Just to clarify matters, what if any, is the legal obligation for adherence to the stated final date of withdrawal from service of the Class 142 Pacer fleet and would the need for operational use of these units past that point be one that could be challenged in law?
According to the
Northern Franchise Agreement (page 145) the lease for all of Northern's 142 and 144 fleet expires on 31 December 2019. So in the first instance, a new (or revised) lease agreement would have to be sought.
The plan to start returning the Pacers from September 2018 onward had the proviso that "The Franchisee shall not return any rolling stock unit to the lessor or sub lease or hire it or otherwise take steps that render it unable to be used in the delivery of the Passenger Services until a date after any rolling stock unit that can be reasonably regarded as replacing it has been introduced into unrestricted use delivering the Passenger Services."
There's also a section stating:
The Franchisee shall maintain the composition of the Train Fleet during the Franchise Term, unless the Secretary of State otherwise agrees, such that there are no changes to the Train Fleet, including changes:
(a)
to the classes or types;
(b)
to the interior configurations; or
(c)
which may reduce the journey time capabilities,
of any rolling stock vehicles specified in the Train Fleet.
so there'd be need for agreement from the SoS to deviate from the current plan (i.e. keep the Pacers longer.)
But much of this is trumped by the requirements of the
RVAR and
PRM-TSI. The Pacers don't meet these requirements (with the possible exception of
144012), so they'd need either a derogation from the SoS to be used as they are (as per the DDA 1995,
section 47), or authorisation from the SoS to undertake the modifications, on top of permission to renew the lease on the trains. So it ends up being a political decision either way.