An MP wants your views: How would you rate your experience of using Great Western Railway?

[43096]

I voted good because the new trains are not the fault of GWR but Her Majesties Tories otherwise known as 'DaFT' The Department For Transport - Not GWR's fault

You are aware that IEP was the spawn of DfT under a Labour Government? Admittedly the Tories didn’t kill it off when they should have done and had the chance to.

 

[yorksrob]

Thanks for taking the time to find us and for getting our opinion on these matters. I didn't think anything else was happening in Westminster due to some vote an important person can't get through.

I find the service OK and the new trains are great but you didn't order enough of them. They have 4 carriage trains on at peak times!! Then we see loads of trains stabled up at West Ealing.

I get the feeling the Reading to Paddington line has been on a shutdown/ don't care anymore due to TFL taking it over. Scheduling is crap why stop at Southall when there is a Crossrail train 2 minutes behind? The train is full by Southall and I don't see any getting off.

I think GWR are ok but to be honest I can't wait until TFL take over so that 9 carriage trains will be on service 24 hrs a day! and we will get more services at peak times.

What do people want? A comfortable seat, a bit of air con or heater and for it to show up on time. If you do that right you won't get many complaints.

A comfortable seat and for it to show up on time. I'll happily trade air-con for a compartment and drop-light !

 

[Parallel]

I think that the Government need to look at a new fleet of trains being ordered for the Cardiff to Portsmouth route as well as other services that pass thought Temple Meads that are not London trains. Preferably, these new trains should be bi-mode in order to get greater value for money from the electrification that is taking place between Cardiff and Bath. (It would also reduce fumes in the Severn Tunnel and air pollution in hot spots such as Bath).

To my knowledge, Bath and Temple Meads are no longer due to be electrified, so for the Cardiff - Portsmouth trains, would only run on overhead wires until Patchway. Though if a tri-mode model was made, they could run on third rail from Southampton to Portsmouth. Issue is Cardiff-Pompey isn’t a particularly ‘political’ route and is often pushed to the back. Sadly, I think it’ll be cast off stock for a long time and I can’t see any new builds being deployed for years.

 

[trebor79]

It's fine the times I've used it.
The new trains are an improvement on the old except for the awful DFT specified interior (especially the seats and lack of luggage space) and lack of decent catering unless using the Pullman Dining service.

 

[jimm]

To my knowledge, Bath and Temple Meads are no longer due to be electrified, so for the Cardiff - Portsmouth trains, would only run on overhead wires until Patchway. Though if a tri-mode model was made, they could run on third rail from Southampton to Portsmouth. Issue is Cardiff-Pompey isn’t a particularly ‘political’ route and is often pushed to the back. Sadly, I think it’ll be cast off stock for a long time and I can’t see any new builds being deployed for years.

There is a difference between electrification being paused - as is the case with the routes into Bristol Temple Meads and Didcot-Oxford - and cancelled, as is the case west of Cardiff. The current state of play is detailed and regularly updated in the GW Electrification thread.

 

[Brissle Girl]

This one is for the DfT - Turbos with 3+2 seating is planned to take over the Portsmouth to Cardiff route. I’d argue these trains are not as suitable as the current stock, despite the capacity increase. A lot of business travellers from Southampton, Bristol and Cardiff use the service. Turbos have no tables to rest laptops or to put down drinks etc. The seating will make them claustrophobic and bad from a customer comfort point of view for longer distance passengers. Please allow GWR to put passengers first and refurbish them with 2+2 seating!

To add to my previous comment, Mr Doughty should be made aware that a sister company of GWR (Transpennine Express) will shortly be releasing some good quality diesel multiple unit stock (Class 185 -Desiros) that would be a huge improvement for the Cardiff to Portsmouth route. There is a lot of speculation that the leasing company is going to find a new home for them in the Republic of Ireland, where the operator has tendered for new stock (apparently with the Desiros in mind), as the DfT appears to be showing no interest in re-using them in the UK. This would be a massive improvement in quality for one of the main services from the capital city, would avoid the scandal of relatively recent high quality diesel stock being exported rather than used to improve services in the UK, and could be put in place within the next 12 months. All it needs is for the DfT to agree to fund it before the leasing company finds an alternative use.

 

[jimm]

You are aware that IEP was the spawn of DfT under a Labour Government? Admittedly the Tories didn’t kill it off when they should have done and had the chance to.

