• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

East Midlands franchise won by Abellio

Status
Not open for further replies.

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,761
I don't see the problem with Crewe-Manchester Airport capacity.
TPE were offered the route in the ITT by extending one of their Airport terminators to Crewe but declined.
The previous Central Trains version was a very poor performer though, and a single car 153 was not very appealing either.
When the Central Trains services to Manchester Airport were withdrawn in 2003 there were only 2 platforms at the airport now of course there is 4 however there are much more trains using Manchester Airport now than in 2003.

There were other issues as well however with the extension to Manchester Airport such as the only practical platform to use at Crewe was Platform 1 which had to be used by both Central Trains in both directions and the terminating First North Western service from Manchester (Platforms 2,3 and 4 were rarely used as the Euston - Crewe LM service didn't exist and CT only terminated at Crewe on Sundays). Also given that the Central Trains services normally came from Nottingham/Skegness/Lincoln Central or Cleethorpes delays were common by the time the trains reached Crewe. Back in 2002 I know Central Trains trialed extending the Nottingham - Crewe services to Liverpool Lime Street on Sundays which may be an option in the future.

More likely to be LNR extension of the london - crewe via rugeley service to manchester airport. Which according to a another user was a service ran by first north western back in the day?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,115
More likely to be LNR extension of the london - crewe via rugeley service to manchester airport. Which according to a another user was a service ran by first north western back in the day?

There were some North Western Trains and later First North Western services to London operated by Class 322 units however like many open access operators on the West Coast Mainline Virgin Trains didn't like competition and it didn't last long.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,827
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
There were some North Western Trains and later First North Western services to London operated by Class 322 units however like many open access operators on the West Coast Mainline Virgin Trains didn't like competition and it didn't last long.

It didn't last long because nobody used it. I did once and there was me, the driver, the guard and maybe one person and the proverbial dog and bicycle enjoying a 4-car set to ourselves.

There is basically next to no demand Manchester Airport to/from London because there is the minor matter of the four major airports London already has, and of the BA flights that also serve that route. The demand this route would realistically serve is to intermediate stations. There might these days be a bit more through traffic due to VT's much higher fares than back then, but I think still very little, and that which there already is is probably changing at Stoke/Crewe (ironically with VT Only fares to get there!)

The Rochdale/Victoria/Newton le Willows service died due to a lack of decent paths over which VT may well have had an influence (and was much better used), but that was a couple of years later.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,761
It didn't last long because nobody used it. I did once and there was me, the driver, the guard and maybe one person and the proverbial dog and bicycle enjoying a 4-car set to ourselves.

There is basically next to no demand Manchester Airport to/from London because there is the minor matter of the four major airports London already has, and of the BA flights that also serve that route. The demand this route would realistically serve is to intermediate stations. There might these days be a bit more through traffic due to VT's much higher fares than back then, but I think still very little, and that which there already is is probably changing at Stoke/Crewe (ironically with VT Only fares to get there!)

The Rochdale/Victoria/Newton le Willows service died due to a lack of decent paths over which VT may well have had an influence (and was much better used), but that was a couple of years later.

Still an option though for the future, cant see abellio taking east midlands services to manchester airport via crewe anyway. pathways are surely more complicated compared that way compared to northwestern
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,947
Location
East Anglia
Back in 2002 I know Central Trains trialed extending the Nottingham - Crewe services to Liverpool Lime Street on Sundays which may be an option in the future.
Wasn't that just the Liverpool-Norwich Sunday service which was diverted due to engineering works around Manchester & Sheffield? I recall them departing Lime Street at xx:27 but picking up their booked path from Nottingham. It took 35mins off the through journey time.
 

StaffsWCML

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2019
Messages
221
So a non-compliant fully compliant bid from Abellio. The DfT have absolutely excelled themselves here.

Is Grayling going for a record on the most concurrent lawsuits at once?
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,882
Location
Sheffield
So a non-compliant fully compliant bid from Abellio. The DfT have absolutely excelled themselves here.

Is Grayling going for a record on the most concurrent lawsuits at once?

Latest from Parliament yesterday as reported in The Times today;
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...x?shareToken=370185e647ac85f01e11872629f1a0be

The railways minister has admitted that Abellio’s winning bid for the East Midlands train franchise into London St Pancras may have been technically non-compliant under competition rules, but not by enough to disqualify it.

In an emergency debate called in the House of Commons after disclosures yesterday in The Times, Andrew Jones, the rail minister, also failed to explain why there had been a nine-day delay between Stagecoach’s disqualification from the competition and the announcement of the decision, a period during which the company’s shares fell sharply. Mr Jones said that it was normal process for the transport department to spend time briefing the Treasury and the Cabinet Office.

