What are the plans for trains that do not comform with accessibility regulations from 2020?

[Blytheski]

I saw that Wales rail was keeping 153s after 2020. I guess the toilets will be locked out of use?

What's the plans for EMT to comply with accessibility regulations as HSTs and 153s don't comply.

Will all other company meet the deadlines?

 

[Alasdair Clift]

Local services will simply have toilets locked out of use if they have large enough disabled spaces. Otherwise they'll either be mass cancellations, or the DfT will see some sense and extend the deadline

 

[mmh]

I don't believe locking toilets out of use will happen because it's one of the most ridiculous ideas ever which would be universally condemned when it became common knowledge.

Actually, that's probably something to suggest it will happen. The world is far from sane.

 

[PHILIPE]

There is a post where somebody has claimed that, under the Disability and Equality Act, it could be illegal to lock an existing toilet out of use.

 

[bramling]

There is a post where somebody has claimed that, under the Disability and Equality Act, it could be illegal to lock an existing toilet out of use.

How about it being illegal to cancel a train due to no suitable rolling stock? Whilst there's little excuse for this deadline not being met, it's ridiculous to be seriously talking about cancelling trains or locking toilets out of use.

 

[DarloRich]

There are no plans yet but there will have to be derrogations as the deadline cant be met. If there are no derrogations lots of trains will stop running.

 

[yorkie]

There is a post where somebody has claimed that, under the Disability and Equality Act, it could be illegal to lock an existing toilet out of use.

I'm not sure about locking them out of use, but trains can have toilets removed, and that is legal. There are routes which were previously served by trains with toilets which are now served by trains without toilets. However this is clearly not applicable to EMT HSTs, where toilets are a necessity and the problems go beyond toilet provision!

Common sense says we will see some derogations.

 

[theblackwatch]

As others have said, there will need to be some derogations. Even just on the HST front, if the 'powers at the top' think that, in the next 12 months, some 25 modified sets will emerge for ScotRail, around half that number for GWR, and four sets for XC are going to be completed, then they really are living on another planet! That doesn't even include EMT...

As for the 153s, in Yorkshire and other areas, logic could perhaps dictate the vehicles being added to Class 150, 155 and 156 sets to for 3 or 4 car trains which would be compliant in the same way that 5 cars are to be used in Scotland.

 

[tbtc]

We might see derogations.

BUT remember the fuss about TPE introducing the Pretendolino carriages? These complied with current regulations (under Grandfather rights etc) but the fuss from Disability Rights people meant the TOC didn't get to operate them in regular service.

It's one thing introducing non-accessible trains in 2018 (which, whilst not complaint with the post-2020 environment, did comply with the requirements for 2018), but TOCs aren't going to be able to get away with inaccessible trains post 31/12/19 without a lot of fuss.

(I know that there's no way we'll get sufficient trains upgraded in time - using the problems with the ScotRail HSTs as a benchmark - I'm trying to be realistic - we used to see people tying their wheelchairs to inaccessible London buses - don't be surprised if there are protests about inaccessible trains in twelve months time - whatever the rights/wrongs of such behaviour)

Could be a few routes reduced from hourly to bi-hourly to permit a 150+153 combination (rather than running single 153s at any time)?

 

[Mogster]

What counts as accessible?

Say you run a 4 car 142 and 150 combo with the 150 having a wheelchair accessible bog. Even though you can’t physically access the 150s bog from the 142 without getting off and back on again is the 1 set of facilities on the service enough?

 

[Trainfan061193]

In all honesty, derogations look more than likely otherwise tons of trains are going to end up being cancelled, I mean surely the DfT won’t allow that to happen like for example we all know that Wabtec won’t have all the refurbished HST coaches completed in 12 months time.

 

[rebmcr]

What counts as accessible?

Say you run a 4 car 142 and 150 combo with the 150 having a wheelchair accessible bog. Even though you can’t physically access the 150s bog from the 142 without getting off and back on again is the 1 set of facilities on the service enough?

Yes, even brand new Class 700s must be boarded in the correct place by wheelchair users.

 

[infobleep]

We might see derogations.

BUT remember the fuss about TPE introducing the Pretendolino carriages? These complied with current regulations (under Grandfather rights etc) but the fuss from Disability Rights people meant the TOC didn't get to operate them in regular service.

