Use of 5 carriage IEPs on Paddington to Cornwall services

[whole diary]

[broadgage]

Why should GWr be penalised when a short-form is no fault of theirs?
Hitachi are contracted to put out trains of the correct length & are penalised correctly if they fail to do so

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are the train operating company and should in my view be penalised for failing to deliver. Even if a supplier has failed in their duty to supply trains that work.

Are hitachi actually paying for their failure ? I have long suspected that they have found some "wiggle room" and are not paying up.

[ChrisB]

My understanding is that Hitachi have to pass credits against their lease fees each time they put out a short-form

[IndustryInsider]

Hitachi are contracted to put out trainsof the correct length & are penalised correctly if they fail to do so

How does that work if a major issue, outside of Hitachi’s control, prevents enough units from reaching a depot or stabling point in time to fully form services the next day?

[Timmer]

Not forgetting of course the passengers on the short formed train being penalised with an uncomfortable journey. But of course they don't matter.

[ChrisB]

Hitachi are contracted to put out trainsof the correct length & are penalised correctly if they fail to do so

How does that work if a major issue, outside of Hitachi’s control, prevents enough units from reaching a depot or stabling point in time to fully form services the next day?

There are presumably allowances made where a unit is involved in a fatality, etc

[IndustryInsider]

I think it’s fair to say that the lines were already blurred, but with the era of NRC’s they are even more blurred.  What chance does the poor passenger have!

[ChrisB]

None. Zilch. Nada.

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) hold a NRC requiring them to run specified services with rolling stock put out by Hitachi. If they are provided with x shortforms, then some services will be shortformed. That is the extent of the NRC.

The Government do not care about the passenger, just the cost to the taxpayer.

[TaplowGreen]

None. Zilch. Nada.

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) hold a NRC requiring them to run specified services with rolling stock put out by Hitachi. If they are provided with x shortforms, then some services will be shortformed. That is the extent of the NRC.

The Government do not care about the passenger, just the cost to the taxpayer.

A great way to encourage people back onto the trains........

[IndustryInsider]

Yes, given all the current obstacles, it amazes me that the return to rail has been so strong!

[stuving]

Hitachi are contracted to put out trainsof the correct length & are penalised correctly if they fail to do so

How does that work if a major issue, outside of Hitachi’s control, prevents enough units from reaching a depot or stabling point in time to fully form services the next day?

Well, for that you have to consult the TARA^▸ (Train Availability and Reliability Agreement) - specifically, Part A of Schedule 6 where clause 2.10 defines Relieved Set. Subclause (b) says:

a Set, other than a Vindicated Set, which is withdrawn from service wholly or mainly as a result of a Force Majeure Event in respect of which the TSP^▸ (Train Service Provider) is the Affected Party

But there's a bit more to it than that, of course. It might be a Vindicated Set, an Excused Set, or something else. An Obstructed Set, for example, is not available for use where the operator is at fault.

The ideological basis for this kind of legalistic approach to the provision of (in his case) rolling stock is that if the provider knows they will suffer a big financial penalty for every deficiency they will make sure it does not happen. Of course there is a big "or else", often left unexpressed, there. And most of the decisions the operator makes are in advance (based on experience/predictions/wishful thinking/internal politics/etc.), so by the time things go wrong they have few options to reduce their losses.

All that's left for the customers (or some of them) is the reassurance of saying "at least it's not costing us money". For the politicians, that's useful; they don't like being accused of failing to make things work and losing money too. For the operator, it gives them a payment they can't use at the time to replace the missing stock. And in any case, under current arrangements, the Treasury snatch that away. And for the passengers ...

[1st fan]

Yes, given all the current obstacles, it amazes me that the return to rail has been so strong!

The last short formed train I was on was packed and the reservations as a result were kaput. Someone who did have a seat gave it up because a they were a bloke and being chivalrous handed theirs to a woman. They also said later on the phone to someone that they found the seat uncomfortable.

I used the Banbury to Marylebone service recently and the first to turn up was rammed because of the Oxford - Didcot closure.

[IndustryInsider]

I used the Banbury to Marylebone service recently and the first to turn up was rammed because of the Oxford - Didcot closure.

Because of?  It hasn’t helped Chiltern of course, but their offering to the passengers has been pretty woeful in general since the pandemic IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).

[1st fan]

I used the Banbury to Marylebone service recently and the first to turn up was rammed because of the Oxford - Didcot closure.

Because of?  It hasn’t helped Chiltern of course, but their offering to the passengers has been pretty woeful in general since the pandemic IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).

Actually to be fair the train I had hoped to get was late arriving into Banbury, I don’t recall why that was - but it was late. The platform was full of Easter travellers and the tannoy announced that this next train was already very busy. They further announced that the service after that was scheduled to arrive on time shortly after this one and comparatively empty. Some passengers you might have thought would have then waited for the next train. Nope, they didn’t seem to care and pushed their way onto the train like it was the rush hour in London and this was the tube.

Virtually empty platform as the train left and people squashed up against the doors onboard. Next train turned up as promised after a short wait and it was much less busy. I got on and got a seat* quite happily.

*which didn’t require me to get my cushion out to be able sit comfortably on it.

[IndustryInsider]

Ah, if it was Easier then it was probably more due to the Euston closure for engineering work…and also the fact it was Easter and trains are much more likely to be busy.

It’s a well known fact that most passengers don’t trust or act upon good advice like that, though fair play to the team at Banbury for at least trying.

[TonyK]

Actually to be fair the train I had hoped to get was late arriving into Banbury, I don’t recall why that was - but it was late. The platform was full of Easter travellers and the tannoy announced that this next train was already very busy. They further announced that the service after that was scheduled to arrive on time shortly after this one and comparatively empty. Some passengers you might have thought would have then waited for the next train. Nope, they didn’t seem to care and pushed their way onto the train like it was the rush hour in London and this was the tube.

The bird in hand worth two in the bush. From some passengers' point of view, this train is here and will be going soon. The one behind could just break down, so I wouldn't get home. If this one breaks down, the one behind would be much use anyway, so I'll get on the rammed one and complain bitterly about overcrowding.