The Labour front bench had called on Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, to explain his comments to the House last week criticising Rachael Maskell, the shadow rail minister, for making incorrect and inaccurate assertions that Abellio’s bid for the franchise had been faulty. Ms Maskell had been quoting from a leaked transport department memo that stated: “All bids contained some non-compliances.”

Mr Jones, appearing for the absent Mr Grayling, said that franchise bids often had “many small technical non-compliances”. He said that in Abellio’s case its bid “did not constitute a material non-compliance”.
 

StaffsWCML

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2019
Messages
221
Sound like BS from a master BSer. What a load of drivel, so one company can submit a non compliant bid that the government claim is compliant then later say is not 'fully-compliant'. Who get to decide what the definition of material non-compliance actually is? Surely in any 'fair' competition it is either compliant or not compliant?!

What an absolute shambles.

Again perhaps DfT should be considering Abellio's current franchises here, most of them are a shambles. Let them sort that out before awarding any more contracts.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Sound like BS from a master BSer. What a load of drivel, so one company can submit a non compliant bid that the government claim is compliant then later say is not 'fully-compliant'. Who get to decide what the definition of material non-compliance actually is? Surely in any 'fair' competition it is either compliant or not compliant?!

What an absolute shambles

Agreed.

I could understand if some bidders disqualified themselves by deciding that being lumbered with the open ended pensions costs wasn't worth it - if Stagecoach felt that these uncertainties turned the franchise into an unstable liability and decided to walk away then fair enough - but to then award the franchise to another company who submitted a non-compliant bid is crazy.

This will be a good few months for Lawyers!
 

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,772
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
What a load of drivel, so one company can submit a non compliant bid that the government claim is compliant then later say is not 'fully-compliant'. Who get to decide what the definition of material non-compliance actually is? Surely in any 'fair' competition it is either compliant or not compliant?!.

As HH pointed out another thread recently (I do not know how do make a link to it), most bids are non-compliant in some respects.

Who decides if a bid is fully complaint or not will be the organisation receiving the bid. In a very complex situation such as a rail franchise bid, some degree of non-compliance isn't surprising. A smaller issue can possibly be fixed. A larger one, like not taking on the pensions risk when you'd been asked to, obviously cannot be.

If a bidder is ruled out because of non-compliance they can seek a judicial review, or perhaps some other form of legal action. Their legal advisers will tell them what chance of winning they have - or of losing and paying the other side's costs. An unsuccessful bidder who thinks the winner's bid was non-complaint can also consider legal action. In doing so they would think about how "material" the issue was and what chance there is of persuading a court that the organisation receiving the bid made a wrong decision in regarding the non-compliance as "not material".

If the DfT was left with only one bid, that was non-complaint in a way it did not consider serious, and financially was not too far from other bids received (a matter we tend not to know about), then should it accept that bid, or scrap the competition and start again, with all that that implies in costs all round (including the DfT) and further delays to any service improvements? Maybe a new set of bids would all be less favourable financially than the one they'd got.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,662
Location
Mold, Clwyd
A fuller write-up, as usual, is in Railway Gazette:
https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...east-midlands-franchise-disqualification.html
Stagecoach has issued its claim at the High Court in London under Part 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, alleging that DfT breached its statutory duties under Regulation 1370/2007, which requires the government to adopt a competitive tendering process which is open to all operators, fair, transparent and non-discriminatory.
...
Stagecoach said it had informed the DfT that it was also preparing a claim for judicial review of the decision to disqualify it from the process, and was also considering legal action against DfT in respect of the ongoing competitions for the West Coast Partnership franchise and the next South Eastern franchise, from which it has also been disqualified for similar reasons
It looks like this is just the first of several legal claims.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,661
Location
Redcar
A reminder that there is a thread for discussion of new rolling stock for the EMR franchise which can be found in the Traction & Rolling Stock section of the Forum here. Please ensure that rolling stock discussion is kept out of this thread.

Many thanks,
ainsworth74
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,661
Location
Redcar
What an absolute complete Omnishambles. How is it that everything can be so comprehensively mismanaged by one department
As someone who regularly deals with the Department for Work and Pensions in some ways its encouraging to see that it's not just one Department that's grossly incompetent. Though that might just be to avoid breaking down in tears at the state of it all....
 