Do you seriously think a minister sits in their office one day and says 'I think we need to order new trains for Great Western and East Coast'? Especially as most Rail Ministers last about five minutes in the job and know nothing much about the railways, so strategic planning is about the last thing any of them are up to doing.

The process starts with the civil servants going, 'those trains are a bit old now and there are a lot of them, how do we go about replacing them?'

Then coming up with a way of doing it that ticks the boxes for the Treasury and its only recently-abandoned obsession with cooking the books by using PFIs to pretend the Government is not borrowing money, while actually doing it in a way that is insanely expensive. PFIs were invented during a Tory government...

 

[Envoy]

To my knowledge, Bath and Temple Meads are no longer due to be electrified, so for the Cardiff - Portsmouth trains, would only run on overhead wires until Patchway. Though if a tri-mode model was made, they could run on third rail from Southampton to Portsmouth. Issue is Cardiff-Pompey isn’t a particularly ‘political’ route and is often pushed to the back. Sadly, I think it’ll be cast off stock for a long time and I can’t see any new builds being deployed for years.

I don’t really get what you mean by it not being a ‘political’ route. It passes through areas that vote Labour, Liberal & Conservative so what the heck.

Much expense has already been spent by Network Rail on lowering the track through the Box Tunnel and screwing the overhead electric rail to the roof. My understanding is that putting up the catenary through the historic landscape of Bath will need special attention and they could not electrify into Temple Meads from Parkway until they re-built 4 tracks between the two - which they have now done. Throw in the fact that re-signalling needed to be done and it is easy to see why electrifying this area was put on the back burner. I really can’t see that the completion of electrification of the two routes into Bristol Temple Meads would not happen.

My understanding is that the Cardiff to Portsmouth route is the second most profitable line for GWR. It serves a lot of major cities and towns - Cardiff > Newport > Bristol > Bath > Salisbury > Southampton and Portsmouth being the main places. It was some civil servant at the Department for Transport who decided years ago that 2 coach 158’s running hourly would be sufficient to link these places as after all - the route did not serve London. How wrong he/she was! When Trans-Pennine Express got new trains, some 158’s got transferred to make up 3 coach trains - which have also proved to be inadequate. I note that Trans-Pennine Express are now having to upgrade their fleet again and will be using the new Hitachi Inter City Express Trains in 5 car formations. A pity that our major cities in the south are just seen by the Department for Transport as being a suitable dumping ground for ex-commuter stock from the Thames Valley!

History shows us that the growth of rail travel has been constantly underestimated by the Department for Transport. Just look at what happened when Virgin introduced the Voyagers on the Cross Country routes. Who on earth thought that 4 and 5 coach trains with narrow bodies would be suitable for these long distance routes? The important route linking Nottingham > Birmingham > Cheltenham > Gloucester > Newport & Cardiff even has to make do with 2 or 3 coach Turbostars (170’s) which can be also rammed with people.

It is regrettable that the electrification of the Cardiff to Swansea line has been cancelled and that the new GWR Hitachi trains have to switch to diesel. Had it been decided now to proceed with electrifying this section, then perhaps a case could have been made for Transport for Wales to order their new trains for the Manchester > Cardiff > west Wales services to also be bi-mode? (They could have run on electricity between Manchester & Crewe and between Newport & Swansea). The local stoppers across south Wales could also have run on electricity thus removing air pollution from stations and giving faster acceleration and lower running costs. If the Department for Transport did their costings just based on the London services, then they are surely wrong?

 

[irish_rail]

The complexity of 5 car IET operation is leading to delays and overcrowding and massively driving up staffing costs which in turn pushes up ticket prices.
Pairs of 5 car IETs splitting and joining at Plymouth adds risk to the service performance also and is inconvenient for passengers. Splitting and joining trains numerous times on depots is also causing delays and cancellations.
A larger fleet of full length 9 car trains would reduce costs in the long run and massively increase reliability.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Sadly I am not a frequent rail user (the rail network doesn't have a route that covers my regular journeys) so the last time I used a GWR service was last September (2018) between Pembroke Dock and Llanelli on the last GWR service of the year on that route; hardly representative of GWR's services but mostly a good experience.

