Ironroad

3 hours ago, Horsetan said:

 

- Would it have been realistic for the GSR to ask permission to test a W or two? If such permission was forthcoming and the engine found suitable, would the LMS have then agreed to build them for the GSR? What would that have cost?

I think this would have been a non runner considering this was in the middle of the 1930's  Anglo-Irish Economic War.

Conditions are also quite different since the age of steam when embankment fires were quite common.  Those fires served to curtail line side vegetation and accordingly did not present a serious concern. But since then that vegetation has become quite dense in places with lots of accumulated deadwood so not an ideal environment for running steam locos. No doubt this will be an issue in the choice of routes going forward.  

8 hours ago, LNERW1 said:

Just watched the YouTuber Lawrie Rose (Lawrie's Mechanical Marvels) turn builders' sand almost identical to expensive modelling sand by cooking it. I'm not joking.

This video at about the 10:25 timestamp.

Very interesting idea, as he states builders' sand is very cheap (May be more expensive in Ireland, it's the kind of thing we'd do. Don't know though, never had to buy builders' sand).

Builders sand usually has a high moisture content, so he's drying rather than cooking it.  If going down this route I would suggest using washed sand as is used in kids' sand boxes.  A 15 kg bag is probably the smallest quantity you can buy but it is a very cheap. eg  https://www.landscapedepot.ie/product/glenview-playsand-15kg/

4 hours ago, K801 said:

As someone in production and logistics I'll attempt to try explain this a different way. Normally when a large run of an item is manufactured,  a good 10% or more extra can be made as "attic stock" for a ton of legit reasons from first runs to try a new mold to tweaks and adjustments on the assembly line. Now, this attic stock costs money in labor, materials, transport, utilities and storage.  It is possible after a certain amount of time, these items are sold off to recoup these costs. Now, in this case weather they were first offered to MM, or if its in a contract or if the factory does what it likes who knows, but the best customers are always returning customers and if the factory went rogue, they would loose repeat business. I suspect there is a middle man in here somewhere who probably purchased the excess stock and sold it off.  Unless there is a statement from MM ( whos website is rarely updated) its just drama, rumour and gossip, but I honestly would not buy a model from a shady source. 

The cost of "attic stock" as you call it is something that should and is normally factored into the full cost of production and as such that cost is recouped in the selling price of the delivered order. In effect any money recovered subsequently from such stock is 100% profit. 

Well maybe not in case of Rita or rather Meta Davies the maid who issued a ticket to Paul McCartney.

Privatisation adds another layer of strangeness to all of this. I would have thought that that would result in a more rigorous approach to revenue generating enforcement. That is certainly the case with car clamping in Dublin.

20 hours ago, Broithe said:

See the note above about inconveniencing posh people.

That's how the place works - you need to know what is supposed to have been done, who is supposed to have done it and who it is supposed to have been done to - a competent assessment of those details will provide a clear prediction of the response of those paid to do the enforcement.

so Rita has been made redundant

38 minutes ago, Broithe said:

Nobody posh was inconvenienced, therefore no response would be forthcoming. It's been like that for the whole of this century.

Parking on footpaths is, outside London, not actually a specific offence in itself in England and Wales, although there is talk of extending the regulation to the country bumpkins. This would be a bit of an issue as, for example, only about half a mile away, there are signs telling you to park half on the path*...

As with many things on the Big Island, it's all a bit mad, Ted.

Whilst you could, in very extreme circumstances, be done for obstructing the highway, you would need to be obstructing somebody that matters. However, driving on the footpath is an offence - so, how else did you manage to park there, etc..?

You just have to know, or guess, what is actually allowed.

 

* E.g. - Here - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.8120785,-2.1109126,3a,27.5y,110.64h,84.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSbdpG3nsUNePHKaFiiIDDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

Sounds "Irish" but for once it isn't, very strange

2 hours ago, Broithe said:

I took a short cut just now and nearly got caught out...

... luckily, though, I was turning left at the end.

Didn't you call "Lovely Rita Meter Maid" no respect there for double yellow lines or parking on pavements

7 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

I would err against empowering local authorities against transportation. The likes of Maxoil Flynn, Lacey, Galway and Cork City councils are clear examples of talking both sides of their mouths but will come down against any changes to the car status quo. The NTA has been the game changer from an industry POV. It's not prefect but now independent body to the likes of Dublin Bus, Irish Rail and the Councils has been driving change in public transport and slowly dragging Ireland into the 21st century. 

