Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway updates

[Zontar]

They have had a job advert on their website for months recruiting drivers and driver managers for months now. London and Wrexham depots.
North wise might interest a few tfw drivers and south wise, a whole bunch of unhappy drivers!

And this is all assuming the traincrew depot is in Wrexham. Which would make sense from a PR perspective, but it'll be interesting to see how well they do recruiting drivers, if they're planning on taking on qualifieds

 

[craigybagel]

They have had a job advert on their website for months recruiting drivers and driver managers for months now. London and Wrexham depots.
North wise might interest a few tfw drivers and south wise, a whole bunch of unhappy drivers!

It just says "North Wales area" rather than Wrexham specifically, which is intriguing given they still insist on drivers living an hour from depot. I don't see them struggling in London, but in the North it might be more of a challenge.....there's lots of former Wrexham & Shropshire crews still working at TfW and whilst they all seem to have had a great time there, we're all aware of the challenges they initially had after being made redundant. I'm not sure it's a risk many would be willing to take moving to open access - especially as unlike last time, TfW are now one of the highest paying TOCs around.

I'd be tempted myself to make an enquiry - but I've got a wife and a mortgage to think about!

 

[John R]

They have had a job advert on their website for months recruiting drivers and driver managers for months now. London and Wrexham depots.
North wise might interest a few tfw drivers and south wise, a whole bunch of unhappy drivers!

I’d have to be really disaffected to resign my job to go to a speculative start up on a route which has already seen one failure.

 

[Zontar]

It just says "North Wales area" rather than Wrexham specifically, which is intriguing given they still insist on drivers living an hour from depot. I don't see them struggling in London, but in the North it might be more of a challenge.....there's lots of former Wrexham & Shropshire crews still working at TfW and whilst they all seem to have had a great time there, we're all aware of the challenges they initially had after being made redundant. I'm not sure it's a risk many would be willing to take moving to open access - especially as unlike last time, TfW are now one of the highest paying TOCs around.

I'd be tempted myself to make an enquiry - but I've got a wife and a mortgage to think about!

Given it's starting in Wrexham, I'd struggle to see anywhere else in north Wales that would be suitable. Personally I just think it's a poorly worded/edited advert.

TFW might have a decent pay now, but they will soon get leap frogged, plus with gbrail on the horizon there's a whole bunch of opportunities arising, financially and security wise. If it does go Pete tong again, there should be more security due to gbrail in my opinion. But it all depends on what people are happy/comfortable with. I highly doubt the rps will be going to wsmr either.

I’d have to be really disaffected to resign my job to go to a speculative start up on a route which has already seen one failure.

I bet these people exist

 

[A Challenge]

I bet these people exist

But do they exist in North Wales in the numbers required even foer what will presumably be quite a small depot?

 

[Zontar]

But do they exist in North Wales in the numbers required even foer what will presumably be quite a small depot?

Hull trains operate a similar amount of services as wsmr are proposing and they have 30 drivers.
15 at each end? And in answer to your question, only time will tell!!

 

[12LDA28C]

But do they exist in North Wales in the numbers required even foer what will presumably be quite a small depot?

More likely in London with drivers at established TOCs fancying a change...

 

[weeklycommuter]

The following letter dated 11 March 2025 from WSMR is now on the ORR website. WSMR notes the Department for Transport's support for their application and complains about the very long time being taken to reach a decision on their application.

Passenger operators: 2024 and 2025 competing track access applications | Office of Rail and Road

All documents related to competing applications received from passenger operators.

www.orr.gov.uk

https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-03/2025-03-11-wsmr-response-to-nr.pdf

