Avanti travel assistance at Birmingham International Station, does this seem right?

[VItraveller]

Note I Recently travelled to Birmingham International train station, it’s not somewhere I regularly go to and I’m completely blind and rely on the Passenger Assistance service. The layout is a bit strange because all the main train station facilities are on the first floor of the building which you access from an escalator or lift . I arrived in an Uber, and Uber drivers in general are not able to assist me too far into any building because they are concerned about their vehicles and need to make sure that they aren’t parking up for too long, in the past I’ve asked passenger assistan ce staff to meet me at the bench by the escalators on the ground floor.
I asked for the same arrangement via the Avanti travel companion WhatsApp service and found surprisingly that they wouldn’t be able to do this, because the land is owned by the airport so it is the airport’s responsibility to guide passengers from the ground floor. Perhaps they were shortstaffed that day, but it seems like a strange explanation.
Do you think it might have something to do with insurance, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me because station staff guide people outside of the building to the car park regularly.

 

[ValleyLines142]

When you say station staff guide people outside of the building, is that airport staff or Avanti staff?

At my station, we are only allowed to take people to the front exit by the taxi rank, not across the car park itself. It caused quite a bit of controversy because the main car park was closed for several months and has only recently reopened, and passengers were being dropped off on the kerb by the other end of the car park and complained to us that they had to walk all the way along the temporary path into the station, but unfortunately our insurance does not cover the car park as it isn't operated by us.

 

[VItraveller]

When you say station staff guide people outside of the building, is that airport staff or Avanti staff?

At my station, we are only allowed to take people to the front exit by the taxi rank, not across the car park itself. It caused quite a bit of controversy because the main car park was closed for several months and has only recently reopened, and passengers were being dropped off on the kerb by the other end of the car park and complained to us that they had to walk all the way along the temporary path into the station, but unfortunately our insurance does not cover the car park as it isn't operated by us.

From what I remember, it is Avanti staff Who do that, but I don’t use the station very much so I can’t be certain.

 

[twpsaesneg]

Note I Recently travelled to Birmingham International train station, it’s not somewhere I regularly go to and I’m completely blind and rely on the Passenger Assistance service. The layout is a bit strange because all the main train station facilities are on the first floor of the building which you access from an escalator or lift . I arrived in an Uber, and Uber drivers in general are not able to assist me too far into any building because they are concerned about their vehicles and need to make sure that they aren’t parking up for too long, in the past I’ve asked passenger assistan ce staff to meet me at the bench by the escalators on the ground floor.
I asked for the same arrangement via the Avanti travel companion WhatsApp service and found surprisingly that they wouldn’t be able to do this, because the land is owned by the airport so it is the airport’s responsibility to guide passengers from the ground floor. Perhaps they were shortstaffed that day, but it seems like a strange explanation.
Do you think it might have something to do with insurance, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me because station staff guide people outside of the building to the car park regularly.

I have no insider knowledge into the land ownership situation at Birmingham International, however I know the station well. Personally I think you should complain about this, as regardless of the ownership situation I would expect the TOC to have a duty of care to you having booked assistance to get you from the designated drop off point to the platform. Whether than necessitates Avanti getting a member of the Airport passenger assistance staff to take you through the airport bit to the station bit shouldn't be your problem. I'm fairly disgusted that you'd been fobbed off with that as an explanation - it shouldn't be your issue to address.

If the issue isn't raised as a complaint then no-one will be able to resolve it, and I think it does need resolution, especially at a major interchange like Birmingham International.

I always think that the "we're not insured" thing is a right con. If a staff member needs to be insured off railway property to carry out their job, then the railway should pay for it.

 

[LowLevel]

Not insured is always an odd quote. I can't imagine many if any front line railway staff have the foggiest idea what their employer's insurance policy says about things in detail, I've certainly never seen any more than the certificates of public liability insurance posted on health and safety notice boards in booking on points.

"Been told not to by someone, right or wrongly" is in my opinion usually a more accurate explanation!

