SAY NO TO 450 TRAINS ON THE PORTSMOUTH LINE

Signatures 1583 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 32 › »

1. 101
   Name: Mark Dawson on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments: I am a daily commuter from Haslemere to London Waterloo and deeply resent to switch the 450 rolling stock.

   Flag
2. 102
   Name: Andrew Williamson on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments:

   Flag
3. 103
   Name: Rob Holgate on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments: I find the service from Haslemere to Waterloo generally efficient and reliable. I am six foot two with a history of back problems and in First Class on the 444 trains I am able to read and work in comfort and do not begrudge paying the additional £2,000 per annum for that privilege. With these current proposals somehow SWT seem to be downgrading my First Class ticket so that I will only be able to sit in the equivalent of a Second Class seat on a 444 (i.e. 4 seats across and no leg room). For me the First section on a 450 is cramped and uncomfortable - my elbows don’t even fit on the armrests and it is certainly extremely difficult to do any work. I fully support the NO 450 campaign.

   Flag
4. 104
   Name: Chris Cotterell on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments: Bring back the 444 rolling stock which was comfortable and an acceptable mode of transport, and never overcrowded, and maybe start putting on express services to and from Haslemere to cut out crowding at Guildford and Woking. Enough rubbish about 100% crowding increases, we are not that stupid.

   Flag
5. 105
   Name: Simon Hicks on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments: I think SWTrains must have got the message by now!!!!! Lets see some positve action ASAP.

   Flag
6. 106
   Name: Tim McKeithan on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments: I agree, I am having to stand the entire way from Hampshire to Waterloo, and I use to sit the entire way. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.

   Flag
7. 107
   Name: Nigel Williams on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments: Just as commuting had become bearable with the demise of the last of the slam doors, SWT look set to wreck it. My journey in a 450 was miserable. I strongly support the motion to retain and increase the 444 stock.

   Flag
8. 108
   Name: Rufus Warner on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 109
   Name: Peter Wilson on Jan 11, 2007

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 110
    Name: Robert Thorne on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: The replacement trains are remarkably uncomfortable and in no way suitable for the extended journey times to Haslemere and beyond.

    Flag
11. 111
    Name: Ian Gregory on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Why is SW Trains so determined to put customers second This is an absurd decision and one that must be reversed.

    Flag
12. 112
    Name: Ian Gregory on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Why is SW Trains so determined to put customers second This is an absurd decision and one that must be reversed.

    Flag
13. 113
    Name: John Isachsen on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
14. 114
    Name: Dan Nash on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: This is a joke, these trains are not comfortable at all on long journeys, i will swith to the roads!

    Flag
15. 115
    Name: James Earwicker on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I am a regular user of this line. I do not wish to see these new uncomfortable trains introduced. Stick withe 444 fleet.

    Flag
16. 116
    Name: Denis O'Brien on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 117
    Name: Mark Nicholls on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
18. 118
    Name: Barry Voysey on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: the commute into london is already painful enough without having to travel on these cramped and uncomfortable trains. Stationary trolley service is nothing but a joke and the layout makes standing even worse as there is no room for this in the narrow passageway between seats. All this will do is force people off the trains.

    Flag
19. 119
    Name: Andrew Hutchinson on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: The seating is dreadful and uncomfortable for such a long journey. To add salt to the wound, a price increase is given - for a reduced level of comfort!! and currently service!! I hate to think what it will be like in the summer months! Probably find these trains have poor air-con facilities! Maybe we should all refuse to show our tickets for a month

    Flag
20. 120
    Name: Alex Carter on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Agree with keep trains online. agree should re-introduce waterloo to hasslemere service to ease over crowding. BUT YES THE 1730 & 1800 THERE ARE NO SEATS SWT ARE RIGHT ABIUT THIS

    Flag
21. 121
    Name: Anthony Kirkby on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I have been using this line for 7 years. In the last 3 years my fares have increased by significant amount more than inflation. The Journey time has increased by 20 Minutes. The Car park has increased from £1.80 to £4.30 per-day, and now I have to sit in discomfort unable to read or work because SWT put profit from their monopoly before their customers. This Journey used to be reasonably pleasant it is now a living hell twice a day. I suggest we all buy SWT shares so we get a say in how they do things

    Flag
22. 122
    Name: Henry May on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I offer my full support to the campaign. NO 450 TRAINS ON THE LONDON-PORTSMOUTH LINE!

