Disabled Woman Stranded Overnight At Lime St

[ClagLover]

Regarding the “she didn’t pre-book” comment from staff, can they not just put the ramp out for her and let her on. Surely that isn’t more than a 2 minute job. And then phone through to Crewe to make them aware that she would need help off.

 

[zwk500]

So much speculation about this woman - it could well be they just went shopping and out for dinner with friends, that’s the sort of evening out most people have when they need to go home at 9:30pm.

@notlob.divad's point still stands though - it wasn't the friends' job to get their friend on the train. There were people there who's job it was, and didn't do it. The question is why.

Regarding the “she didn’t pre-book” comment from staff, can they not just put the ramp out for her and let her on. Surely that isn’t more than a 2 minute job. And then phone through to Crewe to make them aware that she would need help off.

You would need to phone through before putting them on, to ensure there was indeed somebody at the other end before putting them on. So yes it's possible, but requires a little time before departure to allow arrangements to be made.

 

[island]

As with everything there’s three sides to the story, the passenger’s side, the railway’s side, and what actually happened.

The railway’s never going to blame a disabled passenger to the press. Better damage control to give a non-specific apology.

Quite apart from whatever did or did not happen, it’s a pretty poor showing if the last train between two of Britain’s major cities is at half past nine in the evening!

Last trains on Saturdays are always a tad earlier to allow for engineering possessions, as it allows for more work to be done.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

After the 2134 LNW direct to Crewe, there was a 2137 EMR change at Stockport for TfW arr Crewe 2312,
or 2143 Merseyrail (Lime St Low Level) change at Chester for TfW arr 2327.
Neither of these would be attractive to a wheelchair use.

 

[the sniper]

People simply can’t comprehend that some people may have screwed up doing their job.

As a passenger, what you’re telling me is that if I had a negative experience using the railway, and there have been several, you wouldn’t believe me.

You must have missed LowLevel's post...

Some of the passenger assistance staff at Lime St are frankly less than professional and effective (a particular individual went through a spell of reporting guards for refusing to deploy wheelchair ramps themselves rather than the assistance bod doing it which is the service TOCs pay for, saying the guards had "verbally abused them", until they were caught out with multiple witnesses after the very similar reports were noted). But I can't imagine that the facts as reported are correct.

If the dispatcher couldn't see a passenger in a wheelchair on the platform and their friends, (assuming they actually were on the platform, and had positioned themselves as though they wanted to board the train) then the dispatch needs investigating. If they couldn't see the length of the train then how did they know it was safe to dispatch? Something doesn't add up, either the train was dispatched without a proper view along the platform and in which case the dispatcher could possibly be sacked, or the passengers weren't there. I'm sure the whole thing will be investigated and on CCTV.

It would also be interesting to note the guards position as if they could not see due to the curve they may have been in the middle of the train if it was 8 cars. I suppose it's possible the passengers were not actually on the platform but at the end on the concourse waiting for a staff member (assuming that the staff member would come from that direction). If the dispatcher and guard were already both half way up the train to get a better view then it's possible they didn't see them.

While it may well be investigated, if you're familiar with the station and IIRC, if the passengers were inline with the benches/platform furniture (P6/7 is double sided and quite wide) and down by the entrance to the platform (logical) and if it was a double set, the Guard and Dispatcher would have been up the middle of the platform at least. The passengers could have been nowhere near the PTI and out of sight.

 

[Bletchleyite]

After the 2134 LNW direct to Crewe, there was a 2137 EMR change at Stockport for TfW arr Crewe 2312,
or 2143 Merseyrail (Lime St Low Level) change at Chester for TfW arr 2327.
Neither of these would be attractive to a wheelchair use.

More attractive than being stranded overnight.

 

[notlob.divad]

After the 2134 LNW direct to Crewe, there was a 2137 EMR change at Stockport for TfW arr Crewe 2312,
or 2143 Merseyrail (Lime St Low Level) change at Chester for TfW arr 2327.
Neither of these would be attractive to a wheelchair use.

More attractive than being stranded overnight.

I suppose that depends if the alternate options are potentially being stranded at either Stockport or Chester. Alternatively as we don't know her onward travel plans, being stranded at Crewe after 11pm at night

Either way, from the initial report it is clear that if no help had arrived until after the departure of the first train, they are unlikely to make either of the other two options in the 5 minutes and 9 minutes that were available. Particularly as the 2nd option is in an entirely different part of the station.