 

[twpsaesneg]

Not insured is always an odd quote. I can't imagine many if any front line railway staff have the foggiest idea what their employer's insurance policy says about things in detail, I've certainly never seen any more than the certificates of public liability insurance posted on health and safety notice boards in booking on points.

"Been told not to by someone, right or wrongly" is in my opinion usually a more accurate explanation!

In my experience it's been a convenient "reason" given by a manager when they're telling someone not to do something / go somewhere etc.

Right up there with "because of health and safety".

I know for a fact that my employer's 3rd party liability covers me for acts on and off company premises!

 

[bleeder4]

It's just basic human decency to help out someone in need. I once helped a blind person make their way down the street to the shop that I was working in at the time. The street wasn't part of the shop, it was council, yet I still helped that person navigate it and gain entrance to our premises. I very much doubt that the shop's insurance covered actions that took place on the street outside.

 

[KNN]

Have they offered any alternative arrival location where they could help you? Or a contact for the airport support?

There must be a plan for this scenario.

 

[TUC]

When you say station staff guide people outside of the building, is that airport staff or Avanti staff?

At my station, we are only allowed to take people to the front exit by the taxi rank, not across the car park itself. It caused quite a bit of controversy because the main car park was closed for several months and has only recently reopened, and passengers were being dropped off on the kerb by the other end of the car park and complained to us that they had to walk all the way along the temporary path into the station, but unfortunately our insurance does not cover the car park as it isn't operated by us.

Speaking as someone whole wife is blind, can you please explain how someone such as her are meant to be able to catch a train in such circumstances?

Note I Recently travelled to Birmingham International train station, it’s not somewhere I regularly go to and I’m completely blind and rely on the Passenger Assistance service. The layout is a bit strange because all the main train station facilities are on the first floor of the building which you access from an escalator or lift . I arrived in an Uber, and Uber drivers in general are not able to assist me too far into any building because they are concerned about their vehicles and need to make sure that they aren’t parking up for too long, in the past I’ve asked passenger assistan ce staff to meet me at the bench by the escalators on the ground floor.
I asked for the same arrangement via the Avanti travel companion WhatsApp service and found surprisingly that they wouldn’t be able to do this, because the land is owned by the airport so it is the airport’s responsibility to guide passengers from the ground floor. Perhaps they were shortstaffed that day, but it seems like a strange explanation.

That does beg the question why Avanti would think that the airport would regard itself as having any responsibility towards passengers who aren't in the building in order to fly, whilst the rail system they are planning to use isn't bothering to assist?

 

[ValleyLines142]

Speaking as someone whole wife is blind, can you please explain how someone such as her are meant to be able to catch a train in such circumstances?

So if you make a booking for your wife, it should state where the meeting point is. In our case, it's either the ticket office or the gateline, so when your wife is dropped off/coming from foot, she would make herself known and either ticket office or gateline will radio to us on the platforms. We will then take care of the rest and put your wife on the train and ring wherever she is travelling to and we would say 'Hello, booked assist Mrs X is currently on 1A01, seat 61 rear carriage on arrival'.

 

[VItraveller]

I have no insider knowledge into the land ownership situation at Birmingham International, however I know the station well. Personally I think you should complain about this, as regardless of the ownership situation I would expect the TOC to have a duty of care to you having booked assistance to get you from the designated drop off point to the platform. Whether than necessitates Avanti getting a member of the Airport passenger assistance staff to take you through the airport bit to the station bit shouldn't be your problem. I'm fairly disgusted that you'd been fobbed off with that as an explanation - it shouldn't be your issue to address.

If the issue isn't raised as a complaint then no-one will be able to resolve it, and I think it does need resolution, especially at a major interchange like Birmingham International.

I always think that the "we're not insured" thing is a right con. If a staff member needs to be insured off railway property to carry out their job, then the railway should pay for it.

