• 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!

Do Network Rail maintain Public Rights of Way?

Status
Not open for further replies.

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
Recently I e-mailed Surrey County Council after using their interactive public rights of way map.
I was looking up where the public rights of way were n Guildford and in perticular whether the map displays a public right way across Guildford railway station as it was my understanding that is a public right of way. In their response they said:
With regards to Guildford Station, from checking the interactive map there are no recorded public rights of way across the station. As the bridge is within the station it is best to contact Guildford Station or Network Rail for further information.
Since then someone else local has confirmed to me it is a public right of way, as I thought it was and have said on this very forum more than once in the past.

Now the interactive map wouldn't be considered the definative map and it maybe marked up on that but missing on the interactive map online.

I don't think Guildford Borough Council deal with public rights of way. Nor do I think Network Rail do but can anyone else confirm my understanding?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
3,834
This doesn't answer your general question, but when the subject of Guildford came up in the earlier stations rights of way thread, I had a look at old maps, both those on the NLS website and paper copies that I possess, to see if there was any evidence there. To my surprise, none of the maps showed the footbridge, or the connection to the western entrance on Guildford Park Road, until one I have that is dated 1978.

The oldest NLS map shows an early and quite small station layout. There is what could be a path crossing the line midway between the station and Yorkie's bridge, but nothing in the station area.

By the 1890s, the through platforms are shown as now, with the subway clearly shown, but no footbridge and no western entrance. The same applies to all the others I found on NLS, even those published after WW2. However even the later ones still have revision dates going back some decades. From its appearance, I think the footbridge was probably built by the Southern in the 1920s or 30s, and if so it hadn't been surveyed or included by the OS on those maps.

All of those maps showed a fan of sidings where the west side car park now is, so there surely can't have been a public path across there.

From the above it seems to me that for at least several decades, from the 1890s until the footbridge was built, there was no public route across the station. So how did either the right of way, or at least the general belief in one, come about?
 
Last edited:

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,416
A path can become a right of way if you can prove regular public use as such for a decently long period of time. I don’t know whether that could happen to a footbridge, though if the station is ever closed I think that might stop it happening?? Does the station and footbridge close at night, on Christmas Day, or suchlike?
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,002
Recently I e-mailed Surrey County Council after using their interactive public rights of way map.
I was looking up where the public rights of way were n Guildford and in perticular whether the map displays a public right way across Guildford railway station as it was my understanding that is a public right of way. In their response they said:

Since then someone else local has confirmed to me it is a public right of way, as I thought it was and have said on this very forum more than once in the past.

Now the interactive map wouldn't be considered the definative map and it maybe marked up on that but missing on the interactive map online.

I don't think Guildford Borough Council deal with public rights of way. Nor do I think Network Rail do but can anyone else confirm my understanding?
Surrey County Council should not be consulting the interactive map. They should be consulting the Definitive Map. They are the custodian of it. Respond to Surrey County Council highlighting their poor quality response and asking them to confirm, or otherwise, based on the Definitive Map.

Alternatively, ask your local Ramblers group (ie The Ramblers Association), they will have a footpaths officer (voluntary) who tends to be rather knowledgeable about such things, and will probably be more helpful - giving you a 'full colour' picture of the situation, rather than a 'black and white' statement from an official source.

As an aside, there may be legitimate differences between the Definitive Map and other versions - including newly issued OS maps. Things such as modifications (diversions, creations, deletions) may not show for several years.
 

joncombe

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2016
Messages
765
At the moment the bridge pass scheme is suspended with the advice to walk around. So if it is a right of way Network Rail shouldn't have stopped allowing access unless they applied for a temporary closure. The Council should have this on their website, if so.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,018
I think in the present situation we can live with various temporary closures, clearly stated as temporary. What is unacceptable is using it as an excuse to do something permanent, avoiding established procedures and laws, which is more convenient/cheaper - something distressingly being found in all sorts of places.
 

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
3,834
A path can become a right of way if you can prove regular public use as such for a decently long period of time. I don’t know whether that could happen to a footbridge, though if the station is ever closed I think that might stop it happening?? Does the station and footbridge close at night, on Christmas Day, or suchlike?
The western entrance, which leads onto the footbridge, has a roller shutter across it which is closed when trains are not running, but I don't know how long that (or any predecessors) has been there.
I'd have used that entrance in the 1970s, but I don't recall what was there then. I think it might have been something like a lockable steel palisade gate, but I can't be sure.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,262
I understand the “right of way” is a negotiated right under a section 52 planning agreement (nowadays it would be a section 106 agreement). I would search for details in historic planning applications and resulting correspondence.