 

[weastebusdepot]

There was also an LNWR ECS train to Crewe P12 at 2217 (5K59) from P10 which would have made a pretty good taxi.
Realtime Trains - Departures from Liverpool Lime Street

Not if it wasn't booked to run with a guard. There's no way anyone would risk locking passengers on a train with no one to look after them in an emergency. Imagine if the train had broken down between stations and there was no one to carry out a controlled evacuation? No doubt some other local hack would be finding someone to blame then.

On the couple of occasions I've come across people who've turned up at stations fuming because they've got booked assistant and "there was no one to help", one was in the right place but trying get a train an hour earlier than the one they were booked for. The other was at wrong station having got their own taxi to "the railway station" and it wasn't the one their train was leaving from.

 

[simonw]

As with everything there’s three sides to the story, the passenger’s side, the railway’s side, and what actually happened.

The railway’s never going to blame a disabled passenger to the press. Better damage control to give a non-specific apology.

Last trains on Saturdays are always a tad earlier to allow for engineering possessions, as it allows for more work to be done.

Thiis|

I'm always amazed how people take newspaper reports at face value Especially these days when reporters are an endangered species.

AFAIK no one here was at the station when the event occurred so we have no way of knowing what actually happened and why and yet we are on page 3 of comments.

 

[wobman]

Thiis|

I'm always amazed how people take newspaper reports at face vqlue. Especially these days when reports are an endangered species.

AFAIK no one here was at the station when the event occurred so we have no way of knowing what actually happened and why and yet we are on page 3 of comments.

It's obvious newspapers nowadays never fact check before publishing stories.

 

[Watershed]

Not if it wasn't booked to run with a guard

It seems rather unlikely to me that WMT would go to the considerable and unnecessary expense of sending the guard off the inbound working in a taxi to Crewe, when the ECS is a perfectly decent 'pass' ride back to the depot.

I suspect that service simply runs as an ECS for the convenience of the railway, to avoid late night Saturday trouble. It's quite possibly a historic thing from Regional Railways days, during which era a number of known 'troublemaker' trains were simply withdrawn.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems rather unlikely to me that WMT would go to the considerable and unnecessary expense of sending the guard off the inbound working in a taxi to Crewe, when the ECS is a perfectly decent 'pass' ride back to the depot.

I suspect that service simply runs as an ECS for the convenience of the railway, to avoid late night Saturday trouble. It's quite possibly a historic thing from Regional Railways days, when quite a number of known 'troublemaker' trains were simply withdrawn.

There certainly are significant alcohol-related problems on the evening trains towards Crewe out of Lime St, so this wouldn't entirely surprise me.

 

[domcoop7]

As has been said above, one should never take what's written in a newspaper at face value.

But the direct quotes from Network Rail can be taken to be true - the paper wouldn't just make them up.

And they say that:-

"Unfortunately, Miss Webster had not prebooked and arrived at the station less than 10 minutes before her train was due to leave.

"We’re reviewing what happened with staff so we can improve short notice assistance requests in the future.”

So on any analysis, she had arrived at the station before the train departed (and given that they said "less than 10 minutes" and not "less than 5 minutes" or "less than 2 minutes" or "less than the time passengers are advised they need to be on the platform before departure") it was probably around 10 minutes before.

Second clue is the statement about improving "short notice assistance requests". That they included this demonstrates that a request for assistance was made.

Finally, if you assume the passenger isn't being totally honest, then based on the facts we do know, what would be the alternative?

The only one I can think of is that the staff told her she couldn't get assistance as the train was leaving and she didn't pre-book. They told her they may be able to wrangle a taxi, but really shouldn't because it's not their fault. And then some time later came back and said get stuffed.

But if we assume this alternative to be true, why wouldn't the passenger have said that. It would, from her point of view, be equally as good a story to put in the papers:- "Jobsworth Rail Staff leave disabled passenger stranded for not phoning the correct helpline". "I was shocked to be told that the railway can refuse to allow me to board unless I called them one hour in advance - even though I have never needed to do this before! What's more upsetting is there were staff there who could have helped but just refused to."

And if that were true, you'd expect NR to come back and say "sadly due to operational capability we are unable to carry passengers with wheelchairs unless they book at least x minutes in advance. Whilst we are sorry about Mrs Passenger's case, station publicity does make this clear. We do listen to customer's concerns and take them on board, blah blah".

So looking at this forensically, I'd say it all points to the passenger's recollection being correct. The alternatives don't fit, and what little evidence there is supports only the passenger's statement.

