Fix The District WIMBLEDON
TfL’s own words

Investment Programme Report, Quarter 2 2020/21

TfL Programmes & Investment Committee · 11 December 2020 · committee paper (PDF, p.46)

What it shows. The first public record that our branch was dropped from the modernisation — and it dates the decision to a cost-and-schedule review in September 2020, prompted by pandemic finances. TfL’s own words leave the door open to converting the signalling later. (The same meeting’s Signalling & Controls paper, Item 12 §5.10, separately refers to the “4LM signalling descope areas”.)

“In September 2020, we reviewed the Four Lines Modernisation programme to assess and challenge both cost and schedule. Following this review, the western branches of the District line will not be re-signalled as part of this programme… We will continue to assess whether we can convert this signalling in the future.” Transport for London, Investment Programme Report Q2 2020/21 (11 December 2020)
Read the original → (13 MB PDF)

Four Lines Modernisation Programme paper

TfL Programmes & Investment Committee · 21 July 2021 · committee paper (PDF), §4.15

What it shows. TfL restates the decision and names exactly where the new signalling stops: East Putney (our branch) and Stamford Brook (the Richmond and Ealing Broadway branches). The “continue to assess” wording is repeated word for word. The paper also weighs — and rejects, on cost grounds — giving the Metropolitan line the same treatment.

“…the western branches of the District line will not be re-signalled. This means sections of the District line south of East Putney and west of Stamford Brook will remain under the existing signalling… We will continue to assess whether we can convert this signalling in the future.” Transport for London, Four Lines Modernisation paper (21 July 2021), §4.15
Read the original →

FOI-1277-2526 — the branch’s life-expired equipment

Transport for London · Freedom of Information response · published 29 July 2025

What it shows. TfL admits, in writing, that the branch’s train-tracking equipment is life-expired and prone to faults — the root of the daily board errors and delays. (This describes the train-tracking/information layer specifically, not the whole signalling system.)

“…a legacy electronic ‘Train Describer’ system, which includes life-expired equipment. The equipment is prone to faults which means the monitoring of trains can be out of sync or trains are not detected…” Transport for London, FOI-1277-2526 (July 2025)
Read the original →

FOI-4657-2526 — where the new signalling stops

Transport for London · Freedom of Information response · published 7 April 2026

What it shows. TfL confirms verbatim that the modern signalling reaches only as far as East Putney, and that the one improvement coming to the branch is better information boards — now due in the second half of 2026, having slipped from an earlier “early 2026”.

“The 4LM project is replacing the signalling system as far as East Putney station.” Transport for London, FOI-4657-2526 (April 2026)
Read the original →

TfL’s own disruption records, 2015 to 2026

Transport for London · FOI-0919-2627 (20 July 2026), FOI-3588-2425 and TfL’s published performance data (28 August 2026)

What it shows. TfL keeps a record of every service-status message it puts on the platform boards. Put its three releases together and you have an unbroken eleven-year account of the District line — and it shows our branch going one way while the rest of the line goes the other.

Counting the days on which TfL’s own records place a signal, points or track fault at a station on our branch: 14 days in 2015, 27 in 2023, 26 in 2024 — and 49 in 2025. Over the same period the equivalent figure for the whole District line fell, from around 150 days a year to around 120. Our branch’s share of the line’s fault days went from 9% to 37%. In 2025, four stations accounted for more than a third of the fault days on a line that runs from Upminster to Ealing Broadway. Southfields and East Putney account for most of that jump.

2026 so far is better. To 26 July there were 15 such days, which works out at about 26 across a full year — back to the 2023 and 2024 level. We are not claiming the branch is still getting worse. We are saying it has been consistently worse than the rest of the line for a decade, and that 2025 was the worst year on record.

TfL originally refused the data from March 2025 onwards under section 22 of the Freedom of Information Act, on the basis that it was intended for future publication. It published it on 28 August 2026, and we withdrew our challenge.

How to check this. These figures are our analysis of TfL’s raw records, not TfL’s own published statistics. TfL cautions that each row is a status message, not an incident, and that messages overlap — so we count distinct days on which a fault is named at a branch station, never message totals, and never hours. We ignore 2020 and 2021 when comparing periods, because pandemic timetables make them unlike other years. All three datasets are public: the 2015–2019 file is on the request thread below, 2020–2025 is on TfL’s disclosure log as FOI-3588-2425, and 2022–2026 is on TfL’s performance page.

