First Hull Trains: We will get better
First Hull Trains has vowed to improve its service after receiving criticism from passengers.
Following news the Government will take over troubled east coast rail operator National Express, train users have taken the opportunity to criticise the city company.
-
Ian Dunn, First Hull Trains operations manager
But First Hull Train bosses insist the introduction of new trains this week will improve the situation.
One of the company's main detractors is Hull East MP John Prescott, who posted a video on YouTube slating the operator.
In the video, he said: "I have constantly been on about the lousy service of First Hull Trains.
"The toilets do not work, trains are cancelled, the delays, and no hot or cold food.
"Despite all my complaints, it makes no difference."
Mr Prescott said how delighted he was National Express was being taken over by the Government, calling it "Nationalised Express".
Businessman Stuart Allister, of Touch Plc, also criticised First Hull Trains' service.
He said: "I have to travel to and from London each day from Selby and I have the unfortunate adventure of having to travel with Hull Trains.
"Last night, my journey took an extra three hours due to a mechanical failure 10 minutes south of Doncaster.
"This is not the first time Hull Trains has failed and it is noticed by more Hull-bound passengers."
Ken Thompson, employment affairs director for the Mail's parent company Northcliffe Media, has also suffered problems.
He said: "Over the past few months, it has gone right downhill.
"It has put on different trains, which are obviously older.
"The main problem is it has become very unreliable. The trains break down on a regular basis."
First Hull Trains operations manager Ian Dunn said the company had struggled in the past few weeks.
He said: "During the past nine years, First Hull Trains has earned a strong reputation as one of the most reliable long-distance train operating companies in the UK.
"We experienced some operational problems in late April, but during May and throughout most of June our performance was progressively improving.
"Serious damage to one of our trains en-route has put severe pressure on us from a maintenance point of view, as the train will be out of service for between four and six weeks for extensive repairs.
"This means we have to provide the timetable from a reduced pool of trains and this is the reason for reliability dropping in the past week.
"We are introducing another train into service as quickly as possible – hopefully in the next few days."
The company said it had to introduce longer trains as part of a deal – made in January – granting access to the rail line until 2016.
Simon Taylor, of First Hull Trains, said the company had to use older trains. He said: "This rolling stock was a little bit older and has been worked hard. We know these trains have to be refurbished and the work will be done later in the year."
18 Comments
View all
by Astonomia, East Riding
Saturday, July 04 2009, 12:31PM
“Thanks for the information - flogging the leases equates to getting rid of trains to me where ever they are based their attitude to service has declined.”
by terrythetrainspotter, brough
Saturday, July 04 2009, 10:46AM
“Astonomia, that did make me chuckle. Firstly first group did not nick the trains, Hull trains sold the lease to East Midlands trains who are run by Stagecoach. secondly them up north bit First group are based in Scotland. please try and get facts before making statements”
by M, Hull
Saturday, July 04 2009, 10:44AM
“terrythetrainspotter, Hull Trains have been part of First Group for a long time, since around 2005. And Astonomia, First didn't nick the trains, Stagecoach did, ableit for a sum of money.”
by Astonomia, East Riding
Saturday, July 04 2009, 9:48AM
“All was fine until First group got their hands on it. They nicked the new trains for use in the Midlands and because it's 'only Hull' they use second rate old rolling stock. Typical attitude of a big company towards Hull & the East Riding - it'll do their only from 'up north'”
by terrythetrainspotter, brough
Friday, July 03 2009, 5:13PM
“M,Hull, You state Hull Trains accepted the cash for the trains and yet First are to blame??? First used to operate 180's and gave them back because of reliability and opted for HST as the replacement (20 years older) Why would First accept the 180's back?? Hull trains tried to remain not part of first until it needs them!”
by Chris, Hedon & Bury
Friday, July 03 2009, 3:32PM
“If only the line from Hull to London had been electrified at the same time as the route to Leeds and Newcastle, then we would have been enjoying regular trains operated by the excellent Intercity 225. Anyone who has found themselves on a journey to/from London involving a change of train at Doncaster will know just how much superior the rolling stock is on that section of the route compared with the clapped out trains that Northern often use.
First have a reputation for making a complete pigs ear of practically every public transport service they touch. I stand by my view that the only way forward is for a single train company to run all rail services throughout the UK. My money would be on Virgin.
I agree, Hull Trains used to be an outstanding service and they really did help to put Hull on the map. It is just a shame really that the Pioneers they ordered only had four coaches instead of five. GB Railways and Anglia between them knew how to run a train service. It seems that First evidently do not. Of course the other problem in this country has always been the shortage of rolling stock and the time it takes to procure new vehicles.”
by M, Hull
Friday, July 03 2009, 3:06PM
“It was all politics Mark. Operator East Midlands Trains had promised the government to operate a new service from Corby to London, on the basis that they would acquire extra carriages. However, there were very little options available to them. There was huge political pressure on them to instate the services, and since they already operated a number of class 222 units (those that HT used to operate), they decided to pursue them to get a uniform fleet. The Department for Transport got involved, presumably offering Hull Trains cash for the units, and piling on the pressure. Eventually, First sold out, agreeing to give up the 4 year old units for class 180 units twice their age. The claim that technical problems were unforseen has to be looked upon with a lot of doubt - they had appalling reliability in the south west, and anybody could have worked out the potential for ongoing problems. The real loser is the passenger, who now has to put up with inferior trains and poor reliability.”
by Mark, Sutton
Friday, July 03 2009, 1:00PM
“Glen, for some reason much of the rolling stock has been changed to older units. I saw on a train buff's blog that the replacement units had a reputation for breaking down, and this seems to have been the case. My recent experiences of Hull Trains are that they are not as reliable as they used to be.”
by Sir Lazarus, Tinseltown Terminus
Friday, July 03 2009, 12:55PM
“Glen Q - I never "ravelled" on Hull Trains, only unravelled! It still takes around 2.5 hrs but add on the delays, cancellations, lack of facilities, water, air con., etc ........ good luck my friend!”
by Glenn Quagmire, Rhode Island
Friday, July 03 2009, 12:30PM
“I haven't ravelled on Hull trains for a few months but prior to that did do at least monthly and found the service excellent.
The carriages were almost new, with phone sockets and the staff were great. Have I missed something?
I'm due to be travelling again with them next week, have they really gone this far downhill? The service used to be excellent, Hull to London in 2.5 hours was awesome.”