I think I will raise it as a complaint, just so that it doesn’t happen to others.
In general, Avanti very good when it comes to Passenger Assistance and so I don’t think it was a case of that they just couldn’t be bothered, but probably someone somewhere was told that they couldn’t do it.

H asking them to look for the lift and then guide me inside, and take me up to the first floor.
ave they offered any alternative arrival location where they could help you? Or a contact for the airport support?

There must be a plan for this scenario.

They suggested I could meet them at the lift, but it was difficult enough to get the Uber drivers to take me inside the station never mind

So if you make a booking for your wife, it should state where the meeting point is. In our case, it's either the ticket office or the gateline, so when your wife is dropped off/coming from foot, she would make herself known and either ticket office or gateline will radio to us on the platforms. We will then take care of the rest and put your wife on the train and ring wherever she is travelling to and we would say 'Hello, booked assist Mrs X is currently on 1A01, seat 61 rear carriage on arrival'.

It is a shame that your company insurance doesn’t cover the car park for the station, I don’t know how often it cropped up in your station but I, like many other blind people, prefer to travel via Uber or Bolt because black cabs can be very expensive, and those drivers can’t use traditional Taxi ranks.
It also makes me wonder what would happen if someone booked assistance for luggage, and had their car parked in the car park.

 

[TUC]

So if you make a booking for your wife, it should state where the meeting point is. In our case, it's either the ticket office or the gateline, so when your wife is dropped off/coming from foot, she would make herself known and either ticket office or gateline will radio to us on the platforms. We will then take care of the rest and put your wife on the train and ring wherever she is travelling to and we would say 'Hello, booked assist Mrs X is currently on 1A01, seat 61 rear carriage on arrival'.

You're missing my point. I know how to book assistance. I mean your claim that you cannot meet passengers from the other side of the car park even when the car park is closed and not accessible?

 

[43066]

You're missing my point. I know how to book assistance. I mean your claim that you cannot meet passengers from the other side of the car park even when the car park is closed and not accessible?

I think the point being made is that the person needs to be escorted to the appropriate meeting point at the station entrance, as indicated when assistance is booked, where they will be met by railway staff. That seems perfectly reasonable and easy to understand?

The railway generally doesn’t control the estate surrounding its premises, including “station” car parks, which are often council owned and run. So rail staff not crossing a closed car park to meet people seems perfectly reasonable, in just the the same way as you presumably wouldn’t expect them to meet the person across the road from the station, or at the opposite end of the high street from where the station was located, either.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

As I understand it, the arrangement is that mobility staff from the airport are supposed to handle the transfer from road to airport land, and handover to Avanti at the boundary to the station.

If I recall correctly, at one time, the airport staff got very upset at railway staff and possibly railway contractors "working" on airport premises without the aviation security passes, checks etc. I'm not sure if there is any specific aviation or transport security law that mandates that people technically carrying out work at an airport require particular paperwork or licenses.

I do suspect there is such a thing as a "Landside Airport Security Pass" which probably explains all of this.

Looking on Google, Manchester Airport seems to think staff need one who aren't going airside, with some hefty checking:

For any roles based “Landside” at MAG, this will be a 2-year background check

Background checks will involve:

A Security Interview to find out details of your activities over the past 2/5 years.

Contacting your referees for your employment/education history

Evidencing your activities for any periods not in employment or education.

A Basic Criminal Record Check by DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service)

A Counter Terrorism Check (For select roles only)

Slightly off topic, but I wonder if TPE staff working at/out of Manchester Airport have security passes or whether the station area is wholly railway land.

 

[VItraveller]

As I understand it, the arrangement is that mobility staff from the airport are supposed to handle the transfer from road to airport land, and handover to Avanti at the boundary to the station.

If I recall correctly, at one time, the airport staff got very upset at railway staff and possibly railway contractors "working" on airport premises without the aviation security passes, checks etc. I'm not sure if there is any specific aviation or transport security law that mandates that people technically carrying out work at an airport require particular paperwork or licenses.

I do suspect there is such a thing as a "Landside Airport Security Pass" which probably explains all of this.