There will always be people like that who can also shirk responsibility because the local authority model in Ireland is flawed not least because of how they are funded.

Here's food for thought, If you will please read this lengthy Wikipedia article on the subject of the metro system in Atlanta.  What is remarkable is that that this system was built without any state assistance by local authorities in a society where the private car is king. Note also the input of the constituents of those local authorities. The result is a pretty good metro rail system that could be better if the constituents of an adjoining county had not opted out in a referendum.  Note the speed at which they had something operational. Note the flat fare concept. Note the free daily parking at stations and note that while not mentioned it is a lot cheaper to park longer term at the stations than it is at the airport.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Atlanta_Rapid_Transit_Authority

5 hours ago, Brack said:

And not just on the East Coast of Ireland.

Last week we travelled Milan- florence on the high speed trains, reaching 300km/h. Prices are very reasonable if booked in advance.

The last 78km from bologna to Florence is a bit boring as 73km is in tunnels, but it does the trip in 2 hours, vs 3.5/4 in a car (whilst contending with Italian drivers).

The investment must've been huge for all those tunnels, but the results are very interesting - rail's market share of rome-milan traffic has gone from 36% in 2008 to 80% in 2018. Air transport's market share of rome-milan has dropped from 50% to 14%. Load factor averages 78%.

If we're serious about reducing carbon emissions and environmental impact from travel, this is how to do it. Make rail faster, cheaper, and less hassle than the alternatives. Yes it will involve investment, it might not make a profit so may need to involve the state, but it is a public good to reduce the pollution and congestion, and ease the movement of goods and people. An electric train powered mostly by renewables with regenerative braking is far more efficient and sensible than planes or hundreds of cars. Each train on the route has 500 seats, vs 189 on a Boeing 737-800.

Of course we could've had that in the uk, but we started 40 years too late, then built a quarter of the line, didn't put it into the cities at both ends, then cancel most of it so we can fill in a few potholes in London. The huge capacity issues on the bottom of the wcml still remain. The message that sends about investment and hope in the future is pitiful.

Short termist thinking, only concerned with what directly benefits themselves or their constituents and stuff everyone else is rife in political circles of all colours. If it can't be finished before the next election, then what's in it for them?

Infrastructure investment is needed and has huge benefits, the longer it's delayed or the project faffed about with, the more it costs. Every appeal, every review, every postponement or prevarication to appease some angry voter group upset at the thought that some tax funds might pay for something that might benefit someone else just makes the costs rise.

On this side of the Irish sea we knew well in advance we'd need to replace our nuclear power stations 30 years ago, but are just starting now, on half the number required. Guess what, they cost a lot more now.

I'd be pretty sure that the metro would certainly have plenty of passengers on it. This isn't some white elephant in the middle of nowhere, nor does it strike me as solely for the airport traffic's benefit. Build it. Whether or not a heavy rail spur to the airport is viable seems a separate thing.

There were similar complaints about LUAS when first mooted, but once built people just use it and are happy. Indeed the first proposals for that included a line to ballymun (I lived in glasnevin and Beaumont in 2001-3).

Since you mention them I have to take my hat off to the Italians, their road and rail infrastructure is incredible and created despite  some very difficult terrain, historical cities and sites*. And achieved despite being the county with the most unstable government in Europe since WW2.  We have something to learn from them. 

* This reminds me that the ability to build underground without the need for disruption and destruction on the surface is at odds with the approach being taken in the case of metro north. But that is a whole other rant.

4 hours ago, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

I personally see this as being the argument for the Clongriffin link ALONGSIDE the metro for the airport. Manchester, London, Stockholm, Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen all have both a metro/light rail link (which serves other populated locations on the way) to the city centre AS WELL AS a heavy rail link for fast tracking to the main rail stations.

I think this should be the case for Dublin. Metro was clearly designed as a metro which links the city centre and some currently unserved populated suburbs with a link to some non-central rail stations and by happenstance, the airport. But it won’t have the capacity in the peak hours with all the commuters coming from north Dublin to handle all the airport traffic and the associated baggage. We also need a separate dedicated fast route to the airport (even more important when you think we’re an island nation compared with all the mainland European cities that have it!)

