VT Advance and late trains

[Goatboy]

Hi all,

What is the official policy regarding delayed trains and advance tickets?

My partner holds an Advance on the 13:10 Birmingham to Euston service. This train is currently 1 hour late. The ticket office advised asking the train manager of the 13:30 if she could travel on this service.

The TM has just denied her access to this service and insists she waits for the delayed service. He kept insisting she had 'missed her train' despite many explanations that no, she hadn't missed it, it was 60 late and had yet to arrive. The train is, as I write this, still not at Birmingham yet so obviously it hasn't been 'missed'.

Is this VT policy? If so, it's rather stupid as it now means she is entitled to delay repay, costing VT money, whereas she would have arrived only 20 late had he let her on.

So instead of a happy customer and no compensation claim, they now have an irate customer and a valid compensation claim.

Seems quite pathetic. It was a not heavily loaded 11 car Pendo..

 

[greatkingrat]

It looks like there are splitting the service at Preston, so although the train from Edinburgh terminated at Preston, there was another train running from Preston to Euston.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O53835/2013/12/27

 

[Goatboy]

She is now on it. It's packed and no hope of getting to the reservations. I hope the train manager on the 13:30 is proud of his exceptional customer service skills today.

A large number of other customers who also went for the 13:30 because the 13:10 was so late simply boarded without checking first, I wonder how he'll deal with them? I suspect he'll have difficulty charging them all a full fare, so on this occasion it seems that doing it by the book and checking with the TM before boarding wasn't the optimal solution.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

She is now on it. It's packed and no hope of getting to the reservations. I hope the train manager on the 13:30 is proud of his exceptional customer service skills today....

Part of the terms of the ticket are that the passenger can only use the specified service. On this occasion that was inconvenient for your partner, but that doesn't change what was agreed to at the time of purchase.

....A large number of other customers who also went for the 13:30 because the 13:10 was so late simply boarded without checking first, I wonder how he'll deal with them? I suspect he'll have difficulty charging them all a full fare, so on this occasion it seems that doing it by the book and checking with the TM before boarding wasn't the optimal solution.

You will never know, and you probably have no idea what tickets those other people have anyway so it seems pointless to try to speculate, though I suspect you simply want to make the train manager out to be the villain of the piece.

 

[Goatboy]

Part of the terms of the ticket are that the passenger can only use the specified service. On this occasion that was inconvenient for your partner, but that doesn't change what was agreed to at the time of purchase.

The service in question is now 70 minutes late so this is rather irrelevant - besides - my original question remains to be answered - what *is* policy in this circumstance?

I suspect you simply want to make the train manager out to be the villain of the piece.

That is currently absolutely how I feel about it, yes (Hey, points for honesty?).

I will happily replace the Train Manager with VT Management as the villain of the piece if its clarified that it's VT policy and he was simply following it correctly, can't say fairer than that

 

[dtaylor84]

Part of the terms of the ticket are that the passenger can only use the specified service. On this occasion that was inconvenient for your partner, but that doesn't change what was agreed to at the time of purchase.

Er, what was agreed to at the time of purchase was a service leaving at 1310 -- and who failed to live up to that agreement!?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Er, what was agreed to at the time of purchase was a service leaving at 1310 -- and who failed to live up to that agreement!?

Was it a service at 1310, or the 1310 service?

 

[Goatboy]

Was it a service at 1310, or the 1310 service?

In whose interest is it to operate with this sort of thinking in times of delay and disruption? Is it in the passengers interest, who is left 70 minutes late? Is it in the TOC's interest, who is left with a valid Delay Repay claim to meet?

Had travel been allowed on the next available service operated by that same TOC, there would be no customer complaint and no valid Delay Repay claim. Everyone wins, nobody loses.

 

[anme]

I find it astonishing that anyone is defending Virgin Trains in this case!

 

[MikeWh]

I find it astonishing that anyone is defending Virgin Trains in this case!

So do I!

 

[westv]

I know that EC allows you to catch an earlier train if the booked trains is "severely delayed". Presumably VT has the same condition.

 

[bengolding]

Tweet VT to ask what their policy is in cases like this. Due to the ECML blockade at Peterborough, this service was already busy but at least there is the consolation of being able to apply for compensation due to delay over an hour.

