The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided on Monday not to start proceedings against management chiefs at Network Rail (formerly Railtrack) and Jarvis the company responsible for track maintenance at Potters Bar drawing an angry response from Nina Bawden, a novelist whose husband, BBC executive Austin Kark, 75, died in the crash.

"I'm horrified, though I can't say I'm surprised," said Mrs Bawden, who was knocked unconscious in the derailment, which claimed seven lives and left dozens injured in 2002.

"It's a disgrace much like the decision not to have a public inquiry.

"You have an accident that kills seven people and nothing is done about it we should all be ashamed, the whole of society.

"People have been killed and the bosses are getting bonuses. It was quite obvious this crash happened because of bad maintenance.

"They kill my husband and bash me up and yet nothing happens; no proper compensation.

"All we get is a few words of sympathy. I blame Railtrack, I blame the Government for privatising the railways."

Mrs Bawden is going to the High Court next May four years after the accident to claim damages from Network Rail and Jarvis.

Jarvis, which was responsible for maintaining the faulty points which caused the accident, claimed after the derailment that the points could have been sabotaged. No conclusive evidence for this has every been provided.

After Monday's decision, the CPS said it would refer the case to the Health and Safety Executive to see if proceedings could be brought instead under the Health and Safety Act 1974.

A CPS statement said: "No individual was identified as having committed a breach of duty of care, in the first instance because it was impossible to pinpoint when the faults occurred which caused the points failure.

"Without an individual being identified, no prosecution could proceed against a corporation."

Louise Christian, representing survivors and families of the bereaved, also said she was not surprised about the decision. "We've known this has been coming for a long time," she said. "From the outset we've said there should be a public inquiry and this decision reinforces that fact.

"If there had been a public inquiry there would have been more chance of the truth coming out and the CPS making an informed decision."