Seems to be an open and shut case

https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc_admin_2023_3338.pdf

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Seems to be an open and shut case
>
> https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc_admin_2023_3338.pdf
>

Sections 21 and 81 provide interesting reading about the costs of fitting
CDL and how much the Jacobite makes in a year.

In message <um48bi$1jtct$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:01:06 on Fri, 22 Dec
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Seems to be an open and shut case
>
>https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc
>_admin_2023_3338.pdf

Introduction

1. The Claimant, West Coast Railway Company Limited, is the largest
operator of heritage train tours in the United Kingdom. It runs a number
of well-known services. These include the Jacobite Steam Train from Fort
William, which is known popularly as the "Hogwarts Express", having
featured in the Harry Potter films and described as ‘the greatest
railway journey in the world’.

It also operates the "Flying Scotsman" which is considered to be one of
the best-known locomotives in the world.

etc etc
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <um48bi$1jtct$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:01:06 on Fri, 22 Dec
> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Seems to be an open and shut case
>>
>> https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc
>> _admin_2023_3338.pdf
>
> Introduction
>
> 1. The Claimant, West Coast Railway Company Limited, is the largest
> operator of heritage train tours in the United Kingdom. It runs a number
> of well-known services. These include the Jacobite Steam Train from Fort
> William, which is known popularly as the "Hogwarts Express", having
> featured in the Harry Potter films and described as ‘the greatest
> railway journey in the world’.
>
> It also operates the "Flying Scotsman" which is considered to be one of
> the best-known locomotives in the world.
>

I thought Flying Scotsman was operated on behalf of the NRM by Riley and
Son under a contract that is shortly to expire but has already seen the
last operations on NR metals under it.

GH

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <um48bi$1jtct$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:01:06 on Fri, 22 Dec
>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Seems to be an open and shut case
>>>
>>> https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc
>>> _admin_2023_3338.pdf
>>
>> Introduction
>>
>> 1. The Claimant, West Coast Railway Company Limited, is the largest
>> operator of heritage train tours in the United Kingdom. It runs a number
>> of well-known services. These include the Jacobite Steam Train from Fort
>> William, which is known popularly as the "Hogwarts Express", having
>> featured in the Harry Potter films and described as ‘the greatest
>> railway journey in the world’.
>>
>> It also operates the "Flying Scotsman" which is considered to be one of
>> the best-known locomotives in the world.
>>
>
> I thought Flying Scotsman was operated on behalf of the NRM by Riley and
> Son under a contract that is shortly to expire but has already seen the
> last operations on NR metals under it.
>

The operator can only be a steam-licensed TOC, such as WCRC, LSL or DB.
Riley is a maintainer/constructor that rebuilds engines, but doesn't
operate trains.

Shrinking DB only has a very few steam drivers, and is in the process from
withdrawing from the UK passenger charter train operator business. It'll
still operate current commitments, such as the British Pullman, but won't
be seeking new ad hoc charter operations. LSL operates trains for Jeremy
Hosking's companies, so most other steam charters have to be run by WCRC. I
think it's Hosking who complained that WCRC was gaining an unfair advantage
by refusing to spend the money on CDL for its trains, while he had already
made the investment in all his own stock.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It also operates the "Flying Scotsman" which is considered to be one of
>>> the best-known locomotives in the world.
>>>
>>
>> I thought Flying Scotsman was operated on behalf of the NRM by Riley and
>> Son under a contract that is shortly to expire but has already seen the
>> last operations on NR metals under it.
>>
>
> The operator can only be a steam-licensed TOC, such as WCRC, LSL or DB.
> Riley is a maintainer/constructor that rebuilds engines, but doesn't
> operate trains.
>

I thought it may be something like that, though you could have a
hairsplitting debate on what an operator is, certainly the train has to be
operated by a licensed operator but does that preclude a Locomotive owner
or provider also being described as an operator.
Riley fulfils both roles in providing Locomotives it owns or runs on others
behalf to the licensed operators so does a bit more than just being a
maintainer/constructor.

GH

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It also operates the "Flying Scotsman" which is considered to be one of
>>>> the best-known locomotives in the world.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought Flying Scotsman was operated on behalf of the NRM by Riley and
>>> Son under a contract that is shortly to expire but has already seen the
>>> last operations on NR metals under it.
>>>
>>
>> The operator can only be a steam-licensed TOC, such as WCRC, LSL or DB.
>> Riley is a maintainer/constructor that rebuilds engines, but doesn't
>> operate trains.
>>
>
> I thought it may be something like that, though you could have a
> hairsplitting debate on what an operator is, certainly the train has to be
> operated by a licensed operator but does that preclude a Locomotive owner
> or provider also being described as an operator.

Yes, it's a lot more complicated than that. Just because you've bought a
steam loco doesn't mean you can go and run passenger trains on the national
network. Only the three companies that I named have managed it (and one
inherited the licence from BR).

This was the only recent one to qualify:
http://www.lsltoc.co.uk

> Riley fulfils both roles in providing Locomotives it owns or runs on others
> behalf to the licensed operators so does a bit more than just being a
> maintainer/constructor.