I would however like to echo the comments by Parallel and Brissle Girl regarding the proposed use of Turbo DMUs (class 165 and class 166) on the Portsmouth to Cardiff route. I have used that service several times (though not recently) and would generally rate it as good except for lack of capacity and legroom (and, on the last occasion, failed air conditioning which led to me not reaching my destination as the train was cancelled due to the heat). However the class 165 and class 166 trains are suburban DMUs which are in no way ideal for a limited-stop service like the Cardiff-Portsmouth, and do not have gangway connections between units in multiple. The class 158s, with their narrower doors, are far more appropriate save for the fact that there aren't enough of them to run the longer formations necessary. Given the need for extra capacity, I fear in the short term that Turbos are the only option but I hope that the next franchise will be required to bring back class 158s but in 5-car formations (or a new-build tri-mode equivalent with the ability to utilise the sections of overhead and third rail electrification along the route).

NorthernSpirit has suggested splitting the Great Malvern / Worcester to Weymouth and the Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour services at Bristol Temple Meads. I disagree regarding the Portsmouth service, however I feel that the Great Malvern / Worcester / Gloucester services could be split along with the Cardiff-Taunton services. That would allow the Great Malvern / Worcester / Gloucester services to run through to Taunton instead with the Cardiff-Bristol part of the current Taunton service transferring to the Wales & Borders franchise to permit extension to Swansea to create a useful Swansea-Bristol through link.

I think it should be acknowledged that the DfT has a very significant impact on GWR operations.

As a daily user, (as far as I understand) my main gripes are all as a result of DfT instruction. E.g. Cutting short of electrification, passenger comfort and usability of new IETs, downgrading of many services to 5 car IETs, cascade of turbos with 3+2 seating which on paper provides more seats but in reality is uncomfortable.

Yes, the service mid last year was 'bad' but overall I would rate GWR good. It appears DfT are often a problem in which case nationalisation doesn't help!

I would agree with this sentiment. I have not been on one of the new Intercity Express Programme trains yet but the frequent operation of 10-car trains with two kitchens, four cabs and barely any more seats than the 9-car units appears extremely wasteful. A small number of 5-car IET units to replace the class 180s (and Turbos) on London-Cotswolds services would probably have been sensible but the vast majority of the fleet should have been longer trains.

Perhaps when electrification reaches Oxford and Bristol Temple Meads (I hope 'deferred' means 'delayed' and not 'cancelled' like Swansea) it will be possible to replace the three diesel-engined coaches in some of the 5-car sets with seven electric vehicles. That would simultaneously reduce the number of 5-car sets and create a subfleet of straight electric units to take full advantage of the electrified routes. The released diesel vehicles could be added to other 5-car sets, creating 8-car bi-modes with a much-improved power to weight ratio in diesel mode (6 engined coaches to 2 driving vehicles). These would be useful for a cascade, possibly to CrossCountry (which is in dire need of more long trains).

 

[Rob F]

Terrible seats on the new Intercity Express trains.

 

[R G NOW.]

Terrible seats on the new Intercity Express trains.

Maybe if they were made of green leather, perhaps they wouldn't become so grubby.

 

[43096]

Then coming up with a way of doing it that ticks the boxes for the Treasury and its only recently-abandoned obsession with cooking the books by using PFIs to pretend the Government is not borrowing money, while actually doing it in a way that is insanely expensive. PFIs were invented during a Tory government...

Which is utterly irrelevant as they could have gone down the conventional leasing route - that’s not on the Government’s credit card either. It was pure spite that we ended up with the IEP fiasco - all about the Government not liking the way the Competition inquiry into the ROSCOs essentially said the issue was with the DfT.

 

[Weekender]

Firstly I would like to thank you for giving us this chance to take a part in the debate.

As others have said GWR cannot be blamed for the IEP trains as they were specified by a committee at the DFT. I travel from Gloucester to London and the hard seats are very uncomfortable for a 2 hour journey, as is the lighting which is more suitable for an operating theatre than a train.
My main complaint against GWR is the way every time that there is disruption to the system, the Cheltenham line is always sacrificed. It seems easier to cancel the bi-hourly Cheltenham service than one of the more frequent services on other routes.
The staff at Gloucester seem to be friendly and I believe they are as frustrated as the passengers by the decisions taken in London.
Finally an overcrowded hourly service to Bristol is really not good enough as it forces commuters as well as leisure passengers to drive down an equally overcrowded M5.

