WEST of England rail passengers arrived at their stations last week to find notices bearing an apology from Andrew Haines, boss of the local train company, First Great Western (FGW).

“Dear Customer,” it began, “over the last few weeks we’ve not been giving you the service you deserve, and the level of disruption many of you have experienced is simply not good enough.” The letter went on to detail the reasons for the disruptions, plans to sort things out, and an offer of compensation. For many, it was a welcome admission that all was not well.

But regular passengers would have experienced a moment of déjà vu. Almost a year ago – on January 26 – a remarkably similar notice went up. “Firstly I would like to apologise to our customers for not meeting their expectations,” began the letter from Alison Forster, the then managing director. Like Haines’s missive, it went on to list how the company planned to set things right.

The regular public apologies reflect the continuing problems on FGW’s routes, which snake west from London’s Paddington station, taking in the Great Western mainline and branch lines serving the Thames Valley and West Country. Things got so bad in January that some regular commuters staged a fare strike, carrying fake protest tickets. In a curiously British twist, station staff accepted real and fake tickets, but nabbed those carrying neither.

Forster, who led the company during the January revolt, has moved on, taking up a position at FGW’s parent company, First Group. Haines is now in the hot seat, and facing a small-scale repeat of January’s problems.

A new timetable, which should improve capacity, has had teething problems. At the same time, a small number of fares have gone up by nearly 10%. “The new timetable is fine, but since it was introduced, reliability has been hopeless,” said a spokesman for More Train, Less Strain, the campaign group that organised last year’s protest.

It has threatened a repeat of the action unless FGW postpones fare increases. Meanwhile, Colin Breed, the Liberal Democrat MP for South East Cornwall, has tabled a motion in parliament calling for the service to be renationalised.

Haines, who began his career in the railways with a summer job in the lost-luggage office at Victoria station, accepts that the service needs to improve. “There is no doubt that in some cases we should have reacted much faster than we did. But the new timetable is a big improvement, and we are adding capacity and refurbished trains on some routes that will help a lot,” he said.

One example is a back-to-the-future move to replace new trains with refurbished BR-era High Speed Trains, which are more roomy and have more seats than the modern stock.

Some of the franchise’s problems are deep-rooted and out of FGW’s direct control. Haines points out that investment in new infrastructure on the Great Western route peaked in the late 1960s.

The rail and signalling installed then should have been replaced in the late 1990s – but instead Railtrack cut spending. It is only now, under Network Rail, that rail replacement is being increased.

On the Thames Valley routes into London, for example, FGW is responsible for only 28% of delays, with almost all the rest being the responsibility of Network Rail, which owns and operates the track and signalling. The age of the infrastructure leads to sudden and unexpected problems. “A fortnight ago Network Rail did an ultrasonic inspection of a one-mile section of track that showed eight faults that had to be fixed immediately. The result was that the line was closed in the morning,” said Haines.

First has held the franchise since British Rail was privatised in the late 1990s. Its first period in charge expired in 2005, but it retained the licence with an offer to pay the government £1 billion from the business over 10 years.

Haines said the new franchise laid down in detail what the company could do. “It is prescriptive, right down the level of service specified. Every company that bid for that franchise was given a minimum level of service, and it was clear that the government was only prepared to pay for that minimum. One of the three principles set out for the franchise was that it should maximise value for the taxpayer.”

None of this cuts much ice with the fare protesters. “We understand that there are various players in this, including Network Rail and the DfT [Department for Transport]. But as passengers our contract is with FGW – we give them money and they provide the service,” said the More Train, Less Strain spokesman. The group plans a public meeting in Bath next month to discuss another revolt.

Times Recommends

• Minister in talks with Saudis to protect creditors
• Premier Inn hits back in £29-a-room row
• Bankers hit back at 'populist' bonus supertax