• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Delay from Hayes & Harlington - Missed Onward Connection with Advance Ticket

Status
Not open for further replies.

CheesyChips

Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
217
Some thoughts on the following would be most helpful. Thank you in advance.

My journey was from Hayes and Harlington to Old Hill, 20th March, for which I used contactless from Hayes and Harlington to Paddington (GWR), Paddington to Marylebone by tube then held an advance ticket for the 14:10 Chiltern Service to Birmingham (then local LM services to Old Hill to complete my journey).

I boarded the 13:10 GWR service at Hayes and Harlington which became severely delayed between Southall and Ealing Broadway due to a failed Heathrow Connect service sat at West Ealing (so I’m told). The driver announced that he had been instructed to change ends and take us back to Hayes and Harlington to switch to the main line and take us into Paddington that way, which is what happened.

Essentially, we arrived at Paddington 63 mins late http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C20960/2017/03/20

I therefore missed the train at Marylebone for which I had an advance ticket but Chiltern quite happily endorsed my ticket for the 15:10 so nothing lost there but 1 hour of time.

I have two questions:

1. Did Chiltern endorse my ticket because they’re obliged to or because they used discretion?
2. Do I have any recourse to make a claim for my delay between Hayes and Harlington and Paddington? I'm particularly interested because I used contactless.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
1. Did Chiltern endorse my ticket because they’re obliged to or because they used discretion?
If the delay was verifiable and your original journey satisfied minimum connection times between Paddington and Marylebone then they should allow later travel. It's good to hear a TOC doing this.
2. Do I have any recourse to make a claim for my delay between Hayes and Harlington and Paddington? I'm particularly interested because I used contactless.
Yes. Your ticket can be verified by a journey history printout from TfL. Whatever compensation scheme GWR operate is the one you claim against.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
Where was your rail ticket actually from?
If Marylebone then I am note sure you have any recourse because it is your responsibility to get to your starting station as listed on your ticket, thats why you would have been better with a ticket from H&H which would have been fine.
 

Joe Paxton

Established Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
2,450
If you have not registered your contactless card with TfL, then you can get access to the last 7 day's journey & payment history by clicking on the link at the bottom left of this page. Then print it out - or, with some browsers (such as Chrome or Edge) you can natively 'print to PDF' which is useful if you want to keep a record saved to disk or if you don't have a printer.

If you have registered your contactless card, then login as usual. If you choose this moment to register your contactless card then I'm pretty sure you also then get access to recent journey and payment history on that card.

(A TfL account can have multiple contactless and/or Oyster cards attached to it, so you don't need a separate TfL account for each card.)
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
Where was your rail ticket actually from?
If Marylebone then I am note sure you have any recourse because it is your responsibility to get to your starting station as listed on your ticket, thats why you would have been better with a ticket from H&H which would have been fine.
This is quite incorrect. The Op held a ticket between Hayes and Harlington and Paddington (in the format of a contactless payment card). The National Rail Conditions of Travel explicitly permit passengers to use more than one ticket to complete their journey, and customers are entitled to delay repay or whatever compensation scheme is in place for their entire journey in circumstances of delay. As explained by the Op, they had already begun their journey at the point they were delayed. Chiltern were quite correct to permit the Op to board the next available service without hassle. As MikeWh stated, so long as the journey was above board with minimum connection times and the like the Op should be entitled to their due compensation.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
Some thoughts on the following would be most helpful. Thank you in advance.

My journey was from Hayes and Harlington to Old Hill, 20th March, for which I used contactless from Hayes and Harlington to Paddington (GWR), Paddington to Marylebone by tube then held an advance ticket for the 14:10 Chiltern Service to Birmingham (then local LM services to Old Hill to complete my journey).

I boarded the 13:10 GWR service at Hayes and Harlington which became severely delayed between Southall and Ealing Broadway due to a failed Heathrow Connect service sat at West Ealing (so I’m told). The driver announced that he had been instructed to change ends and take us back to Hayes and Harlington to switch to the main line and take us into Paddington that way, which is what happened.

Essentially, we arrived at Paddington 63 mins late http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C20960/2017/03/20

I therefore missed the train at Marylebone for which I had an advance ticket but Chiltern quite happily endorsed my ticket for the 15:10 so nothing lost there but 1 hour of time.

I have two questions:

1. Did Chiltern endorse my ticket because they’re obliged to or because they used discretion?
The former.

The only loss of rights with using Contactless/Oyster on National Rail services is that you have to queue at the ticket office to get the delay verified. If you use paper tickets, you do not need to do this. As a result, you may miss a train and increase your entitlement to delay compensation, so it is surprising the rail industry has this requirement, but there you go. Full details are in the Advance Fares FAQ in The Manual, which is reproduced in our Fares Guide.
2. Do I have any recourse to make a claim for my delay between Hayes and Harlington and Paddington? I'm particularly interested because I used contactless.
You are entitled to delay compensation for your journey, which was between Hayes & Harlington and Old Hill.