 

[jimm]

Which is utterly irrelevant as they could have gone down the conventional leasing route - that’s not on the Government’s credit card either. It was pure spite that we ended up with the IEP fiasco - all about the Government not liking the way the Competition inquiry into the ROSCOs essentially said the issue was with the DfT.

It is highly relevant, because I suspect the leasing companies would not have gone near train orders of the size involved or ordered anything to meet the DfT requirements for the trains - which the TOCs would be bound by, as the DfT calls the tune - without substantial financial guarantees from the government.

Never mind who was going to foot the bill for developing a train to meet the DFT requirement in the first place. It wasn't as if lots of manufacturers were queuing up for the work, even under the process adopted by the DfT with the guarantee of a guaranteed 27-year revenue stream once the trains were in service.

 

[Weekender]

I think it would be more helpful to the MP if on this occasion we could just stick to the question rather than arguing amongst ourselves, at least until after tomorrow afternoon.

 

[Deepgreen]

GWR (and the same outfit's previous incarnation of FGW) mainly focuses on its prestige inter-city workings, and its secondary routes are very much second-rate. I use the North Downs line and it suffers from poorly-maintained stock, poor time-keeping and minimal facilities. The TOC has pretty much the same dire public relations quality as so many other TOCs, with responses to e-mails being slow, illiterate and evasive.

 

[sbd]

I find GWR to be a very good operator i use it several times a month for business as i live in Leicestershire ,where the up keep of the eastmidlands services rolling stock is appalling compared too GWR ,
as with railways things can go wrong, but in general i am very impressed with GWR, be very careful for what you wish for my journeys from leicester to london are not in the same league as GWR ,

 

[FGW_DID]

My main complaint against GWR is the way every time that there is disruption to the system, the Cheltenham line is always sacrificed. It seems easier to cancel the bi-hourly Cheltenham service than one of the more frequent services on other routes.
The staff at Gloucester seem to be friendly and I believe they are as frustrated as the passengers by the decisions taken in London.

To be pedantic, that would be decisions taken in Swindon (the Western Route Integrated Control Centre)

 

[Pshambro]

I've gone from shoehorning myself onto a 3 or 5 car turbo with associated scramble for a 2+3 seat to getting a table seat on a 12 car air conditioned train which is nice and quiet allowing me get some work done on the journey. I've travelled travel 2-3 times a week for the last 6 years and can count on one hand the number of times I have been very seriously delayed (maybe I've just been lucky). Pretty much all delays have been infrastructure related: trespass/signalling/track/OLE

 

[lightning76]

As a former regular user of GWR, I found the performance generally to be more than acceptable. The vast majority of journeys I made passed without a hitch, and when disruption was encountered GWR and its staff generally responded as well as they could in the circumstances.

Unfortunately I no longer regularly use GWR, as most of my journeys with them were from Swindon to or from London, and the combination of the price of tickets and the uncomfortable seats in the new trains mean I now choose to drive; even though the journey takes longer, it is more comfortable and far cheaper by car.

 

[michael74]

Not a frequent user but long distance 2 to 4 times a year, Torbay to Paddington, usually a good service, often loose time but normally make it up. Local trains about a couple of times a month, Rivera Line, if the Exeter Chiefs are playing, all trains are Rammed (note the capital R). I know an alternative timetable is used, but not sure what use it is, GWR need to work harder on that. Local trains to Torbay from Newton Abbot on a Saturday night are next to useless 20:01, 20:52, 22:23 and 23:08 usually running so late they get stopped short at Newton Abbot.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

NorthernSpirit has suggested splitting the Great Malvern / Worcester to Weymouth and the Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour services at Bristol Temple Meads. I disagree regarding the Portsmouth service, however I feel that the Great Malvern / Worcester / Gloucester services could be split along with the Cardiff-Taunton services. That would allow the Great Malvern / Worcester / Gloucester services to run through to Taunton instead with the Cardiff-Bristol part of the current Taunton service transferring to the Wales & Borders franchise to permit extension to Swansea to create a useful Swansea-Bristol through link.

The idea, or one of the ideas behind my suggestion to split the Cardiff to Portsmouth service at Bristol was to ensure that Wales gets a unified rail network which can be operated on a 'near as damn it' basis as Scotrail is to Scotland.