Looking on Google, Manchester Airport seems to think staff need one who aren't going airside, with some hefty checking:



Slightly off topic, but I wonder if TPE staff working at/out of Manchester Airport have security passes or whether the station area is wholly railway land.

Thank you for that info, it’s helpful.
I do find it strange that it’s not something Avanti mentions when booking Passenger Assistance, but perhaps it’s a rare enough occurrence that they don’t need to, I wonder if there’s a way to contact the airport mobility staff.

 

[VItraveller]

I think the point being made is that the person needs to be escorted to the appropriate meeting point at the indicated when assistance is booked, where they will be met by railway staff. That seems perfectly reasonable and easy to understand?

The railway generally doesn’t control the estate surrounding its premises, including “station” car parks, which are often council owned and run. So rail staff not crossing a closed car park to meet people seems perfectly reasonable, in just the the same way as you presumably wouldn’t expect them to meet the person across the road from the station, or at the opposite end of the high street from where the station was located, either.

I suspect this is going to become more of a problem as we move towards more integrated public transport, and making spaces more walkable and less less car friendly

 

[TUC]

I think the point being made is that the person needs to be escorted to the appropriate meeting point at the station entrance, as indicated when assistance is booked, where they will be met by railway staff. That seems perfectly reasonable and easy to understand?

The railway generally doesn’t control the estate surrounding its premises, including “station” car parks, which are often council owned and run. So rail staff not crossing a closed car park to meet people seems perfectly reasonable, in just the the same way as you presumably wouldn’t expect them to meet the person across the road from the station, or at the opposite end of the high street from where the station was located, either.

Except that when the station car park is closed a certain level of flexibility and common sense should be expected.

 

[ValleyLines142]

You're missing my point. I know how to book assistance. I mean your claim that you cannot meet passengers from the other side of the car park even when the car park is closed and not accessible?

My apologies, I misread your post.

So passenger drop offs were at the rear car park which was still open. The front car park was shut entirely, but people were swinging by at the lay-by at the other end of the front car park which was clearly advertised as not being a drop off point, but passengers were still being dropped there anyway, then having the audacity to complain.

Now that the front car park is open, it is still the passenger's responsibility to make their way into the station to speak to staff for their assistance. We have a list of bookings but we have no idea how they're getting to the station and frankly, that's not our responsibility unfortunately.

My advice to you would be to stop off in the 20 minutes free drop off, escort your wife into the station to the gateline and we take her from there.

The car park has since re-opened, but as I say, our insurance takes us to the front doors of the station. The car park is not owned by the TOC but by Apcoa.

For the record, I personally would have no issue taking someone to a vehicle within the car park, but it's a big no no and I'd have a stern telling off for the powers that be above me.

I think the point being made is that the person needs to be escorted to the appropriate meeting point at the station entrance, as indicated when assistance is booked, where they will be met by railway staff. That seems perfectly reasonable and easy to understand?

The railway generally doesn’t control the estate surrounding its premises, including “station” car parks, which are often council owned and run. So rail staff not crossing a closed car park to meet people seems perfectly reasonable, in just the the same way as you presumably wouldn’t expect them to meet the person across the road from the station, or at the opposite end of the high street from where the station was located, either.

Exactly that.

 

[TheTallOne]

What if someone arrives by bus, is the bus driver required to escort them to the station?

I can see taxi drivers grumbling about it, but if it was by bus that's even more unlikely?!

 

[43066]

I suspect this is going to become more of a problem as we move towards more integrated public transport, and making spaces more walkable and less less car friendly

That’s probably true unfortunately. There has to be a line drawn, and it isn’t realistic to expect assistance to include areas which the railway has no control over, and therefore no control over the associated risks. The car park example being a good one; what if it isn’t gritted properly, or isn't maintained, well lit etc. and the person ends up injured due to slipping or tripping while being escorted by rail staff.

Except that when the station car park is closed a certain level of flexibility and common sense should be expected.

