South Hampshire Rail Users (SHRUG)

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

What worries me is that someone is spending an awful lot of time writing these "articles" which are probably just being laughed at by SWT^▸ (South West Trains) and other user groups (such as ourselves).

I assume hope they automate the list of AXED services 

I agree, Brucey. With friends like these, who needs enemas?

[inspector_blakey]

I assume hope they automate the list of AXED services 

I don't think they do: if you can face trawling through the fine print I seem to recall there's a disclaimer tucked away somewhere which basically says that the lists of services AXED due to DUFF STOCK and passengers KICKED OFF for OPERATIONAL CONVENIENCE are not comprehensive because they're based on reports from members 

[Chris from Nailsea]

I thought such passengers were DUMPED for OPERATIONAL CONVENIENCE, rather than KICKED OFF? 

[inspector_blakey]

You may well be right, all I could see by that stage was a miasma of angry-making shouty VENOM AND BILE swarming round in front of my eyes

[Chris from Nailsea]

Indeed: I just get a HEADACHE trying to read it ... 

[chuffed]

Can almost hear the ball bearings clacking (Captain Queeg style in The Caine Mutiny)  in the other hand of the author who seems to spend every waking minute denigrating every little shortcoming of SWT^▸ (South West Trains) ! 

[grahame]

Newer members may like to take a look back and see the comments made by Denis Fryer of SHRUG, who posted some background on this forum a few years back - see http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?action=profile;u=696;sa=showPosts (works for logged in members only, I believe - others will need to search for his posts!)

[Brucey]

I'm currently feeling like I need a lifetime membership card for SHRUG.  Yesterday, I was DUMPED at Woking after my service was diverted via Eastleigh then AXED due to an icey conductor rail, points failure and a broken down train.  Total delay 2hr 10mins.  Today, I was DUMPED at Guildford and then again at Woking after two services were AXED due to a broken rail near Raynes Park*.  Total delay 1hr 5mins.

Customer service has been very poor, especially at my starting station of Bedhampton, where the ticket office lady (when open) can only tell us what it says on JourneyCheck.

At Woking yesterday, there were no staff on hand to ask questions.  They were all hanging around the cab of one train (four staff, excluding the driver and guard), avoiding the clump of passengers along the platform.

Guildford this morning, the person on the PA^▸ (Public Address (broadcast loudspeaker announcements) or Passenger Assist (railway staff providing physical assistance to passengers with mobility issues), depending on context) was telling us to take a stopping service to London Waterloo, rather than the fast service just a few minutes behind.  It seems all they wanted to do was get people out of the station, regardless of how much time it would add to their journey.  I ended up taking this fast service from Woking in the end.

No response to my Tweets to @SW_Trains recently.  Perhaps they've blocked me?

Not a happy bunny at the moment.  Given recent definition of void days, I'm not expecting either day to be declared void.

* = The rails seem to be breaking in this exact location at an all too frequent rate at the moment.

[ChrisB]

No response to my Tweets to @SW_Trains recently.  Perhaps they've blocked me?

If they've blocked you, you won't be following them any longer. If so, try & re-follow - it will tell you that you can't if they've blocked you....

[Brucey]

The latest issue of Hogrider is out.  Although I agree with many of their sentiments (especially with regards to "bouncers" on station platforms, which is probably worthy of an entire thread of its own at some stage) I find their sensationalist language far too off-putting to actually take them seriously.

As a follow up to my post above in March, the first day was declared half void, so ^11.40 refunded.  The second day wasn't void, but this coupled with my other delays and poor customer service that month, resulted in the issue of ^23.00 in Rail Travel Vouchers.  The response letter actually read like someone had read my letter and answered each point individually, rather than stringing together a library of stock paragraphs.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

Hi mate was your twitter on protected tweets? If so unless they follow you then they can't read any of your posts unless they follow back including ones where you mention them

[Brucey]

Hi mate was your twitter on protected tweets? If so unless they follow you then they can't read any of your posts unless they follow back including ones where you mention them

At the time, my account was not protected.

[IndustryInsider]

Sadly the SHRUG website can no longer be found.  I was looking forward to a good laugh.  Has the group disbanded?

[grahame]

Sadly the SHRUG website can no longer be found.  I was looking forward to a good laugh.  Has the group disbanded?

The web site in history can be seen on the way back machine - for example:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130614130010/http://shrug.info/

I don't have any current details of the group.   There is a phone number on the Better Transport web site -
http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/south_hampshire_rail_users
and one of their key members - Den(n)is Fryer - is a forum member, though inactive for a number of years
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?action=profile;u=696

[paul7575]

Dennis Fryer's opinion is still regularly quoted in the Portsmouth news, as though he speaks on behalf of everyone in the area, and also as though 'SHRUG' is somehow representative; e.g. in this recent story:

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/traffic-travel/portsmouth-rail-commuters-miss-out-on-210m-boost-1-6280797

...where they are commenting on something that's basically nothing to do with them, i.e. inner suburban trains for Windsor, ordered by SWT^▸ (South West Trains) to meet the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)'s HLOS^▸ (High Level Output Specification - the DfT's High Level Output Specification, which has specified to Network Rail the outputs that need to be delivered within a Control Period (CP)) requirements for CP5^▸ (Control Period 5 - the five year period between 2014 and 2019) of 10 car trains for the Reading route.  (Confusingly, the 30 new 5 car units will displace the 458/5s off the Windsor routes back onto the main Reading route.)

The local MP^▸ (Member of Parliament, or Mile Post - a method of measuring the railway in miles and chains from a starting point - usually London, depending on context) is badly informed as well, it should be obvious that DfT don't just say "here's some ^millions SWT, spend it on whatever you like" - (unless I've been seriously misinformed about the HLOS/SoFA procedure for the last ten years or so).

However it wouldn't surprise me at all if SWT and DfT just politely ignore anything with SHRUG involvement...

Paul