 

[sheff1]

I find it astonishing that anyone is defending Virgin Trains in this case!

'The rule is the rules guv'.

 

[cf111]

I suppose the TM is right by the letter of the law, but I am surprised by the way he dealt with the situation, especially if his train wasn't busy.

 

[sheff1]

So instead of a happy customer and no compensation claim, they now have an irate customer and a valid compensation claim.

Indeed. And the compensation is 100%, so no revenue at all for Vermin plus the costs of processing her claim.

If I was her, I would avoid Vermin for all future Birmingham to London journeys. Fortunately that is a journey for which good alternatives are available.

 

[westv]

'The rule is the rules guv'.

But what are the rules? Unlike EC the VT website seems to be lacking in any detail on the subject.

 

[All Line Rover]

Part of the terms of the ticket are that the passenger can only use the specified service. On this occasion that was inconvenient for your partner, but that doesn't change what was agreed to at the time of purchase.

From where do you source this assertion?

The Advance tickets Terms & Conditions can be found here: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46546.aspx.

One of the conditions is: "Tickets are valid ONLY on the date and train service(s) shown on the ticket(s)."

Further down, another condition is: "If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey."

The period 'of travel' begins at 13:10. If Goatboy's partner, at 13:30, was still waiting for the 13:10, it is clear that a delay has occurred. Thus, Goatboy's partner should have been allowed to take the 'next available train', the 13:30.

This seems clear cut to me. Do you have access to a more obscure set of Terms & Conditions which stipulate that Advance ticket holders are not entitled to take the next available train, despite there being a delay?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But what are the rules? Unlike EC the VT website seems to be lacking in any detail on the subject.

The National Rail website holds the Advance ticket Terms & Conditions, not the Virgin Trains website. The Virgin Trains website is irrelevant, although it would be helpful if they held a copy of the T&C's on their website also.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
From my own experience, I have often travelled on an alternative service when using an Advance ticket, sometimes at an earlier time than my booked train is timed to depart where it is clear that the booked train will be delayed (for example, where the incoming service due to form that train is severely delayed). Unless I wish to travel on an earlier service, I tend not to ask a member of staff before boarding, because I know I am protected under the Advance ticket Terms & Conditions.

I have, on occasion, even been allowed to travel with Virgin Trains instead of London Midland, although this only happens when this permission is expressly stipulated on the National Rail website (in which case I do not ask a member of staff before boarding), or when the last London Midland train of the day has been cancelled or there are severe delays to London Midland services (in which case I do ask).

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....The period 'of travel' begins at 13:10....

In your opinion.

....If Goatboy's partner, at 13:30, was still waiting for the 13:10, it is clear that a delay has occurred....

But has it occurred 'whilst travelling'?

....This seems clear cut to me. Do you have access to a more obscure set of Terms & Conditions which stipulate that Advance ticket holders are not entitled to take the next available train, despite there being a delay?....

Only the same set of conditions you have. I'm just providing an alternative view point.

....The National Rail website holds the Advance ticket Terms & Conditions, not the Virgin Trains website. The Virgin Trains website is irrelevant, although it would be helpful if they held a copy of the T&C's on their website also....

Interesting, I'll try to bring this point up in the next Gatwick Express/Southern debate.

 

[34D]

This is an interesting question. I won't promulgate a view either way, only to say that virgin are good at customer service, so I would expect a gesture on top.

 

[greatkingrat]

But has it occurred 'whilst travelling'?

By your reasoning, someone with a Birmingham - London advance can't use the 1330 because they haven't actually started travelling yet, but someone booked on the same train with an Aston - London advance can use the 1330 as they have already started their journey?

 

[yorkie]

East Coast would have allowed travel on an earlier service, as that is their policy. Is that not national policy? I'm astounded!

Please ensure that, along with a Delay Repay claim for a 68 minute late arrival at Euston, details are provided to Virgin of the incident, and also mention the crowded conditions. Ask them what steps they will make to avoid such problems in future, and ask them if it is their policy not to allow travel on the 1330 in these circumstances.

If they do not give a satisfactory answer, report the matter to Passenger Focus.

 

[455driver]

The period 'of travel' begins at 13:10. If Goatboy's partner, at 13:30, was still waiting for the 13:10, it is clear that a delay has occurred.