The other idea on splitting services, as mentioned is to bolt on the Weymouth service so that both the Bristol to Portsmouth and the Bristol to Weymouth services can interwork more closely to each other using one type of rolling stock (e.g. potentially transfering class 185 'Pennine' units from TransPennine). Speaking of rolling stock, the idea of a CrossCountry service between Bradford Interchange to Weymouth via Brighouse, Denton (not stopping) and Westbury would allow GWR to free up a unit for two to work on other nearby services on the GWR network (such as peak hour) as the route south of Westbury would be more or less be covered by XC by the introduction of a a new service.

Finally, the Cardiff to Brighton service is untouched and is retained for route rentition reasons.

 

[Envoy]

The idea, or one of the ideas behind my suggestion to split the Cardiff to Portsmouth service at Bristol was to ensure that Wales gets a unified rail network which can be operated on a 'near as damn it' basis as Scotrail is to Scotland.

The other idea on splitting services, as mentioned is to bolt on the Weymouth service so that both the Bristol to Portsmouth and the Bristol to Weymouth services can interwork more closely to each other using one type of rolling stock (e.g. potentially transfering class 185 'Pennine' units from TransPennine). Speaking of rolling stock, the idea of a CrossCountry service between Bradford Interchange to Weymouth via Brighouse, Denton (not stopping) and Westbury would allow GWR to free up a unit for two to work on other nearby services on the GWR network (such as peak hour) as the route south of Westbury would be more or less be covered by XC by the introduction of a a new service.

Finally, the Cardiff to Brighton service is untouched and is retained for route rentition reasons.

I think through through trains from Cardiff to Brighton only operate on Sundays - when they are often cancelled due to engineering work. It also does not make much sense to operate diesel trains on the long electrified line on the south coast.

I don't think that the people of Wales would welcome all having to get off a train at Temple Meads and then change to another one for Bath and beyond and vice versa. The only advantage would be that you could have electric trains between Cardiff and Temple Meads or even Bath.

Cross Country are really short of rolling stock and I can’t see them operating on the relatively slow line down to Weymouth. However, I do wish that this line could have an hourly service and perhaps the chord into Yeovil Junction could be re-built so as to provide a short-cut link for people travelling from Weymouth/Dorchester (or even Bournemouth) to Exeter and beyond.

 

[GreatAuk]

My experience is mainly based on commuting within Bristol last year. The while experience was rather frustrating. If traffic wasn't so awful or if busses were faster I would have switched to driving or taking the bus after my first week.

Delays and cancellations were common - sometimes the cause was infrastructure based (e.g. Cable theft) sometimes problems with a train, and sometimes it wasn't clear. Usually this just meant getting to work late and then having to stay late to make up time. However on a couple of occasions I missed important meetings.

Buying tickets was also frustrating (I didn't commute every day so a season ticket was not worthwhile), with large queues at Temple Meads adding extra delay to my journey. How hard would it be to put 5 more ticket machines outside somewhere to eliminate the queues!

However, assuming I managed to buy a ticket and get on a train which ran to schedule, the service was actually OK I thought. Trains were often busy but not too overcrowded and I usually got a seat on my normal trains. They were all quite old but that's not necessarily an issue - some of them were really comfortable with lovely soft seats and loads of room for bikes etc.

The service frequency when I travelled was a sort of irregular 4tph which was OK I suppose compared to lots of other routes.

 

[PaulHarding150]

I echo almost everything that Envoy said at 20:10 on Saturday

I would stress that most of the complaints are about cosmetic issues, you only need to search on WalesOnline for clickbait drivel about the softness of the seats (Not GWR’s decision, but the DfT, and please remember that the original procurement for these trains was launched by the DfT in 2005 and Agility/Hitachi were confirmed as the preferred bidder in 2009).

A bugbear of mine, which hasn’t been mentioned by others is the inconsistency in train formation. I can live it being essentially a lottery as to whether the train arriving is a nine-car set or 2x5 sets (and equally a five car set at quitter times), but too often a five car set works the London-South Wales route at rush hour and when 2x5 cars to run, they’re often either the wrong way around or one set is. Meaning passengers with reserved seats, or a preference for 1st class or the quiet carriage are often at the wrong end of the platform. It also doesn’t help that carriages are assigned a letter (A-E, A-J etc) and the CIS screens in the stations say “First Class is in carriages 4,5,6 and 7).

GWR seem to have completely given up both enforcing the quiet carriage and advertising it internally. The current IEP trains have one poster at the far end of the carriage saying “Sshh!”