(I may be biased against Lime Street though. I had a client who said the ticket barrier started to open and then retracted back to the closed position whilst he was moving through, and the bar hit him on the arm with some force - probably amplified because he was moving the opposite direction at the time. Northern Rail staff who staffed the barriers outright denied it, and indeed said they remembered the incident and he was lying. Network Rail who own the barriers denied this was even possible. Yet it was written in the incident book,so we didn't give up. But still they denied it. We got the CCTV from Network Rail, and sure enough it showed exactly what our client said had happened. They then admitted liability and paid out despite previously having adamantly called my client a liar and in effect accused him of fraud.)

 

[Djgr]

As has been said above, one should never take what's written in a newspaper at face value.

But the direct quotes from Network Rail can be taken to be true - the paper wouldn't just make them up.

And they say that:-

So on any analysis, she had arrived at the station before the train departed (and given that they said "less than 10 minutes" and not "less than 5 minutes" or "less than 2 minutes" or "less than the time passengers are advised they need to be on the platform before departure") it was probably around 10 minutes before.

Second clue is the statement about improving "short notice assistance requests". That they included this demonstrates that a request for assistance was made.

Finally, if you assume the passenger isn't being totally honest, then based on the facts we do know, what would be the alternative?

The only one I can think of is that the staff told her she couldn't get assistance as the train was leaving and she didn't pre-book. They told her they may be able to wrangle a taxi, but really shouldn't because it's not their fault. And then some time later came back and said get stuffed.

But if we assume this alternative to be true, why wouldn't the passenger have said that. It would, from her point of view, be equally as good a story to put in the papers:- "Jobsworth Rail Staff leave disabled passenger stranded for not phoning the correct helpline". "I was shocked to be told that the railway can refuse to allow me to board unless I called them one hour in advance - even though I have never needed to do this before! What's more upsetting is there were staff there who could have helped but just refused to."

And if that were true, you'd expect NR to come back and say "sadly due to operational capability we are unable to carry passengers with wheelchairs unless they book at least x minutes in advance. Whilst we are sorry about Mrs Passenger's case, station publicity does make this clear. We do listen to customer's concerns and take them on board, blah blah".

So looking at this forensically, I'd say it all points to the passenger's recollection being correct. The alternatives don't fit, and what little evidence there is supports only the passenger's statement.

(I may be biased against Lime Street though. I had a client who said the ticket barrier started to open and then retracted back to the closed position whilst he was moving through, and the bar hit him on the arm with some force - probably amplified because he was moving the opposite direction at the time. Northern Rail staff who staffed the barriers outright denied it, and indeed said they remembered the incident and he was lying. Network Rail who own the barriers denied this was even possible. Yet it was written in the incident book,so we didn't give up. But still they denied it. We got the CCTV from Network Rail, and sure enough it showed exactly what our client said had happened. They then admitted liability and paid out despite previously having adamantly called my client a liar and in effect accused him of fraud.)

So sounds like staff might have previous

 

[Bletchleyite]

If this train had a guard, why can someone in a wheelchair not simply rock up right up to departure and the guard do it?

It is possible to provide for it in this way, ergo not to is a failure to make a reasonable adjustment and thus an offence.

 

[RHolmes]

If this train had a guard, why can someone in a wheelchair not simply rock up right up to departure and the guard do it?

It is possible to provide for it in this way, ergo not to is a failure to make a reasonable adjustment and thus an offence

It wouldn’t possible in all scenarios for this to happen.

An example could be at the next station another wheelchair passenger had booked the space and also expects to be taken to their destination station.

 

[the sniper]

If this train had a guard, why can someone in a wheelchair not simply rock up right up to departure and the guard do it?

It is possible to provide for it in this way, ergo not to is a failure to make a reasonable adjustment and thus an offence.

As has been said, if they'd seen/talked to the Guard, that's probably what would have happened. Theoretically it should speed the process up and make it smoother if done by the station staff, particularly when arranged in advance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It wouldn’t possible in all scenarios for this to happen.

An example could be at the next station another wheelchair passenger had booked the space and also expects to be taken to their destination station.

I know it's not allowed on buses, but on trains is it permissible to carry a wheelchair user in the vestibule if the space is already taken, or would they have to transfer to a seat and fold their chair?

 

[185]

known 'troublemaker' trains were simply withdrawn

Correct. This ECS was previously one of them, possiblity the worst in the north for fighting, waiting police after assaults, incidents.