Ideally DART trains (and slightly modified ones at that - more baggage space etc…) would leave the airport - be it an elevated or underground station - to travel on a double track corridor to Clongriffin where a stop would be made to interchange to DART and Intercity services south for Connolly and north for… well, the north. It would then join the fast lines south and travel non-stop to Spencer Dock where it would join the DART Underground tunnels under Dublin to Heuston and terminate at Hazelhatch. This provides the most connectivity (Clongriffin for Drogheda and Belfast, Spencer Dock for Maynooth and Sligo, Pearse for south Dublin and Rosslare, and then Heuston for everywhere else) but I really feel that the airport DART could not be done without Project FourNorth and DART+ Tunnel. 

That’s just my spake on it but I feel that the argument of ‘sure we’ll have the metro’ really doesn’t stand up properly as an argument against an airport DART as well. And while the airport DART is not a priority with the metro already being there, and projects like FourNorth, and line enhancements, reopenings, and new stations outside of Dublin, I do think we will  eventually need both metro and a heavy rail connection to properly cater for capacity. 

The problem is that if you present a scheme on that scale to the politicians in Dail Eireann, they will run to the hills at the thought of the expenditure, the certainty it will not happen in the term of their tenure and the fact, for the majority of them, it may not be relevant to their constituents.  Taking credit is very important to our decision makers and that means they think only in the short to medium term, very few get credit for being visionaries. 

We need to learn from history. The railways were originally  built in incremental stages and I think the way forward is to present proposals as a series of projects each of which can be delivered at a cost that is digestible in a relatively short time and provides fairly immediate tangible benefits for a specific segment of the population or a particular locality (all politics is local).    All of course with the ultimate goal of an efficient  integrated network of services.

We have the problem that unlike many other parts of the world, our local authorities have little or no power or say when it comes to transportation. Empowering the local authorities in the greater Dublin area could be a game changer. 

I seem to remember someone advocating a Luas for Kerry, we need to get past that.

.

31 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

I was under the impression that the 121s sold out years ago and the only way to get one is to buy second hand (at prices north of €300).

So, unless Murphy Models have some to sell, how are they losing out?  I suppose it all depends on the wording of their contract with the factory re excess production and intellectual property matters.

He's losing out because what is happening is theft of his intellectual property. It negates the demand for reruns and threatens the viability of his business.  There is no way that a factory is entitled to do as it likes with excess production of items it does not own the rights to and considering his experience with the Lima 201s I'd be very surprised if Paddy did not cover that in any contract..

2 hours ago, hurricanemk1c said:

No the foundation analogy is exactly the point - additional capacity requirements on the Northern line stands without having an airport connection. Add an airport connection, even a branch with a connection (and associated increased dwell times to accommodate transferring passengers) and you're back to square 0, let alone square 1. In an ideal world, do both at the same time - capacity and airport. But capacity should come first, as it benefits far more people.

There's not a willingness to fund this however within the political election cycle. It's a higher priority than an airport line (and if I'm honest double track Portarlington-Athlone would be equal priority). And there's no stomach for CPO, so Metro to the airport would be sufficient and likely deliver far higher capacity too than any heavy rail link

But when oh when will that capacity be provided and how can cause an awakening?  Have you ever watched a televised Dail Committee meeting/discussion with so called experts or with those being called to account on any issue?  Pathetic and uninformed nonsense is the order of the day.

1 hour ago, Brack said:

Every change increases the chances that something runs late and you miss a connection.

Airports are fairly critical on timings and arriving before the thing takes off is kind of key!

So with changes, it's not (just) the inconvenience, it's the risk you don't make it. Would I trust being able to get a train down from belfast then back out in time for a flight? Not sure. Last week I went to Italy with the family. Depending on time of day, there are 2-4 trains per hour to Newcastle, then the metro to the airport. Given the ticket prices, the fact I had my wife plus kids, the frequent strikes at the time I was booking the holiday, I drove to the airport and paid to park up, as I knew I could get there in just over half an hour rather than crossing my fingers nothing went wrong and taking twice as long, plus having to allow extra time so there was a backup service.

