A senior solicitor involved in the Corby toxic waste scandal has written to East Midlands Railway (EMR) and Network Rail asking them to accept joint liability for the fatal train collision near Bedford on 19 June. The crash resulted in the death of one driver and left 162 passengers injured.
Move aims to speed compensation for victims
Des Collins of Collins Solicitors, who has offered to represent victims of the Bedford collision, said his firm had invited both the train operator and the infrastructure owner to acknowledge responsibility in principle. The correspondence followed industry reports raising concerns over EMR safety standards and a call from the RMT union for strike action.
"Inevitably, the conclusive causes of rail crashes take time to establish as investigations are necessarily detailed and meticulous. However, it is clear from all reports to date that the signal passed at danger was compounded by the lack of a Train Protection Warning System on that stretch of railway which, if triggered, is designed to automatically bring a train to a safe stop, preventing a collision."
Mr Collins told the companies that an admission of liability would allow for quicker interim payments to cover immediate financial needs such as extended sick pay while final claims are calculated. He added that if liability is not accepted, legal proceedings would be issued.
Context and implications for local passengers
The solicitor’s approach seeks to avoid prolonged litigation for injured passengers and families. While formal inquiries and safety investigations continue, an early acceptance of responsibility by the parties could enable faster access to hardship payments and other interim support.
- Crash date: 19 June
- Fatalities: 1 driver
- Injured: 162 passengers
Collins Solicitors, which is based in Watford, has experience representing victims of past rail incidents. The firm says the proportionate allocation of costs between EMR and Network Rail can be settled later; the immediate priority is financial relief for those affected.
What this means for the ongoing inquiry
Official accident investigations are typically detailed and can take months. A voluntary admission of liability would not replace technical probes by safety bodies, nor would it determine criminal or regulatory outcomes. It could, however, change the practical route for those seeking compensation.
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Date of collision | 19 June |
| Companies approached | East Midlands Railway; Network Rail |
| Legal action | Solicitor invited admission of liability; will commence proceedings if refused |
Local residents and those affected will be watching for responses from EMR and Network Rail, and for any practical steps to speed support to the injured. The case also feeds into wider debate about rail safety systems such as Train Protection Warning Systems and their deployment across the network.
Further updates are expected as companies respond and as official investigations publish findings.