WSMR Section 17 Application – 14 March 2024 – Wrexham General to London Euston
WSMR response to “Network Rail representations for applications affecting the West Coast Main Line (South)” letter of 7 February 2025
1. Thank you for asking for WSMR’s views on Network Rail’s 7 February 2025 letter outlining its reasons for not moving forward with WSMR’s application to operate trains between Wrexham General, Gobowen, Shrewsbury, Telford Central, Wolverhampton, Walsall, Coleshill Parkway, Nuneaton and London Euston.
Purpose of this letter
2. The purpose of this letter is to respond to Network Rail’s 7 February 2025 letter to facilitate expeditious determination by ORR of WSMR’s Section 17 application of March 2024.
3. Such swift determination will enable WSMR to commence wholly new rail connectivity from the May 2025 and/or December 2025 timetables for the 6 key underserved cities and towns of Wrexham, Gobowen, Shrewsbury, Telford, Walsall and Coleshill.
4. This letter also aligns with the support for WSMR services most recently noted:
a) By the Secretary of State for Transport, Rt. Hon. Heidi Alexander MP in Parliament on 13 February 2025.
b) In the Open Access principles set out by the Secretary of State in her letter to the ORR of 6 January 2025 in respect of opening up direct connectivity markets that do not exist today.
c) By the Department for Transport in its letter to ORR of 4 February 2025, including its own assessment indicating the proposal would meet the ‘Non-Primarily Abstractive’ (NPA) test, and subject to any risks to performance being mitigated “as far as is possible”.
d) In the support of multiple local stakeholders along the WSMR route.
Scope of this letter
5. Its principal scope is to address and resolve the issues raised in Network Rail’s letter to ORR of 7 February 2025 and thus facilitate ORR’s determination of WSMR’s Section 17 application.

An extensively delayed determination process
6. For our wider contextual analysis of the lengthy delay in determination of WSMR’s 14 March 2024 Section 17 application we attach our letter to you of 22 July 2024, some 9 months ago.
7. We do not restate the detail of this analysis, but paragraphs 8-15 below summarise the key components of a scale of delay running directly counter to the ORR’s principles of timely, prompt and fair assessment.
8. This delay is further exacerbated by the content of Network Rail’s letter of 7 February 2025.
9. ORR will recall that WSMR started working with Network Rail on timetable development of its proposed service in February 2023, more than 2 years ago, with this being:
a) 14 months prior to the ORR’s 24 April 2024 letter to the industry setting out its ‘Competing and/or complex track access applications for December 2024, May 2025 and December 2025 timetable changes’ process ('ORR 24 April 2024 Process').
b) 16 months before Network Rail’s ‘High Level Plan’ (‘NR High Level Plan’) set out in its 05 June 2024 response to ORR in respect of its 24 April 2024 letter.
c) 24 months before Network Rail’s 7 February 2025 letter.
10. Network Rail also carried out the pre-Section 17 submission industry consultation in November-December 2023, 14 months before Network Rail’s 7 February 2025 letter.
11. WSMR’s Section 17 application was made to ORR 12 months ago, pre-dating the 'ORR 24 April 2024 Process' and the ‘NR High Level Plan’, and a significant number of post-24 April 2024 competing Open Access applications.
12. Network Rail’s letter of 7 February 2025 confirms the existence of 9 West Coast South Rugby Euston Open Access paths but concludes that notwithstanding two years of work with WSMR and nine months of work under the ‘NR High Level Plan’ it is unable “to comment on the ability to accommodate the rights between their origin and destination”.
13. However, Network Rail’s letter does comment on a breadth of topics, including Euston Station passenger flows and the impacts of HS2 away from the geography and Section 17 application timeline of WSMR services, and in doing so appears to extend beyond the fundamental purpose of the 'ORR 24 April 2024 Process' to address specific timetable capacity concerns for various identified pinch points on the Network.
14. It is unfortunate that Network Rail’s Timetable Capacity Assessment contained in the 7 February 2025 letter, undertaken in September 2024, was not shared with WSMR (or presumably ORR) for comment and resolution for c. 5 months, adding further to determination delay.
15. WSMR believes it is disproportionate, unnecessary and in breach of ORR’s principles of fairness that its application under the ORR’s preceding processes has been drawn into the significant national evaluation of capacity instigated via the 'ORR 24 April 2024 Process' and ‘NR High Level Plan’, and that this is continuing to inappropriately delay and preclude ORR’s determination.