It's one thing introducing non-accessible trains in 2018 (which, whilst not complaint with the post-2020 environment, did comply with the requirements for 2018), but TOCs aren't going to be able to get away with inaccessible trains post 31/12/19 without a lot of fuss.

(I know that there's no way we'll get sufficient trains upgraded in time - using the problems with the ScotRail HSTs as a benchmark - I'm trying to be realistic - we used to see people tying their wheelchairs to inaccessible London buses - don't be surprised if there are protests about inaccessible trains in twelve months time - whatever the rights/wrongs of such behaviour)

Could be a few routes reduced from hourly to bi-hourly to permit a 150+153 combination (rather than running single 153s at any time)?

I wonder what kind of protest one could do on trains withoit loos.... Hehe

I speak as someone with long term health conditions that mean I find having access to a loo rather helpful at times.

 

[NoOnesFool]

Given that it took 18 months for the first PRM XC HST rake to be released, derrogations are highly likely. Some reshuffling could aid the toilet issues in 153s; removing the toilets and using them on shorter journeys i.e. Leeds to Knottingley and using displaced accessible stock for the longer routes.

 

[yorksrob]

We might see derogations.

BUT remember the fuss about TPE introducing the Pretendolino carriages? These complied with current regulations (under Grandfather rights etc) but the fuss from Disability Rights people meant the TOC didn't get to operate them in regular service.

It's one thing introducing non-accessible trains in 2018 (which, whilst not complaint with the post-2020 environment, did comply with the requirements for 2018), but TOCs aren't going to be able to get away with inaccessible trains post 31/12/19 without a lot of fuss.

(I know that there's no way we'll get sufficient trains upgraded in time - using the problems with the ScotRail HSTs as a benchmark - I'm trying to be realistic - we used to see people tying their wheelchairs to inaccessible London buses - don't be surprised if there are protests about inaccessible trains in twelve months time - whatever the rights/wrongs of such behaviour)

Could be a few routes reduced from hourly to bi-hourly to permit a 150+153 combination (rather than running single 153s at any time)?

Wasn't the issue with the TPE mk3's the fact that TPE were saying that wheelchair users would have to use the next train, or possibly the one after that (or be provided with a taxi).

That's a million miles away from the situation with existing non accessible trains where disabled passengers are carried with assistance from the railway staff. It is far more likely that this situation would continue.

 

[6Gtraincrew]

There is a lot more to PRM compliance than the disabled access toilet. Even with a locked out loo, they still wouldn't be able to be used.

 

[Wolfie]

Given that it took 18 months for the first PRM XC HST rake to be released, derrogations are highly likely. Some reshuffling could aid the toilet issues in 153s; removing the toilets and using them on shorter journeys i.e. Leeds to Knottingley and using displaced accessible stock for the longer routes.

Given how long the industry has had to adapt trains DfT will almost certainly face litigation, specifically application for judicial review, if they allow derrogations, particularly if they are widespread. The fact that DfT themselves have been about as proactive as a blancmange on this issue will hardly impress any judge. If derrogations are allowed they are likely to be heavily time-limited and the industry better expect a quid pro quo ie a demand for additional expenditure at it's expense on 'things' for passengers...

 

[Bantamzen]

We might see derogations.

BUT remember the fuss about TPE introducing the Pretendolino carriages? These complied with current regulations (under Grandfather rights etc) but the fuss from Disability Rights people meant the TOC didn't get to operate them in regular service.

It's one thing introducing non-accessible trains in 2018 (which, whilst not complaint with the post-2020 environment, did comply with the requirements for 2018), but TOCs aren't going to be able to get away with inaccessible trains post 31/12/19 without a lot of fuss.

(I know that there's no way we'll get sufficient trains upgraded in time - using the problems with the ScotRail HSTs as a benchmark - I'm trying to be realistic - we used to see people tying their wheelchairs to inaccessible London buses - don't be surprised if there are protests about inaccessible trains in twelve months time - whatever the rights/wrongs of such behaviour)

Could be a few routes reduced from hourly to bi-hourly to permit a 150+153 combination (rather than running single 153s at any time)?

Wasn't the issue with the TPE mk3's the fact that TPE were saying that wheelchair users would have to use the next train, or possibly the one after that (or be provided with a taxi).

That's a million miles away from the situation with existing non accessible trains where disabled passengers are carried with assistance from the railway staff. It is far more likely that this situation would continue.