On the other hand, if I were flying in to the airport from somewhere else, I'd be getting the metro into Newcastle - a reliable service where you know where you're going and where/when it stops is essential. I'm always 

I wonder what proportion of those coming in/out of Dublin airport are coming to/from Dublin City itself vs those coming in from further afield?

The LUAS makes getting between Heuston and connolly much easier, but I still can't help but think that part of the trouble is there are too many termini in Dublin. If long distance heavy rail services had been centralised in one station (the logical choice being connolly, though that'd probably make capacity problems there) then much of the connection problem would be removed. The issue is trying to connect to both heuston and connolly services with one N-S line.

As for Metro North vs a spur to the airport, putting in the new line will get far more traffic as there is currently an obvious railway/transit gap in that section of the city (likewise something through kimmage/bushy park/templeogue) on the south side). If the airport were connected in another way, I imagine there'd be no appetite/funding for a new line serving dublin 9/11.

Though whether you'd want the denizens of ballymun gaining increased access to the outside world is perhaps a different question...

You are absolutely correct as regards connections, travel can be stressful and you cannot start to relax until you are on the final leg to your destination something the planners don't seem to understand. 

As regards the origin/destination of those coming in and out of Dublin airport, I don't know and an answer would be interesting. But I'd guess it may be that the number of those with origins/destinations outside Dublin may be in the order of 60%.  DAP naturally attracts from everywhere on the island because on the level of air services it provides. Greater Dublin itself will account for quite a lot of traffic because of the size of the population there. But I suspect that the numbers actually interested in travelling into the city centre regardless as to origin/destination may be quite low particularly if they had options that allowed them to avoid that.

I don't think providing a heavy rail link to the airport diminishes the need or appetite for metro north, the primary purpose of which is to serve Swords and Ballymun etc,. According to the last census Swords is the 8th largest urban centre in the country with a population of 41,000 and that is not the entire catchment area. Projections are that it will grow to 100.000. Serving the airport is purely a bonus (good luck getting on the train there) and was clearly not the focus in planning the metro given it has no direct connectivity to a hub such as Connolly etc. 

And yes an equivalent line on the south side would be a good idea. It should already be part of the agenda and should fit in seamlessly but !!!!!

And she probably would not have even noticed.

1 hour ago, hurricanemk1c said:

 

I want a link to the airport, being a regular user of Dublin Airport, but it has to be done logically. The only way without extra track between Clongriffin and the city centre that you are going to get a decent service to the airport is divert services from other locations. It's not a "circle of negativity", it's being logical about the problem. Otherwise we build a spur, can't adequately use it, and the only winner then is newspaper headliner writers saying another public transport screw up. You don't randomly build a house without checking the land and whether it can support the proposed structure, why should provision of a rail line be any different?

That foundation analogy misses the point.  As it stands the branch won't be built because the additional running lines don't exist and we won't add the running lines because the branch doesn't exist. So we "make do" as we are (and have been). That is a circle of negativity, that has existed for a very long time. I don't pretend that a standalone branch that relies on the current level of services on the main line would be ideal. It would however be a pragmatic incremental step that could deliver a service in a reasonable timeframe and provide the impetus to improving the main line and the services on that line.

The news hounds will find something to bark about no matter what and heavens forbid they might have something constructive to say, isn't that part of the problem?

7 hours ago, hurricanemk1c said:

Just putting a spur from Clongriffin to the airport (and I saw single line mentioned, a mad bottleneck of capacity) will not solve anything without fundamental changes between Clongriffin and the city centre. Otherwise you're just adding congestion, or diverting trains which then will upset large numbers of people. It would only work with additional track laid on the existing corridor, or tunnel it. A relatively low frequency DART service would not be sufficent.

And I've crossed the road many, many, many times between Connolly and Busaras, easily done if you wait for the traffic lights. And a good proportion of bus services that serve Busaras also serve the airport

I don't know who suggested a single line, it would need to be a double tracked line. And yes ultimately adding at least a third running line from Clongriffin to Connolly is a necessity. But the problem is that making the provision of that additional running line into the city a prerequisite to the building of a branch line to the airport is a reason in itself for not adding the running lines.  So nothing gets done.  We are always in this circle of negativity of reasons not to do something.  My suggestion was that trains on the branch would initially simply shuttle back and forth between the airport and Clongriffin with interconnectivity  to all trains passing through Clongriffin. Not ideal but a whole lot more than we have right now which is no service at all.

