A legal opinion that PSVAR applies to virtually all rail replacement work stands to represent a major shake-up for many coach operators. While the view presented is yet to be tested in court, there is little room for any suggestion that it is flawed.
The separate fares issue is key. Additionally, it’s a stretch to say that a rail replacement service is anything other than scheduled. Those two are a slam-dunk. Combined, they mandate PSVAR compliance.
Then add the rail industry’s traditional risk aversion. Indeed, the legal opinion has been solicited by the Office of Rail and Road (ORR). It is part of consultation work with train operating companies (TOCs) into accessible travel guidance.
Currently, many coaches that fall into the age category that already mandates PSVAR compliance when used on in-scope work are occupied at weekends on behalf of TOCs. If ORR’s legal opinion is correct, lots of them are operating outside the law at those times.
Little attention has been paid to coaches’ compliance with PSVAR when used on in-scope services until now. Local authorities have woken up to it. So now are TOCs.
ORR’s legal opinion suggests that, as well as the road transport operator, TOCs could be held liable in law for a non-PSVAR-compliant coach or bus being used on rail replacement. ORR’s consultation with them is yet to begin. But the view it presents will resonate with those companies.
It’s worth noting that some parts of the rail industry will fail to satisfy its own deadline to meet accessibility regulations. But that will have no effect on how PSVAR compliance among replacement road vehicles is approached. Change is coming.