This is the letter from Network Rail dated 7 February 2025. It does raise the question as to how long it will take for Network Rail to deliver their final representations for access applications affecting the West Coast Mainline South Euston to Nuneaton which includes the WSMR application and also the applications from Virgin Trains and Lumo.

https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/defaul...-south-applications-dated-7-february-2025.pdf

Network Rail representations for applications affecting the West Coast Main Line (South)
As requested in ORR’s correspondence of 23 January 2025, Network Rail is writing to ORR to provide representations in relation to one of the nine interacting locations listed in ORR’s letter to the Industry dated 24 April 2024 on ‘Competing and/or complex track access applications for December 2024, May 2025 and December 2025 timetable changes’. That interacting location is WCML South – Euston to Nuneaton.
The purpose of this representation is to provide an informed update to ORR with information regarding capacity availability on the West Coast Main Line (‘WCML’) South between London Euston and Rugby. Whilst the technical analysis referred to in this letter will be used as assurance of the proposed access rights for the current Section 22A’s and Section 17’s applications affecting the WCML (South), this representation does not constitute our final representations on any of the applications (or specific access rights within that application) currently being sought.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The following letter dated 19 March 2025 from Network Rail on the Office of Rail and Road website indicates Network Rail's final representation on the WSMR application will be sent to ORR in the week commencing 21st April 2025. It will then be up to the ORR to make the decision on the WSMR application.

https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-03/network-rail-approach-to-access-decisions-2025-03-19.pdf

28. We do not want to take longer than is needed to provide our representations on any application and we look for opportunities to expedite our assessment of any applications. The following packages of representations are expected to be with you in the next few weeks:
Week commencing 24th March
· Final representations on an initial tranche of ten individual applications including eight relating to the East Coast Mainline.
· One additional final representation on a national passenger application
Week commencing 7th April
· Final representations on a further group (4) of applications from Eastern Region.
· Final representations (2) from Southern Region
· Initial group of Freight Representations (7) which will all be final representations or able to be used as final representations (e.g., in some cases if quantum can be used as well as 1 hour firm right windows)
Week commencing 14th April
· Final Representations (2) from Scotland
· Freight representations (see below).
Week Commencing 21st April
· General representations on power modelling from North West & Central Region
· Final or further representations on a group of applications (6) relating to the West Coast Mainline.
· Freight representations (see below).
Weeks Commencing 28th April
· Freight representations (23) on remaining applications not submitted w/c 7/4/25, will be submitted across April – (see previous weeks) - either as Final or Further Representations depending on capacity assessments. We intend to have all of them completed by the end of April. Where further representations are made, Final representations would be made as soon as possible and any of those remaining can be expected to be made after the end of Phase 5 of our High-Level Plan (that ends 13th June 2025).
29. This leave us with around a dozen passenger representations (some of which are alternates by the same operator) by the end of Phase 5 of our High-Level plan that runs until 13 June 2025. However, we anticipate being able to provide final representations on number of these individual applications from across the network during April and May – reducing that number further.

I assume the group of 6 applications refers to the following list of applications on the following page of the ORR website.

Passenger operators: 2024 and 2025 competing track access applications | Office of Rail and Road

All documents related to competing applications received from passenger operators.

www.orr.gov.uk

Caledonian Sleeper: Caledonian Sleeper Limited S22A 9th SA
Lumo: East Coast Trains Limited S17
Avanti: First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited S22A 3rd, 14th, 17th and 18th SAs
Virgin Trains: Virgin Management Limited S17
West Midlands Railway: West Midlands Trains Limited S22A 32nd SA
Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway: The Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway Company Limited S17

 

[AlanL]

I think the WSMR are chasing the ORR to a make decision soon (they hope it's positive) and there was some correspondence to say that all the relevant information from Network Rail should be available by the end of April, but politics may play a part!

 

[weeklycommuter]

I think the WSMR are chasing the ORR to a make decision soon (they hope it's positive) and there was some correspondence to say that all the relevant information from Network Rail should be available by the end of April, but politics may play a part!

The following letter from Network Rail to the ORR dated 25 April 2025 states that Network Rail will provide final representations to ORR on the WSMR and other West Coast Mainline applications in the week commencing 19 May 2025.

https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/nr-representations-wcml-2025-04-25.pdf

Network Rail believes the concerns outlined in this representation together with the representation dated 07 February 2025, on the South section of the WCML provides the ORR with a significant suite of material to support it in its relevant determinations. Network Rail will provide you with final representations in relation to the applications listed below. We expect to provide ORR with these week commencing 19th May 25 (where possible we will seek to expedite).
• First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited (Avanti) 3rd (Monday – Friday and Saturday Only Glasgow and Blackpool extensions)
• First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited (Avanti) 17th (Monday - Friday Glasgow and Blackpool extensions and new services)
• First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited (Avanti) 18th (1 x Liverpool – London Euston each way on a Sunday)
• East Coast Trains Limited (Lumo North West) (Services between Rochdale and London Euston from 2027)
• Virgin Management Limited (Virgin Trains) (Services between WCML destinations and London Euston from 2025)
• The Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway Company Limited (WSMR) (Wrexham-London Euston 5 daily services each way)
Given the current evidence and analysis our current position of not being supportive of the applications is unlikely to change.