As for connecting Connolly and Busaras. They have coexisted for sixty years and it is inexcusable that the provision of a simple overpass to allow travellers to  transfer from one terminal to the other (out of the weather without  the risks of crossing one of the busiest streets in the city trying to lug suitcases) has not been provided in all that time. Consider this simple journey, I want to get from Drumcondra to Busaras to catch a provincial bus. I can take a bus into O'Connell St and then lug my bags down Talbot St or Abbey St etc. to Busaras.  But wouldn't it be more pleasant and convenient to take a train into Connolly and cross directly into Busaras on a walkway. Making things convenient should be a priority.

I agree with the sentiment that  we are playing catchup after years of of neglecting to invest. But the choice of projects, the logic employed, the order in which they are executed, the extremely slow pace of it all, and the overcomplication and extravagance that is manifest is extremely frustrating to witness and does nothing to satisfy very immediate needs.

We live in the here and now. The logic of looking for low hanging fruit and the completion of relatively cheap projects (even if piecemeal and imperfect) on an ongoing basis would give us ongoing improvements in acceptable timeframes and do something to satisfy the needs of the travelling public on an ongoing basis as needs arise.  Instead we come up with grand plans for projects that might be completed in a 30 plus time span that not only miss the mark (eg the metro and proper connectivity with other services) but may not be relevant to actual needs and circumstances at that distant point in the future..  I accept the Metro is an exceptionally large scale and necessary project that may be close to being spade ready, but it will be a least another 10 - 12 years before it is operational and how many years have passed since it was first proposed.  In the meantime serving the airport is shelved, no alternative is considered and not a thought was given to those living the vicinity of the proposed major construction sites along the route of the metro who could not sell their property if they wanted to because this is hanging over them for all those years.

The concept of a spur off the northern line is a classical example of the inability to grasp the nettle. This was first proposed by CIE, fifty years ago (yes in the 1970's) and I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I read the following  statement in a response from the Dept of Transport, to "Louth" and posted here by him  on March 29.

The draft rail review currently lists the spur from Clongriffin to Dublin Airport as a long-term intervention that should be delivered between 2040 & 2050. Work on the Review is now at an advanced stage and a draft report was published for a Strategic Environmental Assessment public consultation last July. The public consultation phase of the SEA process concluded on 29 September and submissions are now under review by officials from both jurisdictions.

So there is still a possibility of a branch line from Clongriffin a full century after it was first proposed. But DoctorPan you seem to be saying it won't  happen because of development on the route?   It seems to me that this is a corridor that lies on the approach to a runway at Dublin Airport where there are low flying planes and on which there is currently very little development. If the principal is established that a line will be built,  there should be no reason not to secure the land. 

Another point that seems to be missed but is alluded in the Dept of Transport letter, is that  such a branch line is something that has All Ireland implications and would greatly benefit travellers from Northern Ireland that need to use Dublin Airport and to some extent the cost could be shared between both jurisdictions.

As for stopping the enterprise at Clongriffin. This train already makes six stops, Drogheda, Dundalk, Newry, Portadown, Lurgan, & Lisburn and accordingly seems more like a commuter than an express service between the two biggest cities on the island. I think eliminating stops that are already served by commuter trains and adding a stop that provides connectivity to the major airport on the island would be more logical.

Realistically what would the cost of the spur be?  land acquisition, station at the airport, modification at the existing Clongriffin station, 8 km of double track, maybe 200-300m. This is pocket change compared to the 10bn it is currently estimated the metro will cost. It is a very small project that could be done as an aside.

5 hours ago, Broithe said:

Wandering back from the pub in Rathdowney, I would often glance northwards and wonder why there was one red light in the middle of a few sodium lamps at Donaghmore. 

This bemused me for many years.

Last winter, I suddenly realised that I was actually seeing the lamp two miles further on, on the top of the mast at Ballybrophy. Things just happened to line up from my viewpoint.

One very small problem solved.

Probably something to do with where you were coming from

10 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

Its a lot less sinster, the TBM and metro has minimum radius curves in order to fit in Tara Street and Stephens Green stops, it pushed the station up O'Connell Street. 500m is not an ideal transfer distance but there are stations within the London Underground that have walking connections of that length.