There isn’t going to be any ability for staff members to meet people away from railway premises, for good reason. Hence the flexibility and common sense will need to be applied by the person dropping the individual requiring assistance off to the correct location.

 

[KNN]

That’s probably true unfortunately. There has to be a line drawn, and it isn’t realistic to expect assistance to include areas which the railway has no control over, and therefore no control over the associated risks. The car park example being a good one; what if it isn’t gritted properly, or isn't maintained, well lit etc. and the person ends up injured due to slipping or tripping while being escorted by rail staff.



There isn’t going to be any ability for staff members to meet people away from railway premises, for good reason. Hence the flexibility and common sense will need to be applied by the person dropping the individual requiring assistance off to the correct location.

Is the answer to have an independent or integrated transport accessibility provider? A designated accessibility drop off point for rail and/or air with an integrated assistance process doesn't seem too much to expect.

There is a wider point about it, but most taxi drivers are now "private" and often barely able to drive let alone help a person with additional needs.

 

[VItraveller]

Is the answer to have an independent or integrated transport accessibility provider? A designated accessibility drop off point for rail and/or air with an integrated assistance process doesn't seem too much to expect.

There is a wider point about it, but most taxi drivers are now "private" and often barely able to drive let alone help a person with additional needs.

ideally yes, but I don’t think it could ever happen mainly because it doesn’t really seem feasible to have someone to guide disable passengers from the entrance of the station a couple of feet in, and then hand them over to station staff.
As for taxi drivers, I disagree.
I’ve always had really great experiences with everyone I’ve travelled with and they have always done their best to assist me in whatever way they can, but with cities increasingly becoming less car friendly and less places for vehicles to park for a short period of time not to mention the danger of leaving a vehicle in a public place unattended for any length of time, I don’t blame them for not being able to assist further went from their perspective, it would be a much simpler solution if a member of staff from the station could guide a passenger.
After all, when I go to a particular place, I don’t search which piece of land or area belongs to what.

 

[KNN]

ideally yes, but I don’t think it could ever happen mainly because it doesn’t really seem feasible to have someone to guide disable passengers from the entrance of the station a couple of feet in, and then hand them over to station staff.
As for taxi drivers, I disagree.
I’ve always had really great experiences with everyone I’ve travelled with and they have always done their best to assist me in whatever way they can, but with cities increasingly becoming less car friendly and less places for vehicles to park for a short period of time not to mention the danger of leaving a vehicle in a public place unattended for any length of time, I don’t blame them for not being able to assist further went from their perspective, it would be a much simpler solution if a member of staff from the station could guide a passenger.
After all, when I go to a particular place, I don’t search which piece of land or area belongs to what.

I'm glad you've had better experiences, in the city I live in they are by far the most dangerous thing on the road.

And yes I concur with regards to airport staff doing the first bit then handing over, I'd have no idea who owns what either especially somewhere like International. Which is why it needs to be clear what the drop of points are where someone can receive assistance, and if there aren't any then that seems likely to be going against the accessibility policies of most of the companies involved.

For example the first line of Avanti's says this:

We are committed to providing
a reliable and easy-to-access
service that allows older and
disabled customers to arrange
any assistance they may need to
help them access any part of our
network with confidence using the
national Passenger Assist system.

Note particularly the use of "any assistance" and "any part of our network". They might try argue about it being outside the network, but using semantic arguments undermines the claim of being "committed".

Link to Avanti West Coast's Accessible Travel Policy (a pdf file viewable online through browser)

https://www.avantiwestcoast.co.uk/-/media/Avanti-Policies/ATP-Renewal-2024-Accessible-Travel-Policy.pdf

 

[VItraveller]

so just a quick update on this, I put in a complaint to Avanti about this situation, just wanting really to understand what the reason was behind it and if there were any alternative options I could use in future.
They predictably passed the matter onto LNWR after seeing my ticket, even though it has nothing to do with London Northwestern, I don’t think they understood the complaint at all.

Still, I’ve reached out now to the Accessibility manager and hope to get perhaps a more substantive response from him.

