WCRC loses judicial review in High Court

[Killingworth]

I only have my experience as a Jacobite customer, but it seems intuitively obvious that when you have several hundred passengers arrive twice a day, and who have a couple of hours to kill, most of whom will also be hungry, with not much else to do, the shops and restaurants are going to benefit hugely.

In contrast, ferry traffic will tend to be just passing through. In one direction they will typically just drive off and get on with their journey, and in the other will arrive in good time, but not hours in advance.

Is it a majority of the tourist spend? I don’t know, but it’s clear that it would have had a huge impact on a small town that would have been expecting several thousand visitors a week to spend their tourist pounds there and geared up (eg staffing) accordingly.

We used the car ferry from Mallaig to Armadale this year. It was raining. We didn't leave the car until on the boat. There's nowhere much at Armadale to spend money.

It's true that a small number of catering outlets rely on summer trade from Jacobite travellers in concentrated bursts of high activity.

However a compromise must already be being worked on. I've every expectation that vistors to Glenfinnan will get their pictures as a steam train crosses the viaduct.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I might be in the minority here but I think it's the correct decision.

I do as well. It's now time WCRC got together with other heritage operations to design a system workable on vacuum braked coaches.

 

[paul1609]

What is your evidence for that?

It's a critical ferry port on the West coast with numbers far higher than the Jacobite. Plus the ScotRail services, plus those who visit as part of the road to the Isles, and those who stay locally as there are a lot of local b and bs.

What is your data to back the claim about a majority?

It really isn't. The ferry port has a couple of vehicle ferry's a day to some fairly remote islands. Foot passengers that arrive by train can mostly be counted on one hand, in winter they can mostly be counted on no hands. The vehicles mostly arrive 30 minutes before check in and their total spend will be a penny in the toilets. Scotrails passengers are mostly coach parties doing a cut price Jacobite.

 

[John Bishop]

All these posts regarding the Mallaig economy- are we suggesting that its a reasonable reason to exempt WCR from complying with the requirements of CDL?

As far as I’m concerned, it’s a moot point and forms no basis of the decision yesterday and subsequent requirement to comply forthwith.

 

[Brissle Girl]

All these posts regarding the Mallaig economy- are we suggesting that its a reasonable reason to exempt WCR from complying with the requirements of CDL?

As far as I’m concerned, it’s a moot point and forms no basis of the decision yesterday and subsequent requirement to comply forthwith.

Absolutely agree. The hiatus this summer was very unfortunate from Mallaig's point of view, but it should play no part in the decision.

And given there's agreement that it costs around 30k per carriage to convert, and the Jacobite alone makes around £1m a year (WCRC's own figures to the JR) then it should be a no-brainer for the business to adapt. Other businesses sometimes face regulatory or market change that requires a big investment to continue, and this is no different.

 

[Dai Corner]

All these posts regarding the Mallaig economy- are we suggesting that its a reasonable reason to exempt WCR from complying with the requirements of CDL?

As far as I’m concerned, it’s a moot point and forms no basis of the decision yesterday and subsequent requirement to comply forthwith.

I took this as WCRC hinting that the taxpayer, or the shopkeepers and caterers of Mallaig, might like to chip in?

 

[paul1609]

Also, the cost is put at around 30k per carriage, so surely modifying the two(?) rakes of stock used for the Jacobite would only cost around half a million.

I'm no expert on the wcrc carriage fleet but I would expect their MK2 fleet to be fitted with CDL and most of the MK1 fleet to be put up for sale.

 

[Mountain Man]

It really isn't. The ferry port has a couple of vehicle ferry's a day to some fairly remote islands. Foot passengers that arrive by train can mostly be counted on one hand, in winter they can mostly be counted on no hands. The vehicles mostly arrive 30 minutes before check in and their total spend will be a penny in the toilets. Scotrails passengers are mostly coach parties doing a cut price Jacobite.

Yes it is. It's the primary port for Skye which is one of the busiest tourist destinations in the West Coast.

I only have my experience as a Jacobite customer, but it seems intuitively obvious that when you have several hundred passengers arrive twice a day, and who have a couple of hours to kill, most of whom will also be hungry, with not much else to do, the shops and restaurants are going to benefit hugely.

In contrast, ferry traffic will tend to be just passing through. In one direction they will typically just drive off and get on with their journey, and in the other will arrive in good time, but not hours in advance.

Is it a majority of the tourist spend? I don’t know, but it’s clear that it would have had a huge impact on a small town that would have been expecting several thousand visitors a week to spend their tourist pounds there and geared up (eg staffing) accordingly.

So no evidence whatsoever.

Of course if you on the Jacobite you'll see it busier when you are there. A crowd coming off a train looks busy whether it's Mallaig or King's Cross.

Tourism is a big part of the economy. But tourism isn't the same as The Jacobite. Anyone who goes there in the summer months will know how busy it is with B and Bs, ScotRail visitors and those visiting the entire road to the Isles.

Furthermore as has been pointed out. If the Jacobite stops what is there to stop another operator running a steam service?

