First Capital Connect (FCC) has been fined £75,000 with costs of £27,718 following
Plans to deliver faster, more frequent rail travel across the
north of England have progressed as Network Rail submitted an application for a new link connecting Manchester’s Piccadilly and Victoria stations – the Ordsall Chord.
The plans will ease a rail bottleneck to the south of Piccadilly station and enable more trains to travel through central Manchester. On completion in late 2016/early 2017, it will provide: • two new fast trains per hour between Manchester Victoria and Liverpool
• six fast trains instead of four an hour between Leeds and Manchester
• faster journeys between Manchester, Leeds and Liverpool
• a new direct service through Manchester city centre to Manchester Airport
• faster journey times to Hull, Newcastle and the North East
a prosecution brought by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) after the company failed to protect the safety of passengers trapped on a broken down train.
During the evening rush hour on 26 May
2011, an FCC service from Brighton to Bedford lost power and became stranded for around three hours, with around 700 passengers on board, at Dock Junction between St Pancras International and Kentish Town stations in North London. ORR’s investigation found FCC had not
adequately planned its response to deal with stranded trains or provided those on board with accurate information, working ventilation or toilet facilities. Passengers were forced to call National Rail Enquiries for updates and throughout the three hour period were repeatedly informed a rescue train would be arriving in ten minutes. Inaccurate passenger information updates and poor conditions on board resulted in many passengers opening the doors and leaving the train.
The risk of passengers taking independent
action to leave the train in conditions such as these had already been recognised by the rail industry said the ORR, and FCC failed to act on relevant guidance developed after previous incidents of stranded trains.
FCC pleaded guilty to a charge under
The application is a key part of the wider Northern Hub programme to deliver up to 700 additional trains on the network every day, providing space for around 44 million passengers a year, while stimulating much-needed economic growth. It is estimated the Northern Hub will generate more than £4 billion worth of economic benefits and create around 20,000 to 30,000 new jobs. Following 18 months of consultation with local and regional stakeholders, the plans were submitted for consideration to the Transport and Works Act Unit within the Department for Transport. If permission is granted, work is expected to start in late 2014/early 2015. The application documents are available to view online at www.
networkrail.co.uk/ordsall and the Transport and Works Act Unit is accepting representations about the proposals until 28 October 2013. People wishing to submit comments are advised to look at Network Rail’s website for further information.
Page 12 October 2013
section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Ian Prosser, ORR’s director of safety, said: ‘ORR’s investigation into First Capital Connect’s response highlighted that passengers were treated with a distinct lack of care, as the company committed a catalogue of errors. ‘The company left hundreds of passengers trapped on a train for three hours with no air conditioning, toilets or communication system. It’s response significantly increased the risk of passengers independently leaving the train onto
the tracks, when the safest place for them was to stay on board until told otherwise. ‘Since the incident, First Capital Connect has taken steps to rectify its management of similar situations. ORR is monitoring the company and will not hesitate to take action to ensure passengers are not placed in such a position again. Accurate and timely passenger information is essential not only for those planning journeys, but as this incident demonstrates, is critical for the safe running of the railways.’ David Statham, First Capital Connect managing director said: ‘The safety of our passengers is our top priority and we deeply regret what happened back in May 2011. ‘We didn’t live up to our own high standards in the way we handled this event which is why we took quick and decisive action afterwards. We commissioned comprehensive internal and external investigations that led to a range of actions to ensure this unusual combination of events is extremely unlikely to happen again. ‘The safest place for passengers while a controlled evacuation or rescue is being arranged is on the train and we have new processes, techniques and equipment to speed the process whenever possible and to make it more comfortable for those on board. ‘We will reflect on the comments made by the judge in court today and ensure they are incorporated in our ongoing process of learning from this incident.We would like to apologise once again to all those affected.’
RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said: ‘This was a shocking incident that exposes the cavalier attitude of the basket-case First Capital Connect franchise towards the safety of both passengers and staff on their trains. The fact that the most basic of major incident plans had not been put in place by the company on this busy London commuter route is a shocking indictment of the profit-driven ethos behind rail privatisation.’
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140