I’m no expert, but I suspect that doesn’t actually turn the footbridge into a “public footpath” in terms of how it would be shown on definitive maps...
 

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
2,274
Location
SW London
As I understand it, if a public right of way crosses private land it is the responsibility of the landowner to maintain it, but if the landowner fails to do so the council can take legal enforcement action, and/or step in and send the bill to the landowner.

However, in the part of the world I grew up in the majority of magistrates and local councillors were major landowners, so enforcement action was rare indeed......

Certainly some footbridges across stations are public rights of way - the one spanning Lincoln Central station replaced the right of way along the bank of the Sincil Drain (irrigation channel) when the station was built across its course in the 1840s. (The name "Sincil Bank" may be familiar in another context to followers of lower division football)
 

Llanigraham

Established Member
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,073
Location
Powys
A path can become a right of way if you can prove regular public use as such for a decently long period of time. I don’t know whether that could happen to a footbridge, though if the station is ever closed I think that might stop it happening?? Does the station and footbridge close at night, on Christmas Day, or suchlike?

That might have been the case in the past, but to get a "path" reclassified as a Public Right of Way is a lot more difficult than that now, and can even go as far as a Public Enquiry.
And note, the person requesting the change PAYS.

As has been mentioned previously the Guildford station path is NOT on the Surrey CC Definitive map, or the List of Streets, and therefore must be a Permissive Path only. As such there is no legal requirement for it to be maintained by the landowner or Council.
 

Llanigraham

Established Member
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
6,073
Location
Powys
EDIT
From my days as the RoW Officer for a national motorclub, the Surrey CC interactive map is directly taken from the legal Definitive Map and was deemed to be accurate by all those that compared the two.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
May I ask how “someone else local” trumps Surrey County Council”?
Thanks for the replies

It is my understanding that when British Rail rebuilt the station in 1987 planning permission was given on the understanding the footbridge would become a public right of way. I don't know any more than that and nor can I remember where I found this information.

Some years ago at some point after 2010, South West Trains applied for the station to be closed at night from 1:30am to 4am for the safety of staff working at the station. The diversion route marked up on the notices near the station said they were applying for this and the diversion route would be along Guildford Park Road, over the road bridge on Farnham Road and along Walnut Tree Close, from which the front entrance to the station is accessed.

This points to me that the footbridge is a public right of way, as why go to court and stick up notices? Why issue bridge passes?

So do Network Rail administer public rights of way? My understanding was they didn't but maybe someone else knows otherwise.

I intend to go back to the council to ask them to check with their public rights of way officer or person designated to undertake that statutory role.
 

eMeS

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2011
Messages
954
Location
Milton Keynes, UK
In the 1950s I remember my father, on behalf of his church (which was not a CofE church), closing the pedestrian gate in the churchyard on one night a year, so that the church could maintain its right to "ownership" of the footpath which went via the gate. If it makes any difference, the church was in north Cheshire.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,866
Location
Airedale
In the 1950s I remember my father, on behalf of his church (which was not a CofE church), closing the pedestrian gate in the churchyard on one night a year, so that the church could maintain its right to "ownership" of the footpath which went via the gate. If it makes any difference, the church was in north Cheshire.
Once common practice where unofficial footpaths were concerned (not church-specific), as was the sign (eg on a station approach) declaring that such a roadway was not a public highway- don't remember the exact details.
 

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
2,274
Location
SW London
Once common practice where unofficial footpaths were concerned (not church-specific), as was the sign (eg on a station approach) declaring that such a roadway was not a public highway- don't remember the exact details.
Still happens. There is a gate connecting two culs de sac near me that is locked every Boxing Day for that reason. One of the entrances to Lincoln's Inn in central London has a similar arrangment.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
In the 1950s I remember my father, on behalf of his church (which was not a CofE church), closing the pedestrian gate in the churchyard on one night a year, so that the church could maintain its right to "ownership" of the footpath which went via the gate. If it makes any difference, the church was in north Cheshire.
That is how you keep a road from not becoming a public right of way. The traditional day for closing is on 25 December, so I was told by someone whose well versed on Highway law.

There is a road in Oxford that is closed for an annual fair in September. This is so it doesn't become a public right of way. I forget which street off hand.

The Highways Act 1980 covers quite a lot.

