• 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!

Government takes ownership of Class 365 fleet

Status
Not open for further replies.

urpert

Member
Joined
1 Dec 2015
Messages
1,164
Location
Essendine or between Étaples and Rang-du-Fliers
From RAIL:

The Class 365 fleet is now the property of the Department for Transport. Currently 21 are leased to Govia Thameslink Railway, with 19 stored at Crewe South Yard.

The ‘365s’ were procured in 1994 under a unique financing model that was put in place by British Rail shortly before privatisation, which meant Government took ownership of the fleet at 0200 on August 15.”

Full article:
https://www.railmagazine.com/news/n...ernment?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


A new Strat*gic R*s*rve?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Murray J

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2019
Messages
711
Location
East Grinstead
Guessing the DfT probably don't like their trains just sitting around unused so I'm guessing they will find a TOC to lease it too soon.
 

47421

Member
Joined
7 Feb 2012
Messages
655
Location
london
They have got an existing PRM derogation/dispensation so perhaps they will pressed into service to replace non-compliant units. GA has the biggest problem, they have got getting on for 100 non compliant 321s and 317s and there is no prospect of getting anything like the required number of 745s and 720s in service to replace them by the deadline, so may well end up on GA, although I think 365s are not currently cleared to operate on some GA routes.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...65-gtr-dispensation-eversholt-19april2018.pdf
 

MrPIC

Member
Joined
30 May 2015
Messages
425
Yeah, I seem to remember that cab steps and door ledges had to be removed when they were taken too/from Ilford for works. Not sure whether they would fit down the WA but doesn't seem likely.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,880
Location
Nottingham
There were big issues with electromagnetic compatibility on this generation of train, so might require quite a bit of safety case work if they are to be used anywhere with older signalling.
 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,631
Location
Gateway to the South West
From RAIL:


The Class 365 fleet is now the property of the Department for Transport. Currently 21 are leased to Govia Thameslink Railway, with 19 stored at Crewe South Yard.

The ‘365s’ were procured in 1994 under a unique financing model that was put in place by British Rail shortly before privatisation, which meant Government took ownership of the fleet at 0200 on August 15.”

Full article:
https://www.railmagazine.com/news/n...ernment?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


A new Strat*gic R*s*rve?
If I did betting I would put money on someone in government/DfT saying something like 'oh darn'. Any word from the RMT yet about how good it is they are nationalised?
 

jamesontheroad

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2009
Messages
2,045
Yeah, I seem to remember that cab steps and door ledges had to be removed when they were taken too/from Ilford for works. Not sure whether they would fit down the WA but doesn't seem likely.

I remember at launch 25 years ago there was a lingering debacle about them not fitting somewhere in or on the approach to Liverpool Street.
 

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,223
A very similar procedure exists for the new Class 385 fleet. After 25 years the Scottish Government will have the right to buy the entire fleet for £1.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
British Rail essentially mortgaged them just before privatisation and now that mortgage is paid off they return to state ownership.

I presume RMT arent celebrating it as it was the state run rail network that flogged them off rather than the privatised companies.
 

js1000

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2014
Messages
1,011
This ownership clause probably explains why Eversholt weren't busting a gut to sign a long-term lease with a TOC for the 365s and why many of them have been in storage or on short term leases.
 

js1000

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2014
Messages
1,011
A very similar procedure exists for the new Class 385 fleet. After 25 years the Scottish Government will have the right to buy the entire fleet for £1.
It's seems like a wise clause as it prevents ROSCOs milking a dilapidated unit well past it use-by date and keeping leasing costs high - Pacers and 150s are examples. Government can take ownership of it after 25/30 years and offer the train at a lower lease cost which reflects its age to TOCs and which in turn should encourage investment in new trains by ROSCOs.
 

rob365

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2019
Messages
13
May explain why there are two sets sat at Hornsey with very distinctive EMR aubergine on the front sections...
 

whoosh

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2008
Messages
1,370
Yes, it's an anti glare trial I believe. The issue is with platform monitors (which are always on the driver's side). The sunlight bounces off the white paintwork, and then this glare then reflects off the flat monitor glass making it difficult to see the images.
The previous darker FCC livery did not suffer from this as badly as the white.
Finally someone has realised there may be something that can be done to stop delays occurring!
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,359
Location
Bolton
Rodger Ford suggests that the paperwork stems from a BR Era agreement which the government of the day did to buy the trains if they were every unnecessary for any reason. This was neccasary to convince BR to initiate the production in York, which the government wanted given the go-ahead for political reasons.

I doubt they ever thought they'd actually have to buy them.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
Yeah, I seem to remember that cab steps and door ledges had to be removed when they were taken too/from Ilford for works. Not sure whether they would fit down the WA but doesn't seem likely.

I also recall this, and something about the air suspension having to be deflated also. But then my memory on this point may be faulty.