Japan0913

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2017
Messages
232
Link to this below
8 May 2019
Stagecoach Group plc Commencement of legal action against the Department for Transport
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/SGC/14067002.html

On the other hand

Abellio Statement on East Midlands franchise award

08May2019
https://www.abellio.com/news/abellio-statement-east-midlands-franchise-award
Commenting on media coverage in relation to the East Midlands rail franchise, a spokesperson for Abellio said:

“Abellio has been selected by the Department for Transport as the successful bidder to run rail services on the East Midlands Railway from August 2019 to 2027.

“Abellio put forward a bid, after listening carefully to the local community and passengers, which will deliver new trains, jobs, faster journey times, station improvements and create over 30 apprenticeships per annum for young people. Abellio also brought its expertise to offer a compelling opportunity to ensure that the East Midlands railway will become one of the most environmentally friendly in the UK, with a commitment to trials of hydrogen fuel cell trains and zero-carbon station pilots.

“Following the announcement there has been a short ‘standstill period’ - an important part of the franchise awarding process that allows all involved in bidding to ask confidential questions of the Department for Transport to fully understand how they have made their decision.

“As a responsible and experienced rail operator Abellio has taken great care in abiding by the rules of the franchising process during the standstill period and has not issued statements or briefing to the media. Once the standstill period has passed we will take steps to share in detail the plans we have to enhance the East Midlands railway over the coming years. We’re looking forward to working with the East Midlands Trains management and frontline team who have laid such excellent foundations for us to build on. Abellio has already been contacted by many passengers and local stakeholders who are keen to work with us as soon as we are given the go-ahead.

“However, ahead of this it is appropriate that we comment on media reports over recent days.

“Abellio has been successful and unsuccessful in bids over many years. Our view is that the East Midlands competition has been conducted in a robust and fair manner, through a process run by an experienced Rail Franchise team within the Department for Transport. The process is designed to ensure the best bid for the passengers and UK taxpayer

“There have been reports suggesting that Abellio viewed material that was shared with us in a genuine error by Network Rail during the bidding process. They are inaccurate.

“The facts are that experienced Abellio staff took immediate and responsible action to bring the matter to the attention of the Department for Transport. The Department then commissioned an independent investigation that confirmed beyond any doubt that the material had not been opened or read by any Abellio staff.

“For many decades ensuring that the Rail Pension Scheme is fully funded has been an ongoing responsibility for everyone involved in running the railway. Abellio is working constructively with the Pension Trustees, Rail Delivery Group, employee representatives, the Department for Transport and the Pensions Regulator to maintain the pension scheme for the long term.

“Abellio, along with many other multi-national organisations who have submitted compliant bids for current competitions, are satisfied that the protection mechanism put in place by the Department for Transport suitably balances all parties’ risk.

“Abellio’s focus will remain on delivering for the passengers and communities that we serve whilst rebuilding public trust in the railway. This is evident in the huge contribution we are making to the UK’s railway, particularly by our overseeing of more than £3bn investment into new rolling stock, our work collaborating with Network Rail to improve train punctuality and our efforts to improve the UK railway for all through engagement in the Williams Review.

“Abellio looks forward to working with the people of East Midland Trains to ensure the communities in the East Midlands enjoy the benefits of our collective commitment and expertise over the coming years to deliver easier journeys, every day. “

END
Will this franchise settle by August?
The government, as at the time of the LNER, tentatively whether to nationalize?
 

CeeJ

Member
Joined
25 Jun 2017
Messages
157
A full judicial review isn't likely to be completed in time for Abellio to take over the franchise, so I imagine DfT will be either booting up OLR 2 (intriguingly, 'DFT OLR3 Limited' was registered as 'EM Trains' until March this year) or negotiating an extension with Stagecoach? Although the latter seems a bit unlikely, with no announcement on Southeastern yet, they might even be looking at operationalising a third OLR within the space of 14 months.
 

Japan0913

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2017
Messages
232
A full judicial review isn't likely to be completed in time for Abellio to take over the franchise, so I imagine DfT will be either booting up OLR 2 (intriguingly, 'DFT OLR3 Limited' was registered as 'EM Trains' until March this year) or negotiating an extension with Stagecoach? Although the latter seems a bit unlikely, with no announcement on Southeastern yet, they might even be looking at operationalising a third OLR within the space of 14 months.

DOHL
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/dft-olr-holdings-limited/about

About us
DOHL maintains the continuity of passenger rail services if a passenger rail franchise terminates and is not immediately replaced.

DfT OLR Holdings Limited (DOHL) was established by the UK Government’s Department for Transport. DOHL fulfils the Secretary of State for Transport’s requirements under Section 30 of the Railways Act to maintain the continuity of passenger rail services if a passenger rail franchise terminates and is not immediately replaced.