See:- https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/contents

It is updated to 18th August 2020.
Thanks for that. Not sure it covers Public Rights of way per say but more about the rights to use highway, which isn't quite the same thing, as I understand it
 

CyrusWuff

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
3,944
Location
London
Once common practice where unofficial footpaths were concerned (not church-specific), as was the sign (eg on a station approach) declaring that such a roadway was not a public highway- don't remember the exact details.
There are numerous such signs dotted around the railway network. The General format is:

BRB Notice said:
Highways Act YYYY

The British Railways Board hereby give notice that this way is not dedicated to the public.

This GSV link shows an example adjacent to Peckham Rye station: https://goo.gl/maps/oeoj4ga7UXs3kzLv6
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
There is a road in Oxford that is closed for an annual fair in September. This is so it doesn't become a public right of way. I forget which street off hand.
St Giles - owned by St Johns College.

No St Giles fair this year though.
 

Mcr Warrior

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Jan 2009
Messages
11,648
Away from stations, do footpaths / public rights of way that cross running lines at unmanned crossings not also have to be maintained by Network Rail? (I.e. the section of the PROW that's crossing railway property?)
 

theironroad

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
3,692
Location
London
At the moment the bridge pass scheme is suspended with the advice to walk around. So if it is a right of way Network Rail shouldn't have stopped allowing access unless they applied for a temporary closure. The Council should have this on their website, if so.

I walk by that big A board sign occasionally that says the bridge pass scheme is suspended and every time I wonder if anyone has challenged it.

The council might grant network rail a temporary exemption on the grounds of reducing the number of people using the bridge to aid social distancing but I bet they just put the sign up and took a gamble everyone would comply.

As has been mentioned South West Trains tried to stop people using the bridge when they installed barriers at the station a number of years ago but they eventually conceded that their was a right of way. Initially they just let people through when they asked but then the bridge pass/token thing was instituted with signs at the entrance to the subway and on the bridge at top of steps down to each platform stating that bridge passes are not valid beyond that point.

Without building a separate bridge, I'm not sure what the solution will be as I assume the current bridge has been deemed to narrow to divide with a fence (would also need a separate access point on the town side).

Obviously it's not ideal from a revenue point as people do abuse the bridge pass scheme and get on trains and travel either to places without barriers or lie about where they boarded to short change their fare.
 

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
2,943
Away from stations, do footpaths / public rights of way that cross running lines at unmanned crossings not also have to be maintained by Network Rail? (I.e. the section of the PROW that's crossing railway property?)
Isn't there a risk of mixing two - possibly even three - issues here?

1) Network Rail's obligations as a landowner with a public right of way on their land: I would expect Network Rail to have exactly the same obligation as if the land belonged to you, your Aunt Sally, a private corporation, or any other arm of the state (the NHS perhaps, or maybe the Ministry of Defence)
2) NR's obligations as a railway company: it seems to me that regardless of the legal obligation in (1) that a railway company would want to maintain a level crossing to a standard that would not interfere with the safe operation of the railway - which may be a higher standard than whatever is legally required
3) (and this is the one that I am less sure of) A lot of railways were built under Acts of Parliament, which can impose specific obligations on the railway which are still in force. Example - I understand that the Staines - Windsor line runs across part of the Home Park for Windsor Castle, and the agreement to allow this to be built required the railway to maintain two road bridges over the Thames: but while I think that is laid down in the appropriate act, it may be a contractual agreement. But I can imagine that there may be public rights of way laid down in the relevant Railway Acts with a greater obligation to maintain than is given in the general law on rights of way.
 

theironroad

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
3,692
Location
London
To answer the original question.

Yes, NR do maintain public rights of way as is evidenced in the thousands of foot crossings that cross the tracks around the country in addition to level crossings.

Millions of pounds are spent by NR every year maintaining these crossings and trying to make them safe against a minority of people who don't use them properly. They are also spending millions each year maintaining the rights of way by replacing dangerous crossings with fully accessible bridges in order to allow the foot crossings at track level to be closed.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
by replacing dangerous crossings with fully accessible bridges in order to allow the foot crossings at track level to be closed.
Accessible bridges, perhaps, but not fully accessible. No bridge is ever as accessible as a foot crossing because it involves an extra climb which not everyone is able to do, or if there are lifts, it involves a wait.

It probably has to be done because people don't take enough care but some other people do suffer as a result.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
At the moment the bridge pass scheme is suspended with the advice to walk around. So if it is a right of way Network Rail shouldn't have stopped allowing access unless they applied for a temporary closure. The Council should have this on their website, if so.
I'm catch up on the posts I seem to have missed, following the upgrade.

