Rother Valley Railway

As you state, At the time, the structures were still the property of the landowner, So legally no case to answer for, One thing i do wonder though is, once the order became active, and the compensation values for the land were worked out, could the RVR have reduced downwards the compensation payable to the now former owner, to reflect the damage done? or is it a settled formular, that is used and condition of the acquired land, and structures, have no impact?

 

I notice at the questions section, it was mentioned that the relationship was still fraught, between the landowners and the railway. With them watching every move the railway makes, one mistake and they start shouting to the various agencies. It's still there on FB and one of the usual anti railway people saying "They are removing trees when birds are nesting" when they were Ash diebacks and needed to be removed. This had been done before nesting started.

The Landowners have not done themselves any favours though by damaging that bridge. The people who are against the railway and keep complaining about "Enviromental damage and new banks causing flooding". When loads of concrete have been dumped into the river by someone on purpose, just because they could.

 

Just wondering- considering that bridge 26 (Austens) spans a river, and the eastern bank is, and was, owned by RVR, as of June 2023, who nominally owned the bridge?

 

I don’t know, however it is almost certain the compensation amount was not settled on the date RVR took possession. The CP process allows this to be settled at a later date, at a tribunal if necessary. I expect little or nothing more about this will be made public.

The TWAO is clear RVR have the power to CP the land for the railway but it says nothing about things resting on that land, such as disused bridges or other ‘scrap metal’ including other non-reusable bridge decks which’ll cost RVR money to remove. An agreed sale contract might’ve included a schedule of ‘fixtures & fittings’ but clearly that’s not applicable in this case

It wasn’t owned by the railway. John Sreeves says, in the video, the damage occurred on the eve of transfer to RVR .

 

I think the County Council ones were mostly removed when the replica ones were put in but this one was obviously too well embedded in the middle of Rolvenden platform and was still there yeaterday. The datum must have been Tenterden headshunt and it attempts to perpetuate the preservation malpractise of the up direction becoming the down direction.

 

My impression from other news reports is that the EA has fewer staff, particularly knowledgeable people who go out on site, so I guess there's a tendency to cover yourself by making sure all the paperwork is in order, because you don't have time to actually go and look at things yourself.

 

I doubt it since if it’d been owned by the Historical Railway Estate they’d’ve had to regularly inspect it and carry out any essential works. This’d’ve been well known (like Chelfham Viaduct on the L&B) and any ownership transfer-agreement or compulsory purchase requirements in the evidence at the public inquiry.

 

Yep. Fair point.

 

Further progress on the station building
https://rvrailway.blogspot.com/2025/06/SB-271.html

 

Feeling lost without updates on RVR's Bridge 25?

https://rvrailway.blogspot.com/2025/06/bridge-25-24-early-jun-25.html

 

Thank you, it’s good to see all of these. What about Austen's - any nice pictures of the mended bridge which, hopefully, Bridge 25 deck’ll soon be crossing when it’s taken to site?

 

South of Salehurst the millimetre accurate surveying is being done.

https://rvrailway.blogspot.com/2025/06/salehurst-section-1.html

 

Thanks Trevor for the facinating pictures.

 

That says a lot about being ultra cautious of certain neighbours.

 

Thats how its going to have to be, and once the line is rebuilt, the railway is going to have to remain ultra cautious, and not give any excuse to the neighbours to complain .

 

Also, with the continuing hostility from the landowners, I'm wondering if the crop growing season, will mean steam being banned between Bodiam and Robertsbridge, once the line reopens, because a stray spark, could quite easily lead to them, creating more trouble, not just with local media, but with the EA, That actually might be a sound idea to ban steam, during the growing season, as safeguard against disgruntled person's, who might try to claim the railway has started a fire on their land.

 

just stop and think that one through - depending on what has been planted, and in what fields…

for example you sow winter wheat in September, and harvest it the following Autumn. Now plant some other things in other fields and you’ve got a near permanent ‘growing season’

so, very quickly *not a steam railway*…

 

Dont be giving the wrong people ideas... but for any line passing though fire sensitive environments then effective spark arrestors are a really good move...

 

You don't roll over just because somebody makes a complaint. The railway will, no doubt, already have procedures in place for assessing fire-risk and a defendable decision process when it's necessary to consider curtailing steam operations. They, and their insurers, will also have methods for judging whether a claim of fire-damage is justified or not. There's no reason to treat the new neighbouring farms any different from the existing ones.