What does Ian Riley do, other than maintenance, repair and reconstruction
of steam locomotives, a few of which it owns? It doesn't operate or run
trains.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It also operates the "Flying Scotsman" which is considered to be one of
>>>>> the best-known locomotives in the world.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought Flying Scotsman was operated on behalf of the NRM by Riley and
>>>> Son under a contract that is shortly to expire but has already seen the
>>>> last operations on NR metals under it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The operator can only be a steam-licensed TOC, such as WCRC, LSL or DB.
>>> Riley is a maintainer/constructor that rebuilds engines, but doesn't
>>> operate trains.
>>>
>>
>> I thought it may be something like that, though you could have a
>> hairsplitting debate on what an operator is, certainly the train has to be
>> operated by a licensed operator but does that preclude a Locomotive owner
>> or provider also being described as an operator.
>
> Yes, it's a lot more complicated than that. Just because you've bought a
> steam loco doesn't mean you can go and run passenger trains on the national
> network. Only the three companies that I named have managed it (and one
> inherited the licence from BR).
>

Plus Vintage Trains.

Who operates the Hastings DEMU?

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On 22/12/2023 15:01, Tweed wrote:
> Seems to be an open and shut case
>
> https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc_admin_2023_3338.pdf

Reading that report shows that WCR still do not 'get it' when it comes
to railway safety. They've been on the edge of being banned from running
trains a number of times now, they were suspended a few years back.
They had one warning about the door safety this year, and were allowed
to carry on for a few more weeks, then an anonymous inspection of the
train again showed they were not following the rules required for them
to get their exemption. They are clearly just not listening.
Their Risk Assessments and Method Statements seem to be very lacking. As
a Site Supervisor, I know how to write these,and the points brought up
in the report show how naive WCR have been, well, maybe not naive, just
totally ignorant of their requirements to provide a safe service.
When they were suspended (2015 ish, after allowing an engine to run
without having its AWS kit working correctly IIRC), I seem to recall
that they had to employ a Director who was responsible for the safety of
their services. What on earth has he/she been doing, after the person
jumping off a moving train incident (2021?), they should have been all
over the door locking system, but it seems they take little note of
safety failings.
And, one Steward for each coach? That is never going to work, even if
that means one Steward at each end, to cover the 4 doors there, (if 2
are not locked out of use) and that is impossible.
It's clear they are trying to keep costs to a minimum, and they employ
Staff to write their safety briefs who are not competent, even when they
are going to Court, they submit incomplete, and wrong documents, a very
basic error, which a decent Solicitor would not allow to be submitted,
so I would also question their Legal advice too, as it is very clear
they would not be allowed to carry on with their exemption to CDL after
the incidents on their services over the last few years, and to be
pulled on an infringement in June,warned it should not happen again,
then doing the same thing 4 weeks later shows their disregard to the
safety regime, when they were already allowed to operate to lower
standards than most other Operators.
It stinks, and, from postings on other sites, it appears the Owner says
what he wants to happen, and no one challenges him. The Safety Director
should have been sacked in July, but is it all down to the Owner?

--
Remove the '+' and replace with 'plus' to reply by email

Alan Lee <alan@darkroom.plus.com> wrote:
> On 22/12/2023 15:01, Tweed wrote:
>> Seems to be an open and shut case
>>
>> https://assets.caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/3338/ewhc_admin_2023_3338.pdf
>
> Reading that report shows that WCR still do not 'get it' when it comes
> to railway safety. They've been on the edge of being banned from running
> trains a number of times now, they were suspended a few years back.
> They had one warning about the door safety this year, and were allowed
> to carry on for a few more weeks, then an anonymous inspection of the
> train again showed they were not following the rules required for them
> to get their exemption. They are clearly just not listening.
> Their Risk Assessments and Method Statements seem to be very lacking. As
> a Site Supervisor, I know how to write these,and the points brought up
> in the report show how naive WCR have been, well, maybe not naive, just
> totally ignorant of their requirements to provide a safe service.
> When they were suspended (2015 ish, after allowing an engine to run
> without having its AWS kit working correctly IIRC), I seem to recall
> that they had to employ a Director who was responsible for the safety of
> their services. What on earth has he/she been doing, after the person
> jumping off a moving train incident (2021?), they should have been all
> over the door locking system, but it seems they take little note of
> safety failings.
> And, one Steward for each coach? That is never going to work, even if
> that means one Steward at each end, to cover the 4 doors there, (if 2
> are not locked out of use) and that is impossible.
> It's clear they are trying to keep costs to a minimum, and they employ
> Staff to write their safety briefs who are not competent, even when they
> are going to Court, they submit incomplete, and wrong documents, a very
> basic error, which a decent Solicitor would not allow to be submitted,
> so I would also question their Legal advice too, as it is very clear
> they would not be allowed to carry on with their exemption to CDL after
> the incidents on their services over the last few years, and to be
> pulled on an infringement in June,warned it should not happen again,
> then doing the same thing 4 weeks later shows their disregard to the
> safety regime, when they were already allowed to operate to lower
> standards than most other Operators.
> It stinks, and, from postings on other sites, it appears the Owner says
> what he wants to happen, and no one challenges him. The Safety Director
> should have been sacked in July, but is it all down to the Owner?
>

Makes you wonder about everything else they do…..