The suspension of the bridge pass scheme isn't a suspension of one's right to cross the BRIDGE. The poster says:
TO ASSIST WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING, WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY OFFERING THE BRIDGE PASS SYSTEM AND WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WALK ROUND.

Note the use of the word encourage and not must. I'm not personally going to ask to passing that way but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have a right.

I understand the “right of way” is a negotiated right under a section 52 planning agreement (nowadays it would be a section 106 agreement). I would search for details in historic planning applications and resulting correspondence.

I’m no expert, but I suspect that doesn’t actually turn the footbridge into a “public footpath” in terms of how it would be shown on definitive maps...
OK. Thanks for that. That's interesting. I will do a search.

So I wonder who would keep a record of such paths as this? Or are they on original documents solely and over time the information gets forgotten about. I mean more generally.

Having worked in the public sector, I'm aware that documents don't always last as long as they actually should. I'm sure it is the same in the private sector in large companies.

The western entrance, which leads onto the footbridge, has a roller shutter across it which is closed when trains are not running, but I don't know how long that (or any predecessors) has been there.
I'd have used that entrance in the 1970s, but I don't recall what was there then. I think it might have been something like a lockable steel palisade gate, but I can't be sure.
That was introduced for saff safety, some point post 2010. Posters were put up to show a map of the diversionary route between 1.30am and 4am. The route is via the Farnham Road bridge

To answer the original question.

Yes, NR do maintain public rights of way as is evidenced in the thousands of foot crossings that cross the tracks around the country in addition to level crossings.

Millions of pounds are spent by NR every year maintaining these crossings and trying to make them safe against a minority of people who don't use them properly. They are also spending millions each year maintaining the rights of way by replacing dangerous crossings with fully accessible bridges in order to allow the foot crossings at track level to be closed.
I was thinking more along the lines of who maintains the record of these rights of way, rather than who maintains then physically.

Isn't there a risk of mixing two - possibly even three - issues here?

1) Network Rail's obligations as a landowner with a public right of way on their land: I would expect Network Rail to have exactly the same obligation as if the land belonged to you, your Aunt Sally, a private corporation, or any other arm of the state (the NHS perhaps, or maybe the Ministry of Defence)
2) NR's obligations as a railway company: it seems to me that regardless of the legal obligation in (1) that a railway company would want to maintain a level crossing to a standard that would not interfere with the safe operation of the railway - which may be a higher standard than whatever is legally required
3) (and this is the one that I am less sure of) A lot of railways were built under Acts of Parliament, which can impose specific obligations on the railway which are still in force. Example - I understand that the Staines - Windsor line runs across part of the Home Park for Windsor Castle, and the agreement to allow this to be built required the railway to maintain two road bridges over the Thames: but while I think that is laid down in the appropriate act, it may be a contractual agreement. But I can imagine that there may be public rights of way laid down in the relevant Railway Acts with a greater obligation to maintain than is given in the general law on rights of way.
I've recently agreed to help research public rights of way across railway lines in West Sussex. This is for in use lines, disused lines, lines that were never finished and those given permission in parliament but never started. This is to ensure any public rights if aga not shown on the definitive map are recorded prior to 2025, when anything not on a definitive map will cease to be considered a public right of way. I've been told East Sussex has already been researched.

Hopefully other people are covering other parts of the UK.

Obviously it's not ideal from a revenue point as people do abuse the bridge pass scheme and get on trains and travel either to places without barriers or lie about where they boarded to short change their fare.
I've not studied the station redevelopment plans to see if they will deal with the bridge issue. Im not against it being dealt with, as long as people still have a route.

When they use to close it, it involved an extra walk. Alas at the time I didn't know one had some kind of right to use it.
 
Last edited:

Wychwood93

Member
Joined
25 Jan 2018
Messages
634
Location
Burton. Dorset.
Re. the post above by #infobleep - ' I was thinking more along the lines of who maintains the record of these rights of way, rather than who maintains then physically.' - in Railtrack days, and probably BR as well, there was the 'Legal and Parliamentary' section which, in the 90's, was based in Croydon. What they dealt with must still be dealt with somewhere within NR. They certainly had all you would need to know about crossings - and more! A quick look at the NR site sees no direct link to the name I was familiar with. The nearest appears to be somewhere within: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/industry-and-commercial/network-rail-property/ - perhaps somewhere in the 'Planning and land services'.
 

theironroad

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
3,692
Location
London
As Network Rail is a state body, I'd imagine that a FOI request may be one route to get answers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top