As Envoy said the pricing structure doesn’t help passengers. I insist anyone (individual or organisation) buying a £200+ open ended ticket between London and South Wales has more cash than brain cells. Equally I do I think it’s unfair that a Cardiff-Swindon open ended off peak return can cost as little as £22.60 yet the Swindon-London equivalent ticket is closer to £50, despite both journeys taking roughly an hour.

In terms of walk up day fairs, Paddington to Reading (22 minutes) can be bought for £20.60, yet Reading to Swindon (40 minutes) is only £15.30. The DfT needs to work with TfL to ensure that Crossrail/Elizabeth line services from Reading are cheap enough to encourage people to switch at Reading not Paddington even if they’re not heading further east.

It would be lovley to get a firm commitment as to when the 3rd train per hour (at peak times) will run between Cardiff and London oh and for the electrification work and link to Heathrow to happen asap, but that's a different issue.

Staff are a credit to GWR and the rail industry as a whole, trains are clean and relatively comfortable (although you’ll never please everyone!), personally I prefer a buffet over a trolley, but I understand why the DfT, GWR and most passengers prefer a trolley.

 

[FenMan]

I am a regular user of GWR, primarily for North Downs Line journeys from Blackwater via Reading or Guildford to London, Oxford, Gatwick Airport and Heathrow Airport.
I am normally a leisure traveller, but do make journeys for business, mainly to Gatwick or Heathrow,

Following the May 2018 timetable change and various infrastructure failures, the North Downs Line service became very unreliable in the summer and autumn, to the extent that I seriously considered using alternatives when flying from Gatwick. Matters have improved in recent weeks, however reliability is still being compromised by the knock-on impact of the 2018 Thamelink timetable at Gatwick and Redhill, resulting in Reading-Gatwick services being terminated short at Redhill, with poor onward connections to the airport.

Likewise there appears to be little appetite for key stakeholders to address the remaining issues preventing the introduction of a half-hourly Reading-Gatwick timetable, which would make the train option far more attractive than at present while reducing traffic on overcrowded sections of the M4 and M25. Demonstrably there would be significant value in addressing this sooner rather than later if there is a demonstration of political will to push the other stakeholders into taking action.

 

[Hapana]

Positives: 387s are so much better than the 165s that they have replaced. Do appear to have listened to customer feedback re holding connections.
Negatives: We all understand that things go wrong, but the ability to recover, and for Swindon control to provide clear advice through a recovery plan to front line staff during disruption appears sorely lacking. Decisions appear to be made on the hoof, and frequently following staff advice is a bad choice because control have changed their mind after they have communicated with front line staff.

In fact almost universally front line staff appear to dislike "Swindon Control"

 

[Readkite]

I travel by train every weekday, and am consistently let down by delays and poor service. On top of this, here are 3 other areas in which I have been disappointed in the past year:

1. I purchased a Gold Card between Kintbury and London Paddington in January 2018. When purchasing this I was not warned about the upcoming disruption taking place on the Newbury line throughout 2018. The compensation offered for this disruption (25% of the weekday daily rate for the affected days) is inadequate and unacceptable.
2. The new electric trains are claimed to "offer more seats and faster journeys". The reality has been embarrassing: On countless occasions, the 9 car service has been replaced with a 5 car train. This has resulted in customers having to stand from Newbury to Paddington. The older trains always have 8 cars, so this is clearly a step backwards. There have been numerous instances of damaged overhead wires, which have caused further delays (to the usual delays). Trains frequently arrive late from the depot at Paddington. And drivers are also late because they are arriving on another service. There seems to be an inherent problem with the scheduling system given the frequency with which these issues occur.
3. The new electric trains are incredibly disappointing for cyclists, in comparison to the older trains with a dedicated bike carriage. There is little or no signage on the outside of the trains, which causes stress and disruption as I search for the bike section. In the situation where I take the inner bike space, and another cyclist takes the outer bike space - if I am alighting the train before them, I somehow have to unhook their bike, relocate it, unhook my bike, take it off the train, then put their bike back. All while people are trying to get on and off through the same doors! The bike separators are often broken. This means they fall down and can cause damage to the bike.

 

[HouseOfCommons]

Hi all,

Many thanks for all of your comments. Please note that anything added from now will not feed into the briefing that will be sent to Stephen Doughty MP. A link to watch the debate will be posted on this thread tomorrow.