AMTRAK aggrement

TURTLE 2 posted:

I just read an article about a "secret" agreement in their contracts with the freight railroads to use their tracks. The result is that AMTRAK (tax payers) will pay for all the liability, including that of the Freight Railroad,  for any accident claims. See what others can find on this. Seems reasonable solution? 

How about a link to the article.

Amtrak owns very little of their ROW. They have agreements with all of the Class 1's. Its no secret.

I was on FOX news and the Weather Channel and found it somewhere, but can't get back to it. The point was that yes there are agreements with the railroads - it is the "text" of those agreements that are not disclosed. Apparently there is a clause in them that puts all the Liability costs on AMTRAK

Just "google" Amtrak liability for freight railroads. CNBC, Chicago Tribune, etc

Not knowing what the fine print says, isn't this just another way for the taxpayers to foot the bill.  

"But whatever the precise legal language, plaintiffs' lawyers and former Amtrak officials say Amtrak generally bears the full cost of damages to its trains, passengers, employees and other crash victims - even in instances where crashes occurred as the result of a freight rail company's negligence or misconduct."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s...amp;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

From another prospective? Isn't this "No Fault Insurance"

Farmer_Bill posted:

"But whatever the precise legal language, plaintiffs' lawyers and former Amtrak officials say Amtrak generally bears the full cost of damages to its trains, passengers, employees and other crash victims - even in instances where crashes occurred as the result of a freight rail company's negligence or misconduct."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s...amp;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

 

Is there not some sort of "rule" that puts the total bill on any railroad which has trackage rights on another, and this was in effect before Amtrak?  I think I read this some time ago in TRAINS.

Due to some sad recent events, there might be a "switch" in the above way of thinking.

I'm not sure what the mystery is. Taxpayers are on the hook for many things.

There is no question about who is liable.  The applicable legislation, passed at least 30 years ago, states clearly that Amtreak must compensate the railroads on which it operates for all direct costs of running Amtrak trains.  Passenger injury liability is clearly such a cost.  The only way that the railroad could be held liable is if negligence on their part is proven - in a way that satisfies the cognizant court.

GVDobler posted:

I'm not sure what the mystery is. Taxpayers are on the hook for many things.

It has nothing to do with taxpayers or the federal government, except as they may provide funds to Amtrak.  The liability question is between two corporations.  Amtrak is a stock corporation incorporated under the Government corporation Act of the District of Colombia.  The stock was originally owned by thrree railroads.  I forget the details of what happened, but now the federal government is the owner of 100% of the stock shares.

BTW as background, I was involved in railroad planning in Washington in the 70's and spent time in the office of the government employee who wrote the first draft of the act establishing  the National railroad PAssenger Corporation.  That was Jim McClellan, star of the book "The Men Who Loved Trains".

mlaughlinnyc posted:

GVDobler posted:

I'm not sure what the mystery is. Taxpayers are on the hook for many things.

It has nothing to do with taxpayers or the federal government, except as they may provide funds to Amtrak.  The liability question is between two corporations.  Amtrak is a stock corporation incorporated under the Government corporation Act of the District of Colombia.  The stock was originally owned by thrree railroads.  I forget the details of what happened, but now the federal government is the owner of 100% of the stock shares.

BTW as background, I was involved in railroad planning in Washington in the 70's and spent time in the office of the government employee who wrote the first draft of the act establishing  the National railroad PAssenger Corporation.  That was Jim McClellan, star of the book "The Men Who Loved Trains".

 

 

My understanding is that the language was put in the original law as a means to get the private railroads to allow Amtrak to use the tracks.  Makes sense when you think about it because while CSX may have been at fault in the SC episode, the reality from its perspective is that it would not have been an issue if Amtrak were not using its track through the area.  Interesting historical question is what would have happened had the private railroads not gone along.  Government has eminent domain and other powerful tools it can use, so this was probably viewed as a good deal for all sides -- private railroads have liability protection and the government gets to keep passenger rail service in some form.  

Also, Amtrak is now owned by the government and has been for many years.  This is the case because liabilities have exceeded income for many years and the federal government pays the difference plus some.  From an accounting perspective, what then happens is that to the extent assets equal liabilities plus equity, the liabilities to the federal government (paid in over 40 years in the form of subsidy-- about $33bn in accumulated deficit) have overwhelmed the original equity and the federal government is the owner.  Plus the fact that DOT owns outright the other $10bn in preferred stock that constitutes that majority of equity on the balance sheet.  

Amtrak's financial statements are publicly available on Amtrak.com.  There is some interesting stuff to be gleaned from reading them even casually.