Re: Disused line permission

["Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au>]

"Robert Parnell" <rparnell@netspace.net.au> wrote in message
8l470a$1dm8$1@otis.netspace.net.au">news:8l470a$1dm8$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
> >
> > > In the case of a line where a heritage operator is in place, they are
> > responsible
> > > to carry out the work for RAC.
> >
> > Not true - this only applies when ownership of the line resides in RAC.
An
> > example of a line where "a heritage operator is in place" is Unanderra
to
> > moss Vale - the "heritage operator" is clearly not responsible on this
> > section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> This comment was in relation to a disused line, where by heritage
operators
> may lease a disused line and also maintain it. (As LVR did from Cowra to
> Blayney mid 80s to 1997).
>
> Bruce is not one to be doubted on such issues. (trust me!)

But that is not the statement that was made. The statement that was made was
that when a heritage operator is in place, they are responsible for the
upkeep of the line. There are lines where heritage operators are in place
where RAC is still responsible. If there was a qualification regarding
disused lines (ignoring the toipic of this thread) then it should have been
mentioned as a qualification in the original statement.

Dave