However, I don’t believe they are suitable for use on GA. It was always the case that Cl365s could not move towards Ilford under their own power but had to be dragged by a Cl317. When the NLL was closed for engineering work these moves came via Cambridge and up the Lea Valley, but always with the Cl365 being dragged dead by a Cl317.

I cannot see large sums of money being spent on signal immunisation or structure clearance for a short-term solution, if required. It may be that not all of these infrastructure changes would be needed, but the historical facts suggest that the Cl365s are not compatible with the route for whatever reason.
 
Joined
24 Jun 2014
Messages
432
Location
Derby
Rodger Ford suggests that the paperwork stems from a BR Era agreement which the government of the day did to buy the trains if they were every unnecessary for any reason. This was neccasary to convince BR to initiate the production in York, which the government wanted given the go-ahead for political reasons.

I doubt they ever thought they'd actually have to buy them.

Whilst this may stem from a BR era agreement, I'm afraid the rest of the information is incorrect.

Although BR's ships - and many other assets - were leased, Treasury rules prevented it from financing traction and rolling stock by this route (I think the class 50 procurement preceded the introduction of these Treasury guidelines); however, in the early 1990s BR was granted permission by the government to procure trains with a capital value of £150m by lease. A competition was held between GEC-Alstom and ABB, basically to see who could offer most trains for this value; GEC-Alstom offered IC225s for the WCML, ABB class 365s for Network South East - sorry, can't remember how many IC225s were proposed. The two offers were appraised, and investment in 41 x 4-car EMUs for NSE was deemed to give the best return; a complex leasing package was then established, and I THINK it was structured in such a way that ownership would transfer to BR after a period of 25 years.

This procurement/leasing exercise pre-dated the establishment of the ROSCOs. As part of the privatisation process, "ownership" of the class 365s passed to Eversholt; however, these trains didn't belong to BR to start with, and therefore it's possible that Eversholt's ownership is "faux", and they were really just lessors from the owners established as part of BR's original leasing package.

Ownership passed to the DfT roundly 25 years from when the original leasing package for the class 365s was established; however, it is possible this transfer of ownership is by "accident" rather than deliberate. The British Railways Board continued to exist for many years after it ceased to be a railway operator, and it is possible that the "deal" established with Eversholt as part of the privatisation process still envisaged that ownership would pass to it when the original lease period expired; however, much more recently the BRB has been wound-up, and I believe its remaining obligations were transferred to the DfT. If this is correct, this could be the reason for ownership of the class 365s passing to the DfT on 15 August 2019.

Keeping York Works open was just a fortunate coincidence, and did not feature in the tender evaluation process in any way.
 

MrPIC

Member
Joined
30 May 2015
Messages
425
I also recall this, and something about the air suspension having to be deflated also. But then my memory on this point may be faulty.

However, I don’t believe they are suitable for use on GA. It was always the case that Cl365s could not move towards Ilford under their own power but had to be dragged by a Cl317. When the NLL was closed for engineering work these moves came via Cambridge and up the Lea Valley, but always with the Cl365 being dragged dead by a Cl317.

I cannot see large sums of money being spent on signal immunisation or structure clearance for a short-term solution, if required. It may be that not all of these infrastructure changes would be needed, but the historical facts suggest that the Cl365s are not compatible with the route for whatever reason.

Yes quite right, however the new GA stock has longer coaches etc so any gushing limitations may well be solved/about to be solved for that. However like you say, the chances in my eyes of 365's anywhere on GA is fairly slim.
 

modernrail

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,048
Whilst this may stem from a BR era agreement, I'm afraid the rest of the information is incorrect.

Although BR's ships - and many other assets - were leased, Treasury rules prevented it from financing traction and rolling stock by this route (I think the class 50 procurement preceded the introduction of these Treasury guidelines); however, in the early 1990s BR was granted permission by the government to procure trains with a capital value of £150m by lease. A competition was held between GEC-Alstom and ABB, basically to see who could offer most trains for this value; GEC-Alstom offered IC225s for the WCML, ABB class 365s for Network South East - sorry, can't remember how many IC225s were proposed. The two offers were appraised, and investment in 41 x 4-car EMUs for NSE was deemed to give the best return; a complex leasing package was then established, and I THINK it was structured in such a way that ownership would transfer to BR after a period of 25 years.

This procurement/leasing exercise pre-dated the establishment of the ROSCOs. As part of the privatisation process, "ownership" of the class 365s passed to Eversholt; however, these trains didn't belong to BR to start with, and therefore it's possible that Eversholt's ownership is "faux", and they were really just lessors from the owners established as part of BR's original leasing package.

Ownership passed to the DfT roundly 25 years from when the original leasing package for the class 365s was established; however, it is possible this transfer of ownership is by "accident" rather than deliberate. The British Railways Board continued to exist for many years after it ceased to be a railway operator, and it is possible that the "deal" established with Eversholt as part of the privatisation process still envisaged that ownership would pass to it when the original lease period expired; however, much more recently the BRB has been wound-up, and I believe its remaining obligations were transferred to the DfT. If this is correct, this could be the reason for ownership of the class 365s passing to the DfT on 15 August 2019.