Thats what I seem to remember. However this was a situation with just 2 units operating on a highly populated route. With the 2020 regs, and the inevitable delays to new stock, and casacde / refurbishment of existing units I can see lots of problems and protests about it. The DfT will need to be highly proactive with this, ensuring that where non-compliance occurs that the TOCs have a clear set of principles that they adhere to, i.e. use non-compliant units in conjunction with compliant ones where possible, or if not ensure procedures are in place not only to advertise this as soon as possible but provide alternative arrangements for those passengers affected.

 

[yorksrob]

Thats what I seem to remember. However this was a situation with just 2 units operating on a highly populated route. With the 2020 regs, and the inevitable delays to new stock, and casacde / refurbishment of existing units I can see lots of problems and protests about it. The DfT will need to be highly proactive with this, ensuring that where non-compliance occurs that the TOCs have a clear set of principles that they adhere to, i.e. use non-compliant units in conjunction with compliant ones where possible, or if not ensure procedures are in place not only to advertise this as soon as possible but provide alternative arrangements for those passengers affected.

The key principal being that no passenger will be left behind/turned away on account of their disability.

Given that the DfT are unmoved to see whole swathes of the country go without a Saturday train service for months on end, I can't see them being overly exercised by some protests about carrying on as we have been for a bit longer.

 

[Wolfie]

The key principal being that no passenger will be left behind/turned away on account of their disability.

Given that the DfT are unmoved to see whole swathes of the country go without a Saturday train service for months on end, I can't see them being overly exercised by some protests about carrying on as we have been for a bit longer.

DfT may not be. The Courts on the other hand...

 

[yorksrob]

DfT may not be. The Courts on the other hand...

Someone could legitimately make the point that by not having a derogation, disabled people will be prevented from travel, whereas by having a derogation allowing a non-compliant train, they won't be.

 

[Bantamzen]

The key principal being that no passenger will be left behind/turned away on account of their disability.

Given that the DfT are unmoved to see whole swathes of the country go without a Saturday train service for months on end, I can't see them being overly exercised by some protests about carrying on as we have been for a bit longer.

Sadly, you may be right.

DfT may not be. The Courts on the other hand...

By the time any such cases have made it through the legal process most of the issue might well have been solved. In the meantime I can see issues ahead.

 

[tbtc]

I wonder what kind of protest one could do on trains withoit loos.... Hehe

I speak as someone with long term health conditions that mean I find having access to a loo rather helpful at times.

I'm in the same boat as you (health wise) - but (whilst I can access trains and use current toilets okay) I wouldn't be surprised if some people do protest - remember that social media has meant groups of people affected by Government cuts to disability benefits etc have been able to mobilise - wouldn't be surprised if this was a lightening conductor issue for people venting general frustration with PIPs and other "reforms"

Wasn't the issue with the TPE mk3's the fact that TPE were saying that wheelchair users would have to use the next train, or possibly the one after that (or be provided with a taxi).

That's a million miles away from the situation with existing non accessible trains where disabled passengers are carried with assistance from the railway staff. It is far more likely that this situation would continue.

Are you suggesting that Guards are going to carry wheelchair users up onto (unrefurbished) HSTs?

And assist them at the toilets?

Passengers will have a right to expect trains are accessible post 31/12/19 - that includes people currently unable to use the railway. Much as we all love the railway, we can't get away from this legal situation.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm in the same boat as you (health wise) - but (whilst I can access trains and use current toilets okay) I wouldn't be surprised if some people do protest - remember that social media has meant groups of people affected by Government cuts to disability benefits etc have been able to mobilise - wouldn't be surprised if this was a lightening conductor issue for people venting general frustration with PIPs and other "reforms"



Are you suggesting that Guards are going to carry wheelchair users up onto (unrefurbished) HSTs?

And assist them at the toilets?

Passengers will have a right to expect trains are accessible post 31/12/19 - that includes people currently unable to use the railway. Much as we all love the railway, we can't get away from this legal situation.

I'm pretty sure that those with wheelchairs and other mobility issues are already helped onto HST's (albeit not necessarily by the guard). This is even the case for Northern 142's.

In terms of toilets, the HST's I've been on already have one.

 

[Taunton]

It wouldn't be so bad if the accessibility features actually met a need.