 

[The Planner]

The following letter from Network Rail to the ORR dated 25 April 2025 states that Network Rail will provide final representations to ORR on the WSMR and other West Coast Mainline applications in the week commencing 19 May 2025.

So basically, unless the ORR disagrees with NR, no OAO is getting the paths.

(Edited as Avanti will get their rights)

 

[Class 170101]

Except these are already in for May 25
• First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited (Avanti) 3rd (Monday – Friday and Saturday Only Glasgow and Blackpool extensions)
• First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited (Avanti) 17th (Monday - Friday Glasgow and Blackpool extensions and new services)

and this one shouldn't be capacity limiting in the way the above services are so almost certainly shouldn't be disagreed with
• First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Limited (Avanti) 18th (1 x Liverpool – London Euston each way on a Sunday)

Sorry but this should be doable as an extension of existing London to Birmingham / Wolverhampton or London to Chester services rather than as a new dedicated service if demand justifies it
• The Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway Company Limited (WSMR) (Wrexham-London Euston 5 daily services each way)

 

[Zontar]

The following letter from Network Rail to the ORR dated 25 April 2025 states that Network Rail will provide final representations to ORR on the WSMR and other West Coast Mainline applications in the week commencing 19 May 2025.

Can the Orr make a decision before without these?

 

[The Planner]

Can the Orr make a decision before without these?

Would be odd if they did, they will want all the evidence behind it first.

 

[Mollman]

Sorry but this should be doable as an extension of existing London to Birmingham / Wolverhampton or London to Chester services rather than as a new dedicated service if demand justifies it
• The Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway Company Limited (WSMR) (Wrexham-London Euston 5 daily services each way)

The problem is if course that there were direct trains as suggested until Avanti (seemingly under DfT direction) withdrew them.

 

[AlanL]

Very interesting development from NR, however the ORR can also be influenced by political influences as the Shropshire MPs are fully promoting the WSMR application and the Dft are supporting the application in 'principle'.The WSMR have been doing driver training and are close to appointing staff, so perhaps they have been given a 'hint' that their open access application will be successful?

 

[The Middle]

Very interesting development from NR, however the ORR can also be influenced by political influences as the Shropshire MPs are fully promoting the WSMR application and the Dft are supporting the application in 'principle'.The WSMR have been doing driver training and are close to appointing staff, so perhaps they have been given a 'hint' that their open access application will be successful?

Intriguing that they have been interviewing for drivers. You would have to assume any job offer is dependant on the access rights being granted.

 

[Zontar]

Very interesting development from NR, however the ORR can also be influenced by political influences as the Shropshire MPs are fully promoting the WSMR application and the Dft are supporting the application in 'principle'.The WSMR have been doing driver training and are close to appointing staff, so perhaps they have been given a 'hint' that their open access application will be successful?

Was it driver training or PTI training?

Intriguing that they have been interviewing for drivers. You would have to assume any job offer is dependant on the access rights being granted.

One member said they have had an interview but no job offer or details including location or salary.....sounds odd

 

[Clarence Yard]

Can the Orr make a decision before without these?

No. They will get the final NR representations and then invite the applicants to comment on them before doing their final analysis on what has been said by both parties.

When they have done that and come to a conclusion, it will be put to the ORR Board for ratification. Following that, the decision will be issued.

It is quite a mechanical process because it has to stand up legally. They just can’t act on a whim or because of any lobbying.

 

[Zontar]

No. They will get the final NR representations and then invite the applicants to comment on them before doing their final analysis on what has been said by both parties.

When they have done that and come to a conclusion, it will be put to the ORR Board for ratification. Following that, the decision will be issued.

It is quite a mechanical process because it has to stand up legally. They just can’t act on a whim or because of any lobbying.

So we can roughly expect a decision in June then?

 

[Wyrleybart]

Was it driver training or PTI training?

