RAILTRACK was last night accused of ignoring urgent calls for a meeting to discuss the safety of crumbling railway bridges on the East Coast Main Line.
Highways officials have spent the past six weeks asking for a meeting to discuss their concerns after an investigation by The Northern Echo revealed the state of bridges on Britain's fastest line.
They have also sent Railtrack bosses a copy of a structural survey carried out on bridges in the region which identifies several in need of work.
Despite calls for an urgent meeting their appeals appear to have gone unnoticed.
Durham County Council's technical services director Chris Tunstall said last night: "It is disappointing to say the least, and we shall continue to press for an urgent meeting. I am growing increasingly concerned."
Railtrack has met North Yorkshire County Council officals but the two organisations are in dispute over who pays for remedial work to rail bridges.
Last night, Railtrack admitted the Durham County Council study appeared to have gone missing.
The admission will be an embarrassment to the company coming only a day after new chairman John Robinson pledged to create a "culture of zero tolerance for unsafe acts". And it comes barely a month after Lord Cullen criticised the firm for "institutional paralysis" in a report into the Paddington train disaster.
Durham officials spoke out as they prepared to complete safety improvements to a third rail bridge.
The safety upgrades were carried out in the wake of the Selby crash when a car was able to slip past safety barriers into the path of a speeding train on the main line.
Two months ago, The Northern Echo visited 50 bridges between Newcastle and York and found the approaches on dozens of them inadequately protected.
Durham County Council carried out its own survey and identified several where it considered the safety barriers needed upgrading.
This week, work is due to be completed on the last - the Sedgefield Station New Bridge, which carries the A689 over the Stockton to Darlington branch line - which the authority considers to be its responsibility. But Mr Tunstall said last night there was still an urgent need to discuss the conditions of other bridges with Railtrack bosses.
He said: "We viewed the other bridges as being Railtrack's responsibility, and we sent them a copy of our survey report as the basis for further discussion.
"That was six weeks ago, and we are still waiting for a response."
The authority is involved in two studies which are looking at the issue nationally.
But Mr Tunstall said: "There is still a need to discuss this at a more local level, and I am growing increasingly concerned at Railtrack's lack of response to our call for talks about the situation in Country Durham."
North Yorkshire County Council environmental director Mike Moore said some progress had been made at a meeting between the authority, Railtrack and the Health and Safety Executive.
At least ten bridges in North Yorkshire have been earmarked as being of high priority, requiring about £20,000 work each. But who should foot the bill is still disputed.
Safe Trains Action Group spokesman Carol Bell, a survivor of the Southall disaster, said: "Instead of haggling over who is responsible for paying, Railtrack and highways authorities should get the work done and split the bill."
Responding to Durham County Council's criticisms, a Railtrack spokesman said: "The person who deals with the matter has not received the report.
"It seems it has not been sent to the right place in the organisation. We will make sure it is directed to the relevant officer."
Comment from The Northern Echo - Railtrack in the slow lane.
Read more about the bridge safety campaign here.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article