 

 

That's interesting, because the line has to swing west to get to Glasnevin and then east for the Mater & O'Connell stops. So the question is, would there be more flexibility in the siting of the O'Connell stop with keeping to the straighter more easterly route originally proposed via Drumcondra (in which a lot has already been invested) ?

4 hours ago, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

And while this is true, the top of O’Connell street is nobody’s first stop when they arrive in Dublin, and to only connect with the northbound branch of the Green Line here (and a 500m walk with suitcases to the Red Line) was a big mistake, as opposed to a connection with both Luas lines, only 300 metres further along the route, and a mainline connection at Tara and a DART Underground connection at Stephen’s Green. That would be a pretty fantastic Metro System

I sometimes wonder about the level of skulduggery at play. I'm sure the owners of the Leonardo Hotel on Parnell St, The Academy Plazza Hotel on Findlater Place, The Holiday Inn & Gresham Hotel on O'Connell St. are very happy with the siting of the station at the North end of O'Connell St. This also reminds me that I recollect an early architect's picture of what the proposed station at Glasnevin will look like, besides an grandiose oversized station building, an apartment block was pictured behind it. The odd thing is that planning permission for such a block was refused in 2008. Of course Metro North strenuously denied that such a block was on the cards or that the access lane to the station was oriented to facilitate it on what would otherwise be a landlocked site. But it is note worthy that the owners of the site and promoters of the original apartment block did not file any objection to the station and the demolition of their pub. HMMMMM 

14 minutes ago, DJ Dangerous said:

One thing to note with the current glut of 121's on eBay, is that the sellers are genuine toy and model shops in China.

BenBen / OneLink / Woody are a huge model retailer, selling lots of brands.

So, are they in on the scam, or are they also a victim?

Well if Paddy is complaining, they clearly didn't buy from him or a distributor of his. They may not be acquiring these models directly from the factory or from a source with some connection to the factory but regardless the supply chain is not  legitimate. That being the case as I have already suggested Paddy needs to notify eBay and they should be concerned enough to ask the vendors to declare their source of supply and should the vendors fail to demonstrate a legitimate source then eBay should be obliged to cease facilitating them.

Unfortunately, the ultimate solution for Paddy is probably finding a new factory partner. I think he has been down a road similar to this before. The tooling for the original Lima 201's disappeared after the demise of Lima and knockoffs appeared. Hornby who took over the Lima tooling denied knowing the whereabouts of the tooling for the 201.  So it seems that these events were probably a big motivator in the production of a much upgraded 201 that negated any value in the old tooling.

I probably do not know enough to offer a competent opinion on this issue but a couple of issues stand out for me.

Firstly, the journey time on the DART between Greystones and Connolly is effectively an hour something I could not believe when I experienced it (off peak) a few years ago. Not only is this pathetic for an electrified suburban system, it is nonsense to suggest that it be part of a so called "Intercity" service.

Secondly, will we even have a line to Greystones?  The cliff walk above the line was closed about two years ago because of rock falls and apparently the line itself is at serious risk (erosion) and expenditure in the order of about 250 million is apparently required to make it safe, is that a band aid? 

I cannot but suspect that we are really seeing a move towards the total closure of the line south of Bray.

1 hour ago, Keano30 said:

"If I were in Paddy's shoes, I would have a go at eBay and request that they cease facilitating the sale of illicit products"I

Good luck with dealing with eBay. I have had an issue like this previously and eBay washed their hands and didn't want to know. Since then I never buy anything from eBay and would recommend to everyone not to buy from eBay. There is such a lack of action on their part when issues are highlighted to them. 

Also don't bother with the cops because all they will say is its a Civil issue and they can do nothing about it.

I have had the opposite experience with eBay. Some years ago I complained to them about being the victim if misrepresentation and they deleted the vendor.

eBay has been involved in many lawsuits globally with regard to counterfeit/ illicit products with very mixed results in the courts, so nothing is certain. However before getting to that stage and even as a prerequisite to a lawsuit the first step is to notify them with supporting evidence  that a vendor on their site is effectively selling stolen goods. They have to take that seriously and investigate the matter as otherwise the integrity of their service gets called into question and they risk compromising any defence they might have in the event of a lawsuit.