Question 6 – 18 Jun 2020: Over-carries

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

There have been two (reported) incidents of passengers being over-carried at Trowbridge with train doors not being released. In view of it being multiple incidents coming to attention, it's likely to have happened elsewhere too. With few passengers getting on or off, and with train managers spending much more time in cabs, how are GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) ensuring against over-carries, and what steps are in place to get people back when it happens?  In both reported cases, the passenger concerned was significantly late on a key work journey, and were left feeling distinctly uncared-for when they managed to get off at the next station.

[Samyutha Bala]

Incidents such as this are uncommon and any station “fail to call” is classified as a ‘safety of the line’ incident and is taken very seriously with extensive follow-up to ensure it doesn’t happen again.  If you’re able to provide specific details (date and time) of the two instances mentioned, we would be happy to look into this.


The point that train managers/conductors are spending more time in cabs due to COVID-19 may well be true, but this would not cause a fail to call incident.


Of course, if a customer has been over-carried due to an error on our part (fail to call) we would absolutely provide alternatives to get them to their intended destination. In some instances, the quickest option may be a return train journey from the next station, but a taxi could also be provided if that wasn’t a viable option. 

[grahame]

Incidents such as this are uncommon and any station “fail to call” is classified as a ‘safety of the line’ incident and is taken very seriously with extensive follow-up to ensure it doesn’t happen again.  If you’re able to provide specific details (date and time) of the two instances mentioned, we would be happy to look into this.

Many thanks for the reply;  some further data and clarification.

I am aware of these incidents and in both cases the train DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains) call - not failures to call.  The problem was that the doors weren't released.   Both are 'in the system' already as individual cases.   

A similar problem occurred from time to time at Melksham in the past, when the platform was shorter and single door operation was being used.   The question last night was intended to be a generic one - "how do you prevent ..." what is something that's come back to attention, and perhaps is also happening from time to time at other places such as Avoncliff and (with Covid) has reared its head at full length platforms too.

Of course, if a customer has been over-carried due to an error on our part (fail to call) we would absolutely provide alternatives to get them to their intended destination. In some instances, the quickest option may be a return train journey from the next station, but a taxi could also be provided if that wasn’t a viable option. 

You would hope, wouldn't you?  Let's just say the situation on the ground has not always mirrored policy.  And, yes, sometimes the quickest option is a return train - which is also the most pragmatic option.  We run the danger of looking at individual cases here. Question remains "how do you avoid it happening?".

[Jason Ness]

Hi Grahame,

For the specific incidents, we have an obligation to make sure our customers reach their destination. If that’s not been possible, in this instance because someone was overcarried because we didn’t open the doors, staff at the next station (or via the help point if it’s an un-staffed station) should arrange for the customer to be returned to that destination station. That should always be by the quickest route, and it’s worth mentioning that for anyone travelling on a single, return, or weekly ticket, a delay of 15 minutes or more qualifies for Delay Repay compensation (that’s not available to ST holders at the moment I’m afraid).

I’d be interested to hear of any examples where we didn’t arrange that onward transport and/or customers felt ‘un-cared for’ – that should never be the case.

Operationally any failure to let customers disembark at the planned station is disappointing and, as you’d imagine, is something we take seriously. Our Operational teams will pick the issue up with the individual/s concerned to make sure there is no repeat and if there is anything specific that had led to the incidents, such as a shorter platform, or SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening), we’ll re-brief the wider team.

[stuving]

Is there a possibility of "doors enabled for opening but passenger didn't think they were or didn't manage to open one"? And consequently a grey area between that and "doors not enable for opening", which could lead to arguments with staff. The point is more that there may be an element of doubt in a staff member's mind about what really happened, rather than the underlying truth (which can't be determined at the time).

As to passengers being over-carried due to their own getting confused, I suspect it's a lot more common than you imagine - and if the passenger realises that's what happened they won't tell anyone. I'm not sure if any particularr stock has this problem with inside door buttons, but it was (presumably still is) on the outside of 165/6s. You would get used to the inside buttons lighting up when enabled, but might go for a long time never having to open a door from outside because someone inside always did it for you. So the first time you needed to open a door from the platform - no light! So you wait for the light ...

Of course differences between different stock can give the same confusion in the passenger's mind about "is this ready to open?". While logically you push the button anyway, fear of being trapped in a train can cause mild panic in some people, leading to actions that look irrational with hindsight.

[grahame]

Jason, and Stuving

The question raised was as a systemic one and not a new issue, though aspects of recent cases suggest that it's more likely to happen due to changes at present, and that cases may have different metrics.

Jason, I will drop you a separate note with what I know;  our public forum is not the place to publish stuff that can identify individual operational staff and/or public members unless they themselves post here in public.  The wider readership here can be reassured that there has been some follow up - at least in one case, though I suspect via a different route / department to Jason's.

Systemic question last week.  Good to have been brought up so that it can be wider-mentioned to operational teams for them to bear in mind the increased risk of over carrying in some circumstances in these different times.