Flooding will not delay vital Benfleet bridge repairs

RAIL bosses insist heavy rainfall and flooding will not dampen plans to remove and replace Benfleet railway bridge.

Ambitious plans to tear down the 100-year-old bridge over Ferry Road between Christmas and New Year has caused traffic chaos over the last few weeks as one-lane was closed for engineers to carry out preliminary work.

However, motorists suffered hours of delays last weekend as police were forced to close Ferry Road entirely, ahead of schedule, after the highway became submerged in water following heavy downpours.

Bus services on and off Canvey also experienced severe delays due to the closure.

However, despite the road still being flooded on Monday, Network Rail claim the programme of work will not be delayed.

A Network Rail spokesperson said: “Police closed the road on Saturday a few days before we had planned because of the flooding, and it will remain closed until the works are completed.

“However, despite the rain we are still on schedule to start the works as normal on December 25. Obviously we cannot predict the weather, but so far it has not disrupted the works and hopefully this will continue and everything will be finished on time before January.”

Despite chaos on the roads, rail users have praised the company for making sure the disruptions to train services have been well advertised.

Robin Cotgrove tweeted the Echo: “c2c have done a fab job in their awareness of the trains they run.”

Replacement bus services will operate between Pitsea and Leigh, from Christmas Eve until New Year’s Eve.

Special services will also run from Canvey to Pitsea providing a faster connection to London-bound trains.

For more information, visit c2c-online.co.uk/travel_information/service_alterations/benfleet bridgerenewal

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:35pm Fri 28 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches... Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

5:40pm Fri 28 Dec 12

John T Pharro says...

Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!! John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

6:12pm Fri 28 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

6:41pm Fri 28 Dec 12

John T Pharro says...

Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

6:42pm Fri 28 Dec 12

upset says...

Other than the first paragraph (18 words) this is not a news article it's a history lesson.
Other than the first paragraph (18 words) this is not a news article it's a history lesson. upset
  • Score: 0

6:42pm Fri 28 Dec 12

John T Pharro says...

John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height". John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

6:43pm Fri 28 Dec 12

John T Pharro says...

upset wrote:
Other than the first paragraph (18 words) this is not a news article it's a history lesson.
Hopefully not to be repeated.
[quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] wrote: Other than the first paragraph (18 words) this is not a news article it's a history lesson.[/p][/quote]Hopefully not to be repeated. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

6:54pm Fri 28 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

John T Pharro wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height".[/p][/quote]If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend. Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

7:13pm Fri 28 Dec 12

Soouthchurch59 says...

Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.
'caveyite' or caveat?
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height".[/p][/quote]If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.[/p][/quote]'caveyite' or caveat? Soouthchurch59
  • Score: 0

7:37pm Fri 28 Dec 12

EssexPerson says...

Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
I wont pretend to know (or care) who is paying for the bridge replacement but with regard to the contract, nothing has been decided on this franchise. And after the West Coast fiasco all bids for all the available contracts have been put on hold until they have reviewed what went wrong.
But just my opinion, would the DfT risk another public embarrassment by removing National Express as the operator when year after year since 2005 they have delivered top performance results?
As for the bridge repairs, I think (who ever is responsible) have done a good job with regards to notices and replacement options. Of course there is traffic on the Island, but there's always traffic and it had to be replaced.
Will it be done by 30th!?! I'll hold off on giving my praise on that part as I doubt it will be done by then.
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]I wont pretend to know (or care) who is paying for the bridge replacement but with regard to the contract, nothing has been decided on this franchise. And after the West Coast fiasco all bids for all the available contracts have been put on hold until they have reviewed what went wrong. But just my opinion, would the DfT risk another public embarrassment by removing National Express as the operator when year after year since 2005 they have delivered top performance results? As for the bridge repairs, I think (who ever is responsible) have done a good job with regards to notices and replacement options. Of course there is traffic on the Island, but there's always traffic and it had to be replaced. Will it be done by 30th!?! I'll hold off on giving my praise on that part as I doubt it will be done by then. EssexPerson
  • Score: 0

7:39pm Fri 28 Dec 12

Soouthchurch59 says...

Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.
'caveyite' or caveat?
Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it!
[quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height".[/p][/quote]If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.[/p][/quote]'caveyite' or caveat?[/p][/quote]Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it! Soouthchurch59
  • Score: 0

8:04pm Fri 28 Dec 12

John T Pharro says...

Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.
'caveyite' or caveat?
Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it!
And there was me thinking it was 4 foot 8 and a half inches.
[quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height".[/p][/quote]If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.[/p][/quote]'caveyite' or caveat?[/p][/quote]Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it![/p][/quote]And there was me thinking it was 4 foot 8 and a half inches. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Fri 28 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

John T Pharro wrote:
Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.
'caveyite' or caveat?
Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it!
And there was me thinking it was 4 foot 8 and a half inches.
I didn't to confuse you Pharro boy, so I kept it to whole numbers....
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height".[/p][/quote]If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.[/p][/quote]'caveyite' or caveat?[/p][/quote]Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it![/p][/quote]And there was me thinking it was 4 foot 8 and a half inches.[/p][/quote]I didn't to confuse you Pharro boy, so I kept it to whole numbers.... Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

9:17pm Fri 28 Dec 12

John T Pharro says...

Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Soouthchurch59 wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...
Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!!
Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh
4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.
Sorry should read is that "your height".
If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.
'caveyite' or caveat?
Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it!
And there was me thinking it was 4 foot 8 and a half inches.
I didn't to confuse you Pharro boy, so I kept it to whole numbers....
Er no you were wrong. Just an excuse on your part for being wrong again.
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Soouthchurch59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: With C2C looking as if they may well lose the contract, to run this line, I don't really put the bridge on their list of priorities, watch this space, about 4ft 8 inches...[/p][/quote]Network Rail is replacing the bridge not C2C DOH!![/p][/quote]Network rail have enjoyed a huge financial input, from C2C, however since the implantation of the placing of new tenders, for this line, Network rail, say the users, in this case c2c, will bolster the initial funds, however according to news not here, things such as purse strings have been tightened somewhat ........Doh[/p][/quote]4 foot 8 inches is that height? That would explain a lot about your obvious problems.[/p][/quote]Sorry should read is that "your height".[/p][/quote]If you understood anything about the railways, a subject you seem to profess, to be an expert, you would know that 4ft 8 inches is the unique width of the tracks, which as a caveyite, I wouldn't expect you to be able, to comprehend.[/p][/quote]'caveyite' or caveat?[/p][/quote]Ah, CANVEY-ite....Got it![/p][/quote]And there was me thinking it was 4 foot 8 and a half inches.[/p][/quote]I didn't to confuse you Pharro boy, so I kept it to whole numbers....[/p][/quote]Er no you were wrong. Just an excuse on your part for being wrong again. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

6:24am Sat 29 Dec 12

al coniston says...

chaps, if you do insist on slaughtering each other, at least make sure you check what you type . . . . otherwise it ruins the fun and makes you look a bit of a tool to be honest
chaps, if you do insist on slaughtering each other, at least make sure you check what you type . . . . otherwise it ruins the fun and makes you look a bit of a tool to be honest al coniston
  • Score: 0

1:01pm Sat 29 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........
You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station......... Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

8:07pm Sat 29 Dec 12

soul man says...

Carnabackable wrote:
You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........
we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........[/p][/quote]we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol soul man
  • Score: 0

6:15am Sun 30 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

soul man wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........
we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol
But it's not on Canvey, is it...Doh
[quote][p][bold]soul man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........[/p][/quote]we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol[/p][/quote]But it's not on Canvey, is it...Doh Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Sun 30 Dec 12

MrFrogFace says...

Carnabackable wrote:
soul man wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........
we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol
But it's not on Canvey, is it...Doh
I sense you have some issues
[quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]soul man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........[/p][/quote]we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol[/p][/quote]But it's not on Canvey, is it...Doh[/p][/quote]I sense you have some issues MrFrogFace
  • Score: 0

10:35pm Sun 30 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

MrFrogFace wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
soul man wrote:
Carnabackable wrote:
You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........
we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol
But it's not on Canvey, is it...Doh
I sense you have some issues
Only in so far that these bridge repairs are only 50% done tonight, and the chance of getting supplies onto canvey, via Ferry Road on Jan 2nd, seem a pipe dream, so it's the long way round, though at least without any height restrictions !
[quote][p][bold]MrFrogFace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]soul man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carnabackable[/bold] wrote: You never know, Canveyites might some day have their own railway station.........[/p][/quote]we do, its called benfleet and canvey lol[/p][/quote]But it's not on Canvey, is it...Doh[/p][/quote]I sense you have some issues[/p][/quote]Only in so far that these bridge repairs are only 50% done tonight, and the chance of getting supplies onto canvey, via Ferry Road on Jan 2nd, seem a pipe dream, so it's the long way round, though at least without any height restrictions ! Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree