Jump to content

Recommended Posts

DulwichLondoner Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Let me rephrase: the fact remains that these

> incidents seem way more frequent on our lines than

> on other lines run by the same Southern Fail. Is

> this impression wholly wrong and unfounded, or is

> there a logical explanation as to why that is? Are

> the tracks and the equipment on our lines older?

> Are our lines used by less healthy and less

> well-behaved people, who are therefore constantly

> falling ill on the trains, trespassing on the

> tracks etc, way more than passengers on other

> lines?


Don't forget that the tracks and signals are the responsibility of Network Rail, not Southern. If points are breaking then that's Network Rail's fault. We're also in a particularly vulnerable position because only one line runs through ED and there are many pinch points in South London which affect our services (Tulse Hill, Selhurst, East Croydon, Beckenham). If any of those fail then our line gets taken out of service and all our trains are screwed. So yes, we are disproportionately affected by infrastructure failures and delays.



> Yesterday there was a fire at Waterloo which

> caused a lot of disruptions. However, as far as I

> remember, and based on what friends and relatives

> commuting into Waterloo tell me, this kind of

> incident is, luckily, very rare, so yesterday's

> delays are not particularly representative.

> Today's delays on our lines are, instead, way more

> frequent and more representative. Just a case of

> bad luck?


Waterloo has 8 lines running in to it. If one goes down, or one set of points fails, then there's enough slack in the system to manage services without too much disruption. From ED, we have two lines (one up, one down) to London Bridge. That gives us much less flexibility, and makes our services much more prone to delays.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is this impression wholly wrong and unfounded... ?

> YES


It would be interesting to have access to performance statistics (delays, cancellations, etc.), by station and by time of day (peak vs off-peak). However, AFAIK this data either does not exist, or, if it does, is not public.


There are aggregate statistics on Southern?s performance on the Brighton line vs the ?Metro? line, but this level of aggregation is useless: East Dulwich and Balham are both on the ?metro? lines but my impression is that Balham?s services have never been as bad as ours. Clapham Junction is on the metro line and on pretty much all suburban lines into Victoria (except the Gatwick Express which doesn?t stop there), so there?s no way to tell how services from Clapham Junction into Victoria have been affected.


Also, averaging peak and off-peak services is a very easy way to conceal abysmal performance. There are always more off-peak trains than peak ones. From East Dulwich to London Bridge there will be, what? 80 trains a day and maybe 20 during peak hour? I don?t know the actual figures but I hope you get the idea. If half the peak services are late, Southern could still claim that 87.5% (=10/80) were on time, whereas in fact half the trains that mattered to most travellers were not. If they then mix the ED statistics with those of other, better lines (e.g. Balham) then they could easily claim even higher punctuality figures.


I remembered the story of this commuter, who kept track of delays on his journeys, and noted a stark contrast between the 82.5% punctuality reported in the Public Performance Measure, and the 37% he experienced in his commute.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/may/13/rail-companies-trains-on-time-delays-cancellations-punctuality

Maybe he and I happen to be the unluckiest Southern Rail commuters ever; or maybe, just maybe, these official figures don?t mean much.

Cardelia Wrote:

> We're also in a particularly vulnerable

> position because only one line runs through ED and

> there are many pinch points in South London which

> affect our services (Tulse Hill, Selhurst, East

> Croydon, Beckenham). If any of those fail then our

> line gets taken out of service and all our trains

> are screwed. So yes, we are disproportionately

> affected by infrastructure failures and delays.


Thank you, that?s a very interesting comment.


In the absence of detailed performance statistics by station and time of day, as per my previous post, is there any way to get an idea of which stations/lines are disproportionately affected when something goes wrong, for the reasons you mentioned? Other than saying that stations which have multiple lines running through them are less vulnerable because there is an element of ?redundancy? (if one fails, the others can still work)?


For example, multiple lines run through Balham, and it has 4 platforms, of which 2 used by trains stopping there and 2 used only (AFAIK) by trains which pass by without stopping. Maybe all of this adds some flexibility when things go wrong? E.g. if there?s a problem on a platform trains can use another one? If the line from Crystal Palace goes KO, there?s still the line from East Croydon, both of which go into Victoria, and viceversa?


Or, similarly, and ignoring the Southern vs Southeastern differences, I?d imagine the Earlsfield to Waterloo services are less vulnerable than ours because multiple lines converge at Earlsfield and continue to Waterloo?


PS The publicly-owned TFL does public detailed statistics by line and by peak vs off-peak: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/underground-services-performance#on-this-page-0

The privately-owned rail companies do not, AFAIK.

I don't know whether that level of detail in performance statistics is released into the public domain. ED station may have its own performance metrics rather than the ones for Southern as a whole: I've not seen them displayed anywhere, but that's probably a good place to start looking.


The warren of lines through South London can be a good thing for some services because if one part of the network goes down then there are always alternative routes for trains. Generally though this tends to benefit long-distance trains over the urban commuter services - for example, there must be at least 4 ways for Thameslink trains to get from Brighton to the core. And Balham is a good example for the reasons you mentioned.

There's a new 'on time' metric been brought in from July 2017, which looks at accuracy of arrival time to the nearest minute at all stations, rather than the 'right time' one which looks just at endpoints. Its coverage is currently 80% of stations but rising, and it seems to be scheduled for introduction (ie 100%?) in 2019. There are announcements and an example of some preliminary figures using it at https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2017/469773044-2017-07-18.html and https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/how-we-work/performance/public-performance-measure/punctuality-national-rail-network/. I've not seen it stated explicitly, but the reporting year seems to me to run from 1 April, and is then further split into 13 periods. "Control Period" is another entity entirely; CP6 reportedly covers 2019-24.


