Since April 2021, we have listened to 123 reporters who have raised concerns about faults. This has been increasing since 2022/23. From April 2024 until early January 2025, 37 reporters told us about faults, accounting for 21% of processed reports. This increase prompted us to take a deeper dive into the types of fault concerns reported to CIRAS.
We hear a variety of fault issues from across transport. This includes faulty air-conditioning on buses, faulty lighting near the railway, faulty tram tracks, and a faulty security door entry system.
Over the past four financial years, the bus sector has received the most fault reports as a proportion of total reports sent to the sector. Urban metro follows closely. However, overall, infrastructure managers received the most fault-related reports.
In most cases, the quickest way to resolve faults is to raise them through internal company fault reporting channels as soon as possible. Sometimes, though, people use CIRAS. According to our reporting data, around three-quarters of those who raise faults through CIRAS have already reported them internally first.
Often, when a fault is persistently not fixed, reporters turn to CIRAS to try another approach to resolving the issue. Sometimes, they are concerned that management is not taking fault reports seriously. In one example, the reporter had tried raising faults through multiple channels, more than once, before coming to CIRAS saying, ‘I just don’t seem to be getting anywhere.’
Other times, people use CIRAS to flag a pattern of faults. They may have observed that a piece of equipment is repeatedly going faulty, with fixes seemingly missing or not discovering the root cause: ‘[The equipment] was fixed once but now they've got into a situation where they're not working again.’
Around a quarter of people who raise fault reports through CIRAS are not employed by the company responsible for fixing it. Scenarios could include a train driver coming across faulty signalling equipment, or a track worker noticing a fault at a station. They may not know if the organisation responsible for fixing it is even aware of the fault or if they are resolving it.
Some reporters to CIRAS have previously flagged a fault to the organisation they thought was responsible, but then discovered it was not that organisation’s responsibility. Raising a fault through CIRAS can help reporters to identify the correct organisation with ownership for fixing it.
This shows the usefulness of CIRAS where someone doesn’t have access to other appropriate reporting channels, where they are unsure which company is responsible, where a fault is persistent, and, of course, if they don’t feel comfortable raising concerns internally and prefer to report in confidence.
What do our members learn from the reports we share?
Some of our fault reports highlight the challenges with managing the interface between companies and infrastructure managers. It can be difficult to know who is responsible for some issues due to complex property arrangements. This can, in turn, delay faults being fixed.
Additionally, reports might prompt a company to reflect on whether employees are aware of the internal escalation routes available, and whether they could review internal processes so that they are still relevant or accessible to staff.
The main learning point that companies tell us they gain from our fault reports is about the need to keep staff informed and updated on progress with fixing faults.
If people report through internal channels and don’t receive feedback, or they are told it will be fixed but weeks, months, or years pass and it still isn’t, they may feel there is little value to reporting issues. They may not report again. CIRAS is another opportunity for reporters to get information and clarity. Company responses can clarify expected timeframes and sometimes consider improvements to internal communications about resolving issues, so people know what’s happening.
Just over half (54%) of reporters who gave feedback to us on their fault-related reports raised through CIRAS said they felt work had been done to fix the faults. In other cases, work may be planned in to fix the fault, but not yet delivered.
The following case studies are examples of impactful fault reports raised through CIRAS.
A faulty boiler led to no hot water for handwashing and showering at an engineering depot. The issue had been ongoing for weeks. Staff didn’t know when it would be resolved. The report led to the boiler being fixed. The company also fitted barriers around it, as its investigation discovered that adjustments to the boiler had tripped the power supply. The barriers would prevent this. The company shared an update to staff explaining this.
A pedestrian railway footbridge was in a poor state of repair, with visible cracks and holes in its tarmac surface, and rust and corrosion visible. Its stairs had missing nosings. The reporter was concerned about the bridge’s structural integrity and safety. The report prompted dialogue between two stakeholders, who then had a survey of the bridge carried out as well as repairs to the stairs. They shared longer term plans to completely refurbish the bridge with the reporter.
A control room security door was damaged, leaving it insecure. It had been faulty for months. After the CIRAS report, it was replaced with a new, secure door so no unauthorised people could enter.
A faulty lamp post meant only half of a foot crossing was lit. The reporter to CIRAS was concerned by how long it was taking to fix. The crossing is used frequently and in the middle of an S-bend, so trains can’t see it clearly. An investigation following the CIRAS report identified the owner as the local council. The CIRAS member receiving the report asked the council to fix the streetlight urgently and they did.
