a train in Suffolk has been jailed for 15 months.

Arvydas Bartasius, 38, of Hawthorn Close, Ely, Cambridgeshire, admitted endangering safety on the railway.

Ipswich Crown Court heard two train carriages were derailed and 21 people injured in the incident near Sudbury.

Bartasius's tanker collided with a National Express East Anglia train from Sudbury to Marks Tey, in Essex, at an unmanned level crossing on 17 August.

Bartasius was also disqualified from driving for three years.

The court heard that Bartasius drove on to a level crossing and a passenger train travelling at an estimated 50mph hit his tanker.

TLM


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 11, 2011, 21:46:16
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into a collision between an articulated tanker and a passenger train at Sewage Works Lane user worked crossing near Sudbury, Suffolk on 17 August 2010. The RAIB has made six recommendations.

The full report (http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/110811_R142011_Sewage_Works_Lane.pdf) is available on the RAIB website.


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: inspector_blakey on August 11, 2011, 22:42:31
Looks like that RAIB has made a response of sorts to the criticism they've received in the past about the length of time it takes them to publish reports... They're getting exceedingly good at publishing them just a few days before the nominal one-year deadline  ::)


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 11, 2011, 22:43:57
Ah: you spotted that, too?  ;) :D ;D


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: inspector_blakey on August 12, 2011, 00:36:35
Actually it looks from the stats at Death by Health and Safety (http://www.deathbyhealthandsafety.co.uk/readaboutitbelatedly/index.html), who keep tabs on this sort of thing, that RAIB's 'moving annual average' (to borrow a term from the Passengers' Charter) has been just below the regulatory time limit for much of this year.

Maybe I'm being a little too cynical...


Title: Re: Eighteen hurt in train and lorry crash in Suffolk - 17 August 2010
Post by: ChrisB on August 16, 2011, 10:57:37
Maybe they've had budget cuts too, and are now working with fewer staff?



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