    Flag
23. 123
    Name: Zoe Burrows on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Well done for making a stand, I fully support it as a commuter from Petersfield to London Waterloo, we get charged a hefty amount for our fare but seem to get little in return and no consideration as fare paying passengers.

    Flag
24. 124
    Name: Sian Browne on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 125
    Name: Jim Habershon on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I am disgusted.

    Flag
26. 126
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 127
    Name: Rainer Baker on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I totally agree. I'm 6'2 and find the 450's far too cramped. I can't fit properly in the seat that face each other as I invade the space of the person facing me and I can't properly fit in the 2by2 seats as my knees end up wedged against the seatback in front. I'm also quite broad shouldered so the poor person that tries to squeeze in next to me is usually hanging off the end of their seat. Having to put up with this for a journey that is over an hour long is unacceptable. Also, if you sit in the seats that face each other you have nowhere to place a cup of tea.

    Flag
28. 128
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: its woring wronjg when we're charged so much as it is - we're not livestock for christ sake

    Flag
29. 129
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: its woring wronjg when we're charged so much as it is - we're not livestock for christ sake

    Flag
30. 130
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 131
    Name: Caroline Cooper on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 132
    Name: Peter Anderson on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Its ridiculous that you are expected to sit half and half off a seat for part of the journey !!! Its preferable to stand rather than sit in someone's lap

    Flag
33. 133
    Name: Andrew Mackay on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 134
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: The proposed change is disgraceful - 100 minutes on a suburban train is totally unacceptable

    Flag
35. 135
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: The proposed change is disgraceful - 100 minutes on a suburban train is totally unacceptable

    Flag
36. 136
    Name: Paddy Carless on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 137
    Name: Simon Verrall on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 138
    Name: James Birkett on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I agree with everytiing about this petition but would add that SWT brought this upon itself a) by reducing the service in 2004 and b) by lamely saying it is to increasing seats.

    Flag
39. 139
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Even with the introduction of the new trains at peak times you get a lot of standers. So why not add more carriages, add more direct trains to Haslemere or stagger the fares for different times for commuters.

    Flag
40. 140
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 141
    Name: Jan Smorczewski on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Please SWT, the 450 trains are a total misery for any journey longer than half an hour for anything longer than 30 mins.

    Flag
42. 142
    Name: Miles Biggins on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Not since the invention of the steam train 200 years ago, have long distance travellers with a shoulder width greater than that of a six-year-old had to put up with such uncomfortable conditions as in the 3x3 and 2x2 facing seats on the 450 trains. This is unacceptable in the 21st Century.

    Flag
43. 143
    Name: James Goldman on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 144
    Name: Patrick Robinson on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Pure greed is driving South West Trains to introduce the cheaper 450, suburban rolling stock , on the Portsmouth line. It represents a serious Health and Safety risk and should not be allowed.

    Flag
45. 145
    Name: Rick King on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 146
    Name: Derek Rawlings on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: I often see passengers choosing to stand rather than squeeze into the "piggy in the middle" seat, which often remain empty even on crowded trains. As a result, the 450's don't even address the supposed overcrowding in the first place. They simply transport the same number of passengers in reduced comfort

    Flag
47. 147
    Name: Tom Cartwright on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
48. 148
    Name: Gary Halls on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments: Clearly no-one from SWT has ever tried sitting on the seats in one of the 450 class trains for more than a few minutes -or maybe they have and just don't care!

    Flag
49. 149
    Name: Philip Soutter on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 150
    Name: William Bruce on Jan 11, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 32 › »