Be careful not to complicate matters in your compensation claim.

Clearly state your journey was from Hayes & Harlington to Old Hill. I'd include a photograph of your paper ticket, a screenshot of your Contactless journey history and a screenshot showing the valid itinerary from Hayes & Harlington to Old Hill departing at 13:10.

...The Op held a ticket between Hayes and Harlington and Paddington (in the format of a contactless payment card). .....
Indeed. I'll quote this again, and it's as true now as it was then:
Roger Ford said:
"What counts is the message, not the medium."
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
The Op held a ticket between Hayes and Harlington and Paddington (in the format of a contactless payment card).

I don't think this is quite there, as no ticket is involved. A contactless payment card is very clearly not a ticket. It is different to an Oyster which contains a Travelcard product. I have been looking for supporting material of this claim but am so far unable to find any. (It is quite possible that I might have missed it.)

What this boils down to AIUI is that the OP had a valid itinerary, and travelled according to that itinerary. On touching in with his contactless payment card, the contract for conveyance is formed, at which point the delay to his journey was not known (very important). The question then surrounds whether an indeterminable product "purchased" at the time of touch-in (however becoming determined at touch-out) equates to a paper ticket purchased at the same time for the same journey travelled (in this case Hayes & Harlington - Marylebone). I don't think there is any confirmation either way although I would argue that it would be weak to be arguing otherwise, which is what then allows this product to be combined with other paper tickets in the usual manner.
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,994
Location
here to eternity
I don't think this is quite there, as no ticket is involved. A contactless payment card is very clearly not a ticket. It is different to an Oyster which contains a Travelcard product. I have been looking for supporting material of this claim but am so far unable to find any. (It is quite possible that I might have missed it.)

What this boils down to AIUI is that the OP had a valid itinerary, and travelled according to that itinerary. On touching in with his contactless payment card, the contract for conveyance is formed, at which point the delay to his journey was not known (very important). The question then surrounds whether an indeterminable product "purchased" at the time of touch-in (however becoming determined at touch-out) equates to a paper ticket purchased at the same time for the same journey travelled (in this case Hayes & Harlington - Marylebone). I don't think there is any confirmation either way although I would argue that it would be weak to be arguing otherwise, which is what then allows this product to be combined with other paper tickets in the usual manner.

I hope that TOC's are now not going to start to wriggle out of their responsibilities if one part of a journey is made using contactless payment, bearing in mind that travel by means of contactless is bound to increase over the next few years.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
I hope that TOC's are now not going to start to wriggle out of their responsibilities if one part of a journey is made using contactless payment, bearing in mind that travel by means of contactless is bound to increase over the next few years.

I don't know, but I am uneasy with the certainty sometimes communicated on this forum that a contactless payment card equates a paper ticket. I have yet to see any supporting evidence of that.

The only way to ease your worries for definite is for the status of contactless payment card to be clarified in the NRCoT, as it has been around for a number of years now and its usage only going to increase as you correctly stated, so the NRCoT really need to keep up with the development of new technology.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
I don't think this is quite there, as no ticket is involved. A contactless payment card is very clearly not a ticket. It is different to an Oyster which contains a Travelcard product. I have been looking for supporting material of this claim but am so far unable to find any. (It is quite possible that I might have missed it.).

Allow me to assist ;)

For me this is enshrined in the Condition 4.2 in the National Rail Conditions of Travel:

4.2 Some Tickets are held as an electronic record on a smartcard or electronic device, or may be transmitted to you for you to print out yourself. In such cases you will be advised of (and must comply with) the specific conditions applying to Tickets held in those formats

I'd argue use of a contactless payment card constitutes a ticket which is stored on a smartcard or electronic device. But you don't have to take my word for it. Helpfully, p.7 of the National Rail Conditions of Travel elaborates and contains the following note:

INFORMATION: ‘Ticket’ includes a validated contactless payment
card where accepted. The ‘Tickets’ definition in Appendix B gives more information

Appendix B of the National Rail Conditions of Travel elaborates further and sets out the definitions of key terms used in the said Conditions of Travel. It defines a "ticket" as follows (my emphasis where it appears):

“Ticket” means any physical or electronic document or record which entitles a passenger to make a journey on the National Rail Network between the stations or within the zones indicated by one or more of the operators listed in Appendix A. An electronic document or record may consist of (but not be limited to):
(i) a smartcard (including an Oyster or ITSO card);
(ii) a payment card or identity card;
(iii) a mobile telephone or tablet device;
(iv) other mobile electronic device; or
(v) a database, in conjunction with an authorised Contactless Bank Card bearing the "))))" symbol described in the notices and publications of the Train Company as being valid for travel on their services. Electronic documents or records may not display the same information as printed Tickets but the conditions for use of these will explain where this information can be found;

I think on this basis we can rest assured that a contactless payment card constitutes a ticket on at least equal terms with its paper counterpart.