I guess it was PTI checking using 221104.
Presume using SLC drivers.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I guess it was PTI checking using 221104.
Presume using SLC drivers.

Correct, not training as such, more to do with risk assessments/ traction clearance. Network Rail regularly throw this up as a hurdle during the open access application process, claiming that the lack of this information should be taken into account when deciding whether paths should be granted, even when it is blindingly obvious that there are no issues.

Some open access operators would prefer to do this exercise once rights are granted, or the rolling stock is actually available, relying instead on computer based simulations and existing data like the sectional appendix etc- but Network Rail still insist anyway, depending on how enthusiastic they are about the application. I'm not aware of Network Rail being successful with this approach, but it's just a tool they use to throw the kitchen sink in with their objections.

 

[Chippychips]

So basically, unless the ORR disagrees with NR, no OAO is getting the paths.

(Edited as Avanti will get their rights)

Sounds like NR are making it difficult for everyone. Even with the Avanti decision it appeared reluctant as they would've needed an ECS path anyway.

I think there's a lot of emphasis from NR keeping those 9 paths as 'firebreaks' for late running trains and poor line performance. I dunno... is that fair or unfair?
Depends who's side you're on.

If I was WSMR, I'd see it as unfair, considering the plan is to run 5 return trains a day at odd times; low impact plus 4 paths still available for 'firebreaks'.
But as NR I'd see it as fair for the sake of contingency measures for a badly run WCML... but then again, why should WSMR be penalised for a poor line/operators... decisions decisions decisions...

 

[The Planner]

Sounds like NR are making it difficult for everyone. Even with the Avanti decision it appeared reluctant as they would've needed an ECS path anyway.

I think there's a lot of emphasis from NR keeping those 9 paths as 'firebreaks' for late running trains and poor line performance. I dunno... is that fair or unfair?
Depends who's side you're on.

If I was WSMR, I'd see it as unfair, considering the plan is to run 5 return trains a day at odd times; low impact plus 4 paths still available for 'firebreaks'.
But as NR I'd see it as fair for the sake of contingency measures for a badly run WCML... but then again, why should WSMR be penalised for a poor line/operators... decisions decisions decisions...

What's poor about the WCML? There are already 2 approved paths that aren't running yet, the second Liverpool and the Stirling. Where do you draw the line and still be able to recover from issues?

 

[weeklycommuter]

Sounds like NR are making it difficult for everyone.

That is clearly the view of the open access train operators. WSMR's letter is quoted in post #368. Hull Trains sent the following letter dated 25 April 2025 to ORR.

https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/hull-trains-s22a-32nd-sa-response-2025-04-25.pdf

Hull Trains 32nd Supplemental Agreement
I attach a revised draft supplemental which addresses the drafting of NR as well as a “non accommodation“ letter, a response to the NR comments and, for information, our latest
received version of the Dec 2025 SX Kings Cross Station platforming.
In 30 years, I have never experienced such resistance from the infrastructure provider to a train path being introduced. The point-blank refusal to even consider the southbound working carried on for about a year, it was excluded from the ESG T/T and when it was very briefly included in the timetable database, it was removed on instructions from more senior management. Even when it was formerly bid, it has been a struggle to see it being worked on, and we now have that “non accommodation” letter.
It is hard to escape the conclusion that NR has decided which trains to include in its draft timetable and which not to include, based on their idea of what the ESG based December 2025 timetable should contain, irrespective of the applied rights position of participants and irrespective of the need to produce options for the ORR to consider as part of its decision on those rights. We believe the “non-accommodation” letter is part of a NR process of making the facts fit their pre-determined position.

 

[Brubulus]

Does network rail have any real incentive to support these applications? I can see how it would be easier for them to have no trains at all on the network.

 

[Northerngirl]

I still don't see how the line is anywhere near at capacity, as far as I can tell half of the bottlenecks are just caused by inexplicably far apart signals, but If there's no government demands for more train, why would they bother upgrading

 

[The Planner]

I still don't see how the line is anywhere near at capacity, as far as I can tell half of the bottlenecks are just caused by inexplicably far apart signals, but If there's no government demands for more train, why would they bother upgrading

Which line and where?

 

[Zontar]

I guess it was PTI checking using 221104.
Presume using SLC drivers.

I heard rail adventure drivers