 

[35B]

That’s probably true unfortunately. There has to be a line drawn, and it isn’t realistic to expect assistance to include areas which the railway has no control over, and therefore no control over the associated risks. The car park example being a good one; what if it isn’t gritted properly, or isn't maintained, well lit etc. and the person ends up injured due to slipping or tripping while being escorted by rail staff.

There isn’t going to be any ability for staff members to meet people away from railway premises, for good reason. Hence the flexibility and common sense will need to be applied by the person dropping the individual requiring assistance off to the correct location.

The question is whether assistance is being provided as a service to help customers, or as an exercise in minimal compliance. With that answered, what is "reasonable" becomes easier to work out.

From organising travel for an elderly acquaintance (single, no available relatives), reliant on assistance to get any distance at all, the transport industry needs to treat this with higher priority. In his case, the gap between taxi and registration point is a major issue. In his case, the railway imposes restrictions on where the taxi can park, and how long it can remain, which prevent the driver from helping him to the registration point, or beyond the station front door to where the taxi could wait up for his arrival. It's not remotely unreasonable to expect that the service offered by the railway would extend to enable him to be assisted those 50-odd yards.

I'm not generally a fan of the social model of disability, but this is definitely one of the places where it is relevant. He is entirely able to travel, but relies on a level of assistance that the railway industry claim to provide. When the industry draws lines that limit it, it is the railway industry that makes him unable to travel - not himself.

 

[43066]

From organising travel for an elderly acquaintance (single, no available relatives), reliant on assistance to get any distance at all, the transport industry needs to treat this with higher priority. In his case, the gap between taxi and registration point is a major issue. In his case, the railway imposes restrictions on where the taxi can park, and how long it can remain, which prevent the driver from helping him to the registration point, or beyond the station front door to where the taxi could wait up for his arrival. It's not remotely unreasonable to expect that the service offered by the railway would extend to enable him to be assisted those 50-odd yards.

I can’t speak for any specific location, but the issue generally that there is no integrated “transport industry”; the taxi industry and the railway industry are entirely separate, and in many cases it will be local authorities who impose the relevant parking restrictions, and indeed own and maintain the “station” car parks.

Clearly it isn’t ideal but we are where we are and, just with any other business, there are legitimate concerns about liability if staff provide assistance (thereby assuming a duty of care) in areas not controlled/maintained by the railway.

 

[VItraveller]

I can’t speak for any specific location, but the issue generally that there is no integrated “transport industry”; the taxi industry and the railway industry are entirely separate, and in many cases it will be local authorities who impose the relevant parking restrictions, and indeed own and maintain the “station” car parks.

Clearly it isn’t ideal but we are where we are and, just with any other business, there are legitimate concerns about liability if staff provide assistance (thereby assuming a duty of care) in areas not controlled/maintained by the railway.

Hopefully the transport industry can think of something soon, the population isn’t getting any younger and I think a lot more people would be comfortable travelling if there was more clarity around this.

 

[35B]

I can’t speak for any specific location, but the issue generally that there is no integrated “transport industry”; the taxi industry and the railway industry are entirely separate, and in many cases it will be local authorities who impose the relevant parking restrictions, and indeed own and maintain the “station” car parks.

Clearly it isn’t ideal but we are where we are and, just with any other business, there are legitimate concerns about liability if staff provide assistance (thereby assuming a duty of care) in areas not controlled/maintained by the railway.

I used the word "industry" precisely because it is a collective noun for all participants, not a specific firm. As for the individual in question, the premises involved were (and are) entirely railway own land, so do not bring the questions/red herrings about liability into question.

 

[43066]

I used the word "industry" precisely because it is a collective noun for all participants, not a specific firm. As for the individual in question, the premises involved were (and are) entirely railway own land, so do not bring the questions/red herrings about liability into question.

If that’s the case I completely agree they should implement a work around. However the “it’s not railway land” issue will be a problem in more locations than it isn’t.