If Network Rail have access to the source data (they already summarise to TOC and sub-operator level: see eg https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/how-we-work/performance/public-performance-measure/) then conceivably a breakdown by station, route, or time-of-day might be obtainable now or in the future, via an FoI request if necessary.


Thee are also oodles of statistics published by the ORR, http://orr.gov.uk/statistics. I was surprised to see that the East Dulwch estimated entrances-and-exits fell from 1.71M in 2015-16 to 1.33M in 2016-17. The figures for Denmark Hill and Peckham Rye for both years were 7.00M->7.18M and 7.52M->7.46M respectively.

mary123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Recent news that trains from Dalston is running 24

> hours..i thought great but stopping at new cross

> gate..,if only they went down to forest hill to

> help serve Dulwich area.



Agree..especially as its a real pain to get buses back from there.

New Cross gate makes sense. It's a busy area, with nightlife and a university nearby. Also, as an initial expansion, it's going to be the shortest/simplest route to roll out.


Maybe not much use if you're in Dulwich or Forest Hill, but useful for people in Peckham, Nunhead, Deptford, Brockley...

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They'll be extending the all-night service next

> year ? including the Overground line from Highbury

> and Islington / Dalston Junction to Clapham

> Junction via Denmark Hill, which will be very

> useful.


I wasn't aware of this. That's great news.

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They'll be extending the all-night service next

> year ? including the Overground line from Highbury

> and Islington / Dalston Junction to Clapham

> Junction via Denmark Hill, which will be very

> useful.


Have you got a source for that info as the only thing I can find is that the 2018 extension is for the northern part to Highbury & Islington, not to Clapham Junction (i.e. it will still end at New Cross Gate):

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/london-overground/london-overground-night-service

  • 3 weeks later...

JW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> London Bridge officially reopened today to much

> fanfare. Does anybody know whether this means that

> Southern trains will all now run to London Bridge

> as opposed to two an hour terminating at South

> Bermondsey?


I'm off to Millwall (South Bermondsey) on Sat 6th Jan.

Trains seem to be running a normal service into London Bridge.

Fingers crossed.

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JW Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > London Bridge officially reopened today to much

> > fanfare. Does anybody know whether this means

> that

> > Southern trains will all now run to London

> Bridge

> > as opposed to two an hour terminating at South

> > Bermondsey?

>

> I'm off to Millwall (South Bermondsey) on Sat 6th

> Jan.

> Trains seem to be running a normal service into

> London Bridge.

> Fingers crossed.


Thanks DulwichFox - my point was more around whether the service would revert to one train every ten minutes from ED to LB during rush hour? Rather than the existing service, where the 07.40 and 08.02 terminate at South Bermondsey. Any ideas?


Have fun at the game!

JW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks DulwichFox - my point was more around

> whether the service would revert to one train

> every ten minutes from ED to LB during rush hour?

> Rather than the existing service, where the 07.40

> and 08.02 terminate at South Bermondsey.


No, alternate trains in the morning rush hour are still terminating at South Bermondsey.


Shit service.

JW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > JW Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > London Bridge officially reopened today to

> much

> > > fanfare. Does anybody know whether this means

> > that

> > > Southern trains will all now run to London

> > Bridge

> > > as opposed to two an hour terminating at

> South

> > > Bermondsey?

> >

> > I'm off to Millwall (South Bermondsey) on Sat

> 6th

> > Jan.

> > Trains seem to be running a normal service into

> > London Bridge.

> > Fingers crossed.

>

> Thanks DulwichFox - my point was more around

> whether the service would revert to one train

> every ten minutes from ED to LB during rush hour?

> Rather than the existing service, where the 07.40

> and 08.02 terminate at South Bermondsey. Any

> ideas?

>

> Have fun at the game!



I remember the trains were set to return to one every ten minutes when the new Thameslink timetable starts. Anyone know when that will be?

fishbiscuits Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JW Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Thanks DulwichFox - my point was more around

> > whether the service would revert to one train

> > every ten minutes from ED to LB during rush

> hour?

> > Rather than the existing service, where the

> 07.40

> > and 08.02 terminate at South Bermondsey.

>

> No, alternate trains in the morning rush hour are

> still terminating at South Bermondsey.

>

> Shit service.


I wonder when the 'rush hour' really starts for ED. I'd suggest it would be covered by the 08.10, 08.20, 08.30 and 08.51. So an 08.40 would probably be far more useful than the 07.40.


The new Thameslink timetable starts in May.

Call me greedy but we used to have a 07.40, 08.00 and an 08.40. Congestion at LB was the reason given for terminating some of the services at South Bermondsey. But now that the work at LB has finished we should get these services back shouldn?t we? Although I?m still unsure how we?re impacted by the Thameslink timetable.

JW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Call me greedy but we used to have a 07.40, 08.00

> and an 08.40. Congestion at LB was the reason

> given for terminating some of the services at

> South Bermondsey. But now that the work at LB has

> finished we should get these services back

> shouldn?t we? Although I?m still unsure how we?re

> impacted by the Thameslink timetable.


Good point! I vaguely remember that when the Thameslink programme finishes is the same as when the work at London Bridge finishes, hence why we'll revert to our original timetable then. I can't remember exactly where I heard that and can't find anything online though...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...