What this boils down to AIUI is that the OP had a valid itinerary, and travelled according to that itinerary.

Yes I agree completely - as is the case with all delay compensation claims where split tickets (paper or otherwise) are used.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
I don't know, but I am uneasy with the certainty sometimes communicated on this forum that a contactless payment card equates a paper ticket. I have yet to see any supporting evidence of that.

The only way to ease your worries for definite is for the status of contactless payment card to be clarified in the NRCoT, as it has been around for a number of years now and its usage only going to increase as you correctly stated, so the NRCoT really need to keep up with the development of new technology.

It already is clarified in the NRCoT!!
 
Last edited:

maniacmartin

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
15 May 2012
Messages
5,394
Location
Croydon
Even though the contactless payment card is now specified in the NRCoT, I still envisage it's use causing more complication than had a through paper ticket been used. It's difficult enough to get some TOCs to pay Delay Repay for all tickets used for the journey instead of just the ticket on which the delay occured without adding CPCs into the mix. This is especially true when the delay occured on a cheap ticket that connects with an expensive ticket.
 
Last edited:

Joe Paxton

Established Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
2,450
I agree that there isn't the clarity regarding this that there could or should be - indeed looking at the London-area TOCs I don't think any actually mention contactless in terms of Delay Repay, and only some mention Oyster. (I haven't yet had reason to try a DR claim from a TOC when I was using contactless, though I have with Oyster.)

I'd urge the OP to put in a Delay Repay claim for the whole journey to GWR though and see what happens. It makes logical sense to me, though I note manianmartin's comments above about some TOCs being awkward about paying Delay Repay on multiple tickets.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
I agree that there isn't the clarity regarding this that there could or should be - indeed looking at the London-area TOCs I don't think any actually mention contactless in terms of Delay Repay, and only some mention Oyster.

There should not be any need to specify all the different possibilities of "ticket" in the Delay Repay guidance. A "ticket" is comprehensively defined in the NRCoT, from which crehid has helpfully posted the relevant extract above.
 

Joe Paxton

Established Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
2,450
I agree that there isn't the clarity regarding this that there could or should be - indeed looking at the London-area TOCs I don't think any actually mention contactless in terms of Delay Repay, and only some mention Oyster.

There should not be any need to specify all the different possibilities of "ticket" in the Delay Repay guidance. A "ticket" is comprehensively defined in the NRCoT, from which crehid has helpfully posted the relevant extract above.

Fair enough, though many passengers won't have a clue about the NRCoT (its mere existence, let alone its contents!). Omitting any mention of Oyster and/or contactless doesn't exactly invite passengers who used those "tickets" to claim for Delay Repay... which of course might well be the very point of omitting any mention of them...

(I also appreciate that getting a journey history for Oyster/contactless is a bit of a faff, and explaning how to do so is a bit involved.)
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
(I haven't yet had reason to try a DR claim from a TOC when I was using contactless, though I have with Oyster.)

I have!

GTR paid out with a copy of the TfL journey history after a half hour delay between St Pancras and Wimbledon.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
It already is clarified in the NRCoT!!

As it had been in the NRCoC since at least May 2012 !

Unfortunately we don't all have time to keep up with all the developments. That is why the forum appointed (Senior) Fares Advisors.

Even taking a step back, with matters we have been aware of, sometimes they are missed or forgotten. Such is life.
 

Joe Paxton

Established Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
2,450
I have!

GTR paid out with a copy of the TfL journey history after a half hour delay between St Pancras and Wimbledon.

Good to hear it!

Obvious point really but there are times when I suspect I could have claimed, had I not re-routed my journey on discovering there were delays. (I often check that trains are running OK before touching-in for a journey, but also I think the contactless system seems more forgiving than Oyster for same station exits).

Dare I bring up the whole question of claiming Delay Repay when using Oyster or contactless for a journey where the daily (or weekly) cap has been reached, or where the delayed journey is the one that takes the card to a relevant cap?! Perhaps it's best to just file that one under 'it's too complicated and life's too short'!
 
Last edited:

Merseysider

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
22 Jan 2014
Messages
5,388
Location
Birmingham
Joe Paxton said:
Dare I bring up the whole question of claiming Delay Repay when using Oyster or contactless for a journey where the daily (or weekly) cap has been reached, or where the delayed journey is the one that takes the card to a relevant cap?! Perhaps it's best to just file that one under 'it's too complicated and life's too short!'
Good question! I suppose you'd be within your rights to ask for compensation based on the relevant single fare if you've already capped out. That, or 1/n of the cap, where n is the amount of journeys taken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top