DOHL is committed to working closely with all aspects of the rail industry to ensure the continued provision of critical passenger rail services.

On 24 June 2018, DOHL took on the running of the East Coast Main Line, through a wholly owned subsidiary, London North Eastern Railway (LNER).

Perhaps, the government started to EMR, Abellio will take over.

West Coast Partnership, Southeastern, and, Crosscountry.
The surge in OLR.
 
Last edited:
Joined
24 Jun 2014
Messages
432
Location
Derby
The bottom line in all of this is that we do not know the scoring system used by the DfT, and if they told bidders that compliance with certain requirements was mandatory.

If the DfT had made compliance with certain requirements mandatory in the ITT, any bidder submitting proposals which did not meet these mandatory requirements was knowingly submitting a non-complaint bid, and should have done so in the knowledge that their offer was likely to be rejected. However, there are no reasons as to why non-compliances can't be submitted for other elements of the ITT, and those undertaking the tender evaluation will mark-down such non-compliances accordingly; this is typical in any tendering/evaluation process.

It should be noted that public procurement rules prevent post tender negotiation; clarification of bids is permitted - and very often happens - but whereas in most of the private sector it is permitted for buyers and sellers to discuss and vary bids after their submission, the DfT could not have contacted Stagecoach after tender submission and given them the opportunity to revise their bid and make it compliant with any mandatory requirements of the ITT.

It will be interesting to see how this goes forward. The standstill period was voluntary, and therefore the DfT could have awarded the franchise to Abellio when the announcement of them being selected as preferred bidder was made back in April; moreover, the Stagecoach press release doesn't specifically state that the company is asking the High Court to prevent the DfT from awarding the contract to Abellio.

A question of all "legal eagles" looking in; is it significant that the action regarding the award of the contract to Abellio is being made by East Midlands Trains Ltd and not Stagecoach Group plc? Would it not have been the parent - Stagecoach Group plc - who was invited to bid for the three franchises?
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,157
What an absolute complete Omnishambles. How is it that everything can be so comprehensively mismanaged by one department
You are perhaps being a little unfair. Ministers can direct civil servants to do things even if they are likely to cause problems. According to docunents published by the NAO apparently exactly that happened in DfT over the ferry fiasco..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48208121

The common factor is Failing Grayling.
 
Last edited:

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
There were some North Western Trains and later First North Western services to London operated by Class 322 units however like many open access operators on the West Coast Mainline Virgin Trains didn't like competition and it didn't last long.

It wasn’t that Virgin Trains doesn’t like competition, it was more to do with the fact that the promised upgrade of the WCML to 140mph wasn’t happening amongst other promised upgrades and the limitation of competition was put in place by the DfT as a form of compensation.

Which is why since 1997, there hasn’t been many successful companies running on the WCML other then Virgin Trains, Silverlink etc
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,157

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,396
DfT have 'total confidence' in their processes. They said that over the WCML debacle and the Eurotunnel litigation too...
The NAO just did a mini report on the Ferry/Eurotunnel saga. The NAO found that DfT's Accounting Officer pointed out in advance that DfT were likely to get sued.
That is an interesting version of "Total confidence" when they know they didn't or is it that they expected to get sued anyway what ever they did.
 
Last edited:

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,157
The NAO just did a mini report on the Ferry/Eurotunnel saga. The NAO found that DfT's Accounting Officer pointed out in advance that DfT were likely to get sued.
That is an interesting version of "Total confidence"
Yup. I posted on that separately (directly above the post that you quote). Some interesting comparison of Failing's public comments with internal advice too...
The Accounting Officer is, by the way, the Permanent Secretary - the most senior civil servant in the Department - who has responsibilities with respect to financial issues to Parliament.
 

jw

Member
Joined
25 Jul 2010
Messages
167
Confirmed by @transportgovuk that @AbellioRailBus has now signed the East Midlands franchise contract. pic.twitter.com/lptEOxb6jg

Richard Clinnick of Rail has just tweeted that DfT and Abellio have inked the franchise agreement.

DfT must feel pretty confident in their defence against the Stagecoach legal action.
 

Verulamius

Member
Joined
30 Jul 2014
Messages
245
Richard Clinnick of Rail has just tweeted that DfT and Abellio have inked the franchise agreement.

DfT must feel pretty confident in their defence against the Stagecoach legal action.
Not necessarily. Over the past couple of years there has been judicial reviews over Merseyrail and TfL rolling stock. In both cases the winning bid was allowed to be signed but with authority due to pay damages if the judicial review succeeds.

I am not aware that Stagecoach has issued a writ to postpone the contract signing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top