Here in Canary Wharf the whole area and transport (DLR, Underground, bus, London taxis, and all the buildings) are new and thus fully accessible. I reckon I maybe see one passenger a year on the DLR in a wheelchair.

The few such users you do see around travel by car. Notably, having caused considerable expense to the London taxi trade making their cabs accessible, almost all wheelchair users now seem to have moved over to Uber, with normal cars, because they are a bit cheaper. I've assisted a couple myself, when walking along, to get out of their Uber.

 

[DarloRich]

Complaints by disability groups may well lead to equality - there will be no trains for anyone!

With the best will in the world that isnt going to acceptable therefore a pragmatic compromise needs to be reached for the short to medium term.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Given how long the industry has had to adapt trains DfT will almost certainly face litigation, specifically application for judicial review, if they allow derrogations, particularly if they are widespread. The fact that DfT themselves have been about as proactive as a blancmange on this issue will hardly impress any judge. If derrogations are allowed they are likely to be heavily time-limited and the industry better expect a quid pro quo ie a demand for additional expenditure at it's expense on 'things' for passengers...

The "industry" has had more than 10 years to make stock PRM compliant, so the government (ie DfT, ORR, and the disability agencies) is unlikely to be lenient with shortfalls of compliance.
I can see the DfT supporting derogations where its own decisions have led to delay, but not for the industry's own decisions and project management.
The HST conversions seem to me to be an industry choice, between the franchisees, ROSCOs and Wabtec (the cascades/conversions were not imposed by DfT/SG).
In contrast, the XC conversions were authorised by DfT directly, and (eg) Transport for Wales (WG) was very late in approving PRM work on the fleet inherited from ATW.
I suspect the industry will be made to suffer for its own poor decisions and project management.
Delays in getting PRM trains into service probably also means continuing trouble with other planned cascades.
The issues surrounding 769s are linked to DfT decisions following the cutback of electrification projects, so derogations here may be more likely.

 

[Jonfun]

I'm in the same boat as you (health wise) - but (whilst I can access trains and use current toilets okay) I wouldn't be surprised if some people do protest - remember that social media has meant groups of people affected by Government cuts to disability benefits etc have been able to mobilise - wouldn't be surprised if this was a lightening conductor issue for people venting general frustration with PIPs and other "reforms"



Are you suggesting that Guards are going to carry wheelchair users up onto (unrefurbished) HSTs?

And assist them at the toilets?

Passengers will have a right to expect trains are accessible post 31/12/19 - that includes people currently unable to use the railway. Much as we all love the railway, we can't get away from this legal situation.

We can get away from this legal situation - my understanding is that these disability regs come from EU legislation, which we won't have to follow come brexit - we could simply change the law to a less prescriptive one (eg youre allowed to use a noncompliant unit in multi with a compliant one, etc). If we leave with a deal, then we just derogate until such time we leave fully and then change the law. Disabled folk have been quite successfully using the trains thus far - what suddenly happens on 1st January 2020 that stops them?

 

[rebmcr]

We can get away from this legal situation - my understanding is that these disability regs come from EU legislation, which we won't have to follow come brexit - we could simply change the law to a less prescriptive one (eg youre allowed to use a noncompliant unit in multi with a compliant one, etc). If we leave with a deal, then we just derogate until such time we leave fully and then change the law. Disabled folk have been quite successfully using the trains thus far - what suddenly happens on 1st January 2020 that stops them?

The UK leads Europe on accessibility, not the other way around.

Aside from that, legislative capacity would be in high enough demand to restrict even obviously essential laws post-Brexit, nevermind controversial ones.

 

[43096]

We can get away from this legal situation - my understanding is that these disability regs come from EU legislation, which we won't have to follow come brexit - we could simply change the law to a less prescriptive one (eg youre allowed to use a noncompliant unit in multi with a compliant one, etc). If we leave with a deal, then we just derogate until such time we leave fully and then change the law. Disabled folk have been quite successfully using the trains thus far - what suddenly happens on 1st January 2020 that stops them?

Another “blame the EU when the reality is rather different” situation...
1. All existing EU directives/standards are being incorporated into UK law for 29/03/19.
2. The 31/12/19 PRM deadline was decided by the UK (DfT), not the EU. The standards may be EU standards - and are actually slightly less prescriptive than the proposed standard under the DDA - but the date for implementation was totally of the UK Government’s choosing.