 

[the sniper]

Correct. This ECS was previously one of them, possiblity the worst in the north for fighting, waiting police after assaults, incidents.

People talk about bad trains, but those must have been some of the worst in the country in the LM days. Not a matter of if there'd be a mass brawl, but how far they'd get before it happened...

 

[LCC106]

I know it's not allowed on buses, but on trains is it permissible to carry a wheelchair user in the vestibule if the space is already taken, or would they have to transfer to a seat and fold their chair?

Not sure but one TOC I travelled with recently wouldn’t allow anyone to travel in the vestibules due to social distancing. Well, it was the trolley guy.

 

[The exile]

It wouldn’t possible in all scenarios for this to happen.

An example could be at the next station another wheelchair passenger had booked the space and also expects to be taken to their destination station.

You can’t really make this the “norm” unless all trains have a large area suitable for wheelchair users (like German DD rakes usually do). Even this doesn’t address the issue of multiple people all requiring assistance at an unstaffed station at once. Pre booking does at least enable the operator to do something about it ( whether they do or not is another matter).

 

[notlob.divad]

Correct. This ECS was previously one of them, possiblity the worst in the north for fighting, waiting police after assaults, incidents.

People talk about bad trains, but those must have been some of the worst in the country in the LM days. Not a matter of if there'd be a mass brawl, but how far they'd get before it happened...

Can I ask how many years ago that was?

 

[RHolmes]

I know it's not allowed on buses, but on trains is it permissible to carry a wheelchair user in the vestibule if the space is already taken, or would they have to transfer to a seat and fold their chair?

No it’s not possible to carry a wheelchair reliant person in the vestibule as it blocks emergency exit routes, the same way that bikes and buggies should also NOT be in any vestibule space. It’s also not a safe place for them to be in as dedicated wheelchair spaces have backrests designed for the event of crashes etc

They would have to fold their wheelchair (if they are physically able to do so) store it in a luggage rack (again if it fits) and move to a seat. This isn’t possible or an option for passengers with electric wheelchairs for example which are generally larger or with passengers who are unable to transfer from wheelchair to seat easily

 

[scrapy]

I know it's not allowed on buses, but on trains is it permissible to carry a wheelchair user in the vestibule if the space is already taken, or would they have to transfer to a seat and fold their chair?

It depends on the rolling stock and the size of the wheelchair, how busy the train is, the size of the vestibule, size of doorway (single end doors or double doors) and is the guard / drivers decision that it is safe. Now that only the ramps with lugs on can be used, most trains only have holes to fit the ramps in at the doors adjacent to wheelchair space so that limits options.

Taking Northern for example on a class 150/1 somebody in a wheelchair could go in the vestibule adjacent to the wheelchair area on one side as only alternate doors are emergency doors.

On class 195/331s the vestibules are huge and it's likely a wheelchair could be placed where the tip up seats are and not cause an obstruction.

This is all as long as the wheelchair user is happy with the arrangement and safe.

No it’s not possible to carry a wheelchair reliant person in the vestibule as it blocks emergency exit routes, the same way that bikes and buggies should also NOT be in any vestibule space. It’s also not a safe place for them to be in as dedicated wheelchair spaces have backrests designed for the event of crashes etc

They would have to fold their wheelchair (if they are physically able to do so) store it in a luggage rack (again if it fits) and move to a seat. This isn’t possible or an option for passengers with electric wheelchairs for example which are generally larger or with passengers who are unable to transfer from wheelchair to seat easily

A wheelchair user is different to a bike or buggie in that they can usually manoeuvre themselves across to the other side of the train in the event of an evacuation or even the platform being on the other side, as long as the wheelchair is against a solid wall or partition it would likely be very safe. An unoccupied wheelchair should not be left blocking a doorway and where possible folded.

It should be noted that the rule book allows one door on most carriages to be locked out of use (and this is safe and not thought to be detrimental to evacuations), a wheelchair is unlikely to be any more detrimental than this.

 

[johntea]

People talk about bad trains, but those must have been some of the worst in the country in the LM days. Not a matter of if there'd be a mass brawl, but how far they'd get before it happened...

There was a similar situation in Yorkshire at one point, the last Sheffield to Leeds all stations stopper of the night didn’t run on Friday and Saturday night

Although looking at the timetable now it seems to have been reinstated (22:31), no idea when that happened as I don’t travel to Sheffield as much as I used to!

Perhaps they felt more confident now the services have CCTV compared to the days of a pacer!