Keeping York Works open was just a fortunate coincidence, and did not feature in the tender evaluation process in any way.
So are we saying that the DfT now owns the underlying asset but Eversholt still benefits from a lease of the trains with a term that runs into the future and a right to sublease for rental income?

If so, it is an interesting one. If Eversholt does not have the right to scrap the trains an take the scrappage monies, that would increase the incentive on them to press the units back into service for income?

It would also be interesting to know if the Eversholt lease was for a big upfront payment and then nominal annual rent or is for a meaningful annual rent as that could affect appetite to press back into service.
 
Joined
24 Jun 2014
Messages
432
Location
Derby
So are we saying that the DfT now owns the underlying asset but Eversholt still benefits from a lease of the trains with a term that runs into the future and a right to sublease for rental income?

If so, it is an interesting one. If Eversholt does not have the right to scrap the trains an take the scrappage monies, that would increase the incentive on them to press the units back into service for income?

It would also be interesting to know if the Eversholt lease was for a big upfront payment and then nominal annual rent or is for a meaningful annual rent as that could affect appetite to press back into service.

I guess the answer is we don't know.

Certainly, the class 365s were unique to BR in that they didn't own them, and I do know that this caused a lot of problems at privatisation and there was much legal involvement in sorting this; it is quite possible that, after a period of 25 years (wasn't that the write down period for trains in BR days?) it was planned that they would pass to the BRB (which had to continue to exist because of international obligations and, no doubt, other reasons), and Eversholt made payments to the actual owners out of lease payments it received itself from TOCs. However, BRB ceased to exist - if I remember correctly during the period of the coalition government - and I believe its obligations/etc passed to the DfT.

If there are any members of this forum who worked in BR's legal department at the time of privatisation, they might be able to shed some light on what actually happened those 25 years ago.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,650
Location
Another planet...
I seem to recall another government entity which owned some rolling stock... the DfT weren't keen and forced them to sell up IIRC.
 

d9009alycidon

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2011
Messages
842
Location
Eaglesham
Yeah, I seem to remember that cab steps and door ledges had to be removed when they were taken too/from Ilford for works. Not sure whether they would fit down the WA but doesn't seem likely.

The ones that were used in Scotland pending the availability of the new 385s were modified to fit the local loading gauge, seem to remember cab steps etc being involved, cant see them being converted back after completion of the loan.
 

Tynwald

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2016
Messages
179
In view of there age, 25 years old. There outdated technology, eg. GTO inverter traction package, and the fact that in the next 2 years there will be many more out of work EMU's, some much more modern than 365. I can see these trains having no further employment. A great shame. But in todays railway there no cascade policy, to ensure full life use, of some very expensive equipment
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,389
In view of there age, 25 years old. There outdated technology, eg. GTO inverter traction package, and the fact that in the next 2 years there will be many more out of work EMU's, some much more modern than 365. I can see these trains having no further employment. A great shame. But in todays railway there no cascade policy, to ensure full life use, of some very expensive equipment
The problem is most older EMU stock isn't suitable for cascade given the work needed to address issues with the stock e.g. No Automatic Selective Door Operation for a start which really limits where they could go especially as regards capacity uplift.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,759
You think the government will do the same for other units? 350/2 maybe?

Is their just 40 in the entire fleet, or are their more that the government don’t own yet?
 
Last edited:

MrPIC

Member
Joined
30 May 2015
Messages
425
The ones that were used in Scotland pending the availability of the new 385s were modified to fit the local loading gauge, seem to remember cab steps etc being involved, cant see them being converted back after completion of the loan.

Humm that is interesting. I had heard about 6 months+ back that there were discussions at GA about 365's coming over to bridge the gap between 321/317 and 720, but it was very uncertain and quite some time ago.
We shall see I suppose!
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,754
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
You think the government will do the same for other units? 350/2 maybe?

Is their just 40 in the entire fleet, or are their more that the government don’t own yet?

Just the 40 units. The 41st (365526) was written off in the Potters Bar derailment, although AFAIK two cars from it still survive in non-operational condition.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some end up on GA. The situation over there seems a mess, what with them ordering units which don’t fit in some platforms, and - arguably - not enough new units. But, they have the 379s so it depends what happens with those.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,389
You think the government will do the same for other units? 350/2 maybe?

Is their just 40 in the entire fleet, or are their more that the government don’t own yet?
No this was a fairly unique contract just pre-privatisation with terms that doesn't apply to most other stock contracts (i.e. that purchased by ROSCOs for TOCs). The only other contracts with similar porvisions are IET 800/801, Thameslink 700, all new build London Overground EMUs (378s/710s) and Scotrail 385s
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top