“…we are not obliged to supply the requested information for March 2025 onwards as it is subject to a statutory exemption to the right of access to information under section 22. In this instance the exemption has been applied as the information you have requested is intended for future publication. The data will be published on our website later this year.” Transport for London, FOI-0919-2627 (20 July 2026)
Read the full response and download the data →

Network Rail’s fault log — a second organisation’s record of the same track

Network Rail · Freedom of Information response FOI2026/01116 · 20 July 2026

Why this one matters. Every other set of numbers here is TfL reporting on itself. This is not. Network Rail attends signalling faults on part of our branch under contract to TfL, and it keeps its own log. That gives us a way to check TfL’s public account against somebody else’s record of the same equipment.

Network Rail logged 27 signalling faults on the branch between 2022 and April 2026 — 2 in 2022, rising to 10 in 2025. Its worst year is 2025, the same as TfL’s.

We checked all 27 dates against what TfL told passengers that day. On 9 of them TfL named a fault on the branch. On 7 the branch was disrupted but TfL gave a different reason. On 10 more, TfL’s record does not mention the branch at all — and on 10 November 2025, when Network Rail logged a points failure at Wimbledon Park, TfL’s record for the whole day contains nothing but the routine overnight notice.

What this does and does not prove. Network Rail gave us dates but no times. A fault logged on a given day might have happened after the branch closed for the night, or been fixed before any train was affected. So these are questions worth asking, not proof that anything was hidden — and we have asked Network Rail for the timings.

“Under our contractual arrangement with TfL we provide incident response only for some signalling assets.” Network Rail, FOI2026/01116 (20 July 2026)
The public record & reporting

Progress with the Four Lines Modernisation project

Rail Engineer · Clive Kessell (former IRSE President) · 2 May 2023

What it shows. A technical account of the descope: the modern (CBTC) signalling stops at Stamford Brook and East Putney, drivers switch to manual, and the branches keep their existing signalling and trip cocks. The stated reason was framed as conditional — “at the present time”.

“The original intention of providing an overlay system to provide ATO has been viewed as unjustifiable at the present time in view of the lower traffic density and the complications arising from joint running with other operators.” Rail Engineer (May 2023)
Read the full article →

“Falls short of full modernisation”

FulhamSW6 (local news) · 20 April 2026

What it shows. The 2026 works are a patch, not a modernisation — track-circuit and monitoring upgrades, not new signalling — and a full overhaul “likely to cost hundreds of millions” remains unfunded. Putney MP Fleur Anderson is pressing TfL, Network Rail and SWR. The article also records the two-day branch fault during the 2025 Wimbledon Championships.

“Changes fall short of full modernisation for Wimbledon branch services.” FulhamSW6 (April 2026), headline
Read the full article →

TfL’s £500,000 fix has failed three times already

Putney News · 12 July 2026

What it shows. The interim £500k package failed three times inside a fortnight, and the fault-monitoring switch-on was postponed with no new date. The article also cites TfL’s June 2024 board paper — confirming the branch will not be re-signalled, tracing back to the December 2020 decision.

“TfL’s own board paper, from June 2024, confirms the Wimbledon branch will not be re-signalled… followed a December 2020 recommendation to drop the branch from the Four Lines Modernisation programme.” Putney News (July 2026)
Read the full article →
Community analysis

Will the District line branches ever see CBTC?

RailUK Forums · community discussion · 14 September 2025

What it shows. Railway enthusiasts and professionals set out the ripple effect: because nearly every District line train starts from a branch, a fault on the legacy sections can hold up the modernised core. Included for the argument — it’s informed discussion, not a primary source.

“failures can occur on the legacy sections and then block the entire line up” RailUK Forums (September 2025)
Read the thread →

More sources

The plain-English explainer footnotes every claim on the site, including the Government primary sources — South Western Railway’s transfer to public ownership (May 2025) and the June 2025 TfL capital funding settlement.

Spotted something we’ve got wrong, or have a document we should add? Get in touch via the campaign page.