All these posts regarding the Mallaig economy- are we suggesting that its a reasonable reason to exempt WCR from complying with the requirements of CDL?

As far as I’m concerned, it’s a moot point and forms no basis of the decision yesterday and subsequent requirement to comply forthwith.

The economy is no argument at all as if WCR stop running a steam service, what is stopping another operator running a steam service instead, there is nothing inherently special to the everyday tourist about a WCR service over another steam operator

 

[31160]

There is of course the MK2b/c rakes that had CDL fitted when they were still a part of the Wales and West Fleet for working the Weymouth and Friday only Crewe services so they aren't even starting from a blank page

 

[Western Gaffer]

It's the primary port for Skye which is one of the busiest tourist destinations in the West Coast.

Presumably 'primary port' in the sense of the only port serving Skye from the mainland, but obviously the presence of a fixed bridge further along the coast, with substantially greater capacity (~4800 vehicles/day pre-Covid), means that the Armadale ferry is very much the secondary choice for the bulk of the traffic!

 

[craigybagel]

I might be in the minority here but I think it's the correct decision.

I'm taking comfort from the fact that both here and on other sites there's not much been too much shouting from the "elfansafety gone mad!!!" brigade.

Reading the judgment makes it pretty clear WCR never had a leg to stand on - and that's before you take into account their less than stellar record of complying with the rules.

 

[Titfield]

I'm taking comfort from the fact that both here and on other sites there's not much been too much shouting from the "elfansafety gone mad!!!" brigade.

Reading the judgment makes it pretty clear WCR never had a leg to stand on - and that's before you take into account their less than stellar record of complying with the rules.

When you say "we have cleaned up our act and our way is safe look at us", you can hardly be surprised that when your method fails in full view of the regulator any credibility or benefit of the doubt you may have had vanishes in an instant.

 

[Meole]

WCRC reported to be considering an appeal as their response.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I'm taking comfort from the fact that both here and on other sites there's not much been too much shouting from the "elfansafety gone mad!!!" brigade.

Reading the judgment makes it pretty clear WCR never had a leg to stand on - and that's before you take into account their less than stellar record of complying with the rules.

I don’t think there has been any of that here tbh, we’re having a rational conversation about the potential impact of disruptions to WCRC’s operation of regular charter operations.

Personally I think it’s a real pity that WCRC are essentially the ‘face’ of mainline steam railtour operations currently - there’s clearly too much ego involved, if they are seriously considering an appeal (which I don’t think has any merit either, other than trying to ‘save face’.) On the other side though, it’s important that railtour operations are protected, including if possible the continued use of vacuum braked stock to enable vacuum-only steam locomotives to continue to have a future.

 

[eldomtom2]

However it would only take one accident on a heritage railway for that Heritage Railway to find itself in a challenging position if lawyers acting for the deceased or injured asked the simple question "why wasnt the rolling stock fitted with CDL? To answer "because the legislation does not require it" may be legally correct but it would not absolve them of liability. It may be not that the ORR wishes to introduce such measures on a heritage railway but would be compelled to do so after such an incident.

This is resting on a lot of hypotheticals. Remember that the ORR will almost certainly have considered whether or not CDL requirements should be extended to heritage railways.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

WCRC reported to be considering an appeal as their response.

On what basis?

 

[Wolfie]

WCRC reported to be considering an appeal as their response.

Not very clever as an appeal would only be successful if there are errors in law.... Not to mention that they will almost certainly end up liable for ORR's costs as well as their own when (and l deliberately use that word after a truly damning judgement) they lose.

 

[Titfield]

This is resting on a lot of hypotheticals. Remember that the ORR will almost certainly have considered whether or not CDL requirements should be extended to heritage railways.

It is a chain of hypotheticals but we live in an increasingly litigious society which introduces further considerations in the decision making process as to what courses of action to take.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Not very clever as an appeal would only be successful if there are errors in law.... Not to mention that they will almost certainly end up liable for ORR's costs as well as their own when (and l deliberately use that word after a truly damning judgement) they lose.

WCRC don’t come across in any of this as very clever, more just behaving like a petulant child.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

It is a chain of hypotheticals but we live in an increasingly litigious society which introduces further considerations in the decision making process as to what courses of action to take.

We do but ultimately it would come down to two things - politics, and money. I suspect all heritage railways ceasing operation because of a change to the ORRs view of what is acceptably safe would not play particularly well in the media, particularly where there are notable towns (such as Bridgnorth, Haworth, Whitby, Dartmouth etc) where there would be a distinct impact on their economic viability.

Its a bit of a strawman example but in a slightly different world (or maybe this one, who knows?) you could see a government body such as ORR or the Environment Agency taking issue with the emissions of both steam and diesel operations on the basis of public health risk via climate change, but it would not be a reasonable course to require heritage operators to somehow engineer a system to achieve zero emissions. Similarly there is no such thing as absolute safety - just reasonable risk controls that are proportionate to the situation. (Ultimately absolute safety means no trains run!)

 

[Titfield]

We do but ultimately it would come down to two things - politics, and money. I suspect all heritage railways ceasing operation because of a change to the ORRs view of what is acceptably safe would not play particularly well in the media, particularly where there are notable towns (such as Bridgnorth, Haworth, Whitby, Dartmouth etc) where there would be a distinct impact on their economic viability.

Its a bit of a strawman example but in a slightly different world (or maybe this one, who knows?) you could see a government body such as ORR or the Environment Agency taking issue with the emissions of both steam and diesel operations on the basis of public health risk via climate change, but it would not be a reasonable course to require heritage operators to somehow engineer a system to achieve zero emissions. Similarly there is no such thing as absolute safety - just reasonable risk controls that are proportionate to the situation. (Ultimately absolute safety means no trains run!)

If heritage railways can not afford to convert their coaches to CDL over a fairly lengthy period of time then one has to question how resilient their businesses are to any other imposition of additional costs.

As I said earlier it may not be the ORR who compel change but an insurer deciding that the premium for a non cdl operating heritage railway increases by say £50K a year. I very much doubt that there are more than a handful of insurers underwriting the risk for heritage rail operations.

 

[theblackwatch]

There is of course the MK2b/c rakes that had CDL fitted when they were still a part of the Wales and West Fleet for working the Weymouth and Friday only Crewe services so they aren't even starting from a blank page

They've disposed of most of them in the past 10 years.

 

[MotCO]

If there was a fatality on a heritage line caused by a passenger falling out of a train or being struck by an opening door then the consequences would be very swift and severe.

No sensible Director of a Heritage Railway would want the threat of a corporate manslaughter charge hanging over them.

Whether or not WCRC receive a further derogation, surely if an accident did unfortunately happen there could still be a corporate manslaughter charge, so surely it is in everone's interests to install CDL as soon as possible.

 

[eldomtom2]

If heritage railways can not afford to convert their coaches to CDL over a fairly lengthy period of time then one has to question how resilient their businesses are to any other imposition of additional costs.

As I said earlier it may not be the ORR who compel change but an insurer deciding that the premium for a non cdl operating heritage railway increases by say £50K a year. I very much doubt that there are more than a handful of insurers underwriting the risk for heritage rail operations.

I don't see the use in such vague speculation.

 

[snowball]

I might be in the minority here but I think it's the correct decision.

On my reading of the posts in this thread, that puts you in the majority.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

If heritage railways can not afford to convert their coaches to CDL over a fairly lengthy period of time then one has to question how resilient their businesses are to any other imposition of additional costs.

As I said earlier it may not be the ORR who compel change but an insurer deciding that the premium for a non cdl operating heritage railway increases by say £50K a year. I very much doubt that there are more than a handful of insurers underwriting the risk for heritage rail operations.

The coal crisis is already demonstrating that, but heritage railways have always been at the uncertain end of things. Only the biggest, most successful lines have ever really had financial security, and even those are now having to cut their cloth. Need to remember that heritage rail is primarily about keeping something alive that would otherwise be lost, rather than primarily making profit in the traditional business sense.

 

[1Q18]

Can the doom-mongers who seem convinced that this ruling means the end for the heritage railway sector, despite the fact that there has never been any suggestion that they would ever be required to fit CDL, give us one single example of a specific safety system that heritage railways are required to fit to their rolling stock? The only example I can possibly think of is continuous brakes.

Safety management comes down to reducing risks as much as is ‘reasonably practical’. An operator which is comfortably profitable fitting CDL to main line charter stock is one thing. For a heritage railway, the risks are significantly less (primarily due to the lower speed they operate at), and the challenges are much higher because the costs would be so much harder to bear, and that in many cases it would mean making unacceptable alterations to heritage artefacts, so it could never be considered reasonably practical.

 

[357]

On my reading of the posts in this thread, that puts you in the majority.

Yes reading though it does seem that is the case, and I'm surprised to be honest!

 

[mjc]

That calculation seems a bit suspect though. It is taking the value of preventing a fatality (VPF) and comparing that to the cost of fitment - but these are measuring different things over different timespans, so can't really be compared as raw data. The VPF is presented if it were guaranteed that a CDL or droplight-related fatality will occur on any given day of operations - that, of course, is not borne out by the statistics. There have been only a handful of such fatalities over the last few years, and none at all involving heritage trains.

It seems like the correct comparison would be the cost of fitment and maintenance of CDL, over the anticipated lifespan of the CDL equipment or coaches (whichever needs replacing first), versus the expected FWI during that same lifespan. That calculation would, it seems to me, come to a rather different conclusion.

Of course that's not to say that WCRC are in the right here. They have, as others have said, wasted a significant amount of money (probably into the six figures) on a legal challenge that seemed destined to lose - it's evident the High Court Judges were not impressed by their arguments.

FWI?

 

[Killingworth]

FWI?

Full Waveform Inversion - any better, polite, ideas?

CGG: Seismic Full Waveform Inversion (FWI)

Full Waveform Inversion (FWI) accurately computes highly detailed, data-driven models of subsurface velocity, absorption and reflectivity for use in seismic imaging and interpretation.

www.cgg.com