Or she has missed the 1310 and is trying it on!

Unless the TM could see that the 1310 was late how would he know the difference?

 

[sheff1]

I won't promulgate a view either way, only to say that virgin are good at customer service so I would expect a gesture on top.

Fobbing off complaints (or even ignoring them) and hoping people can be bribed to say nice things about them is not my idea of good customer service.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I agree with 34D that this thread is interesting, but it is also confusing. The OP asks for Virgin's policy and then makes a number of strong criticisms against that Company's staff which can be justified only either, after knowing what that policy is andthen making a judgement on it, or, assuming that the staff concerned can be judged on the OP's own assessments in the absence of consideration of that policy. Since then, no one has been able to provide Virgin's policy, (if it exists).

However, there is some case law on rail travel with tickets for specific services (to which I don't have access right now). The Decision was that the particular contract which flows from a ticket for a specific train is not affected by a delay to the contracted service.

Er, what was agreed to at the time of purchase was a service leaving at 1310 -- and who failed to live up to that agreement!?

Was it a service at 1310, or the 1310 service?

I cannot find any definition of journey which confirms that it begins at the scheduled time even if the scheduled train is delayed; I do not deny that such a passenger is contracted to be a passenger, but just that their journey has not yet begun - that's what we call 'a delay'.

Further down, another condition is: "If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey."

The period 'of travel' begins at 13:10. If Goatboy's partner, at 13:30, was still waiting for the 13:10, it is clear that a delay has occurred. Thus, Goatboy's partner should have been allowed to take the 'next available train', the 13:30.

It is incorrect to introduce the concept of "a period of travel" to a specific contract which specifies the precise train, irrespective of its delay, while it continues to exist. There are many illustrations of this in contracts for specific services at defined times which are delayed.

I'll refrain fromn commenting on the arguments over 'good customer service'.

 

[bb21]

Fobbing off complaints (or even ignoring them) and hoping people can be bribed to say nice things about them is not my idea of good customer service.

But it works in many cases. I would hazard a guess that it works in the majority of cases. Not that it makes everything alright.

I won't comment on the rights and wrongs of the TM's actions, but I am disappointed that despite a rather obvious delay of in excess of 60 minutes, the OP's wife was refused travel. The facts would have been fairly easy to ascertain, and I would be quite shocked if the TM thought it appropriate that passengers should wait for a service so badly delayed if he were genuinely aware of the severity of the situation. May I suggest that poor communication within Virgin may well have played a part in this.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

By your reasoning, someone with a Birmingham - London advance can't use the 1330 because they haven't actually started travelling yet, but someone booked on the same train with an Aston - London advance can use the 1330 as they have already started their journey?

It appears to be a fair assessment given the wording, but I don't believe it is the intention. The 'National Rail Guide to Tickets has the following to say....

Advance - Travel on specific trains.

....

If you try and use your Advance ticket on a train other than the one you have booked, you will have to buy a new ticket for your journey, priced at the cheapest available fare for the service you use.

However, if you miss your service because your connecting train was delayed you will be able to travel on the next service provided by the same company, or any additional services as authorised by rail staff, without penalty.

And whilst I think that is rather simplistic, it does seem to point to 'the spirit of the law'.

 

[westv]

East Coast would have allowed travel on an earlier service, as that is their policy. Is that not national policy? I'm astounded!

Surely it must be national policy if it's in the general AP ticket T&Cs -which it is? VT don't say otherwise in their website so I would have thought national terms apply.

"If the train you purchased a ticket for is cancelled or is delayed and you still decide to travel, special arrangements will be made to accommodate you on another train (although a seat cannot be guaranteed"

 

[Haywain]

Surely it must be national policy if it's in the general AP ticket T&Cs -which it is? VT don't say otherwise in their website so I would have thought national terms apply.

"If the train you purchased a ticket for is cancelled or is delayed and you still decide to travel, special arrangements will be made to accommodate you on another train (although a seat cannot be guaranteed"

This makes pretty clear that being accommodated on another train depends on the special arrangements having first been made, and not simply on the decision of the passenger that there is sufficient delay.

 

[arb]

East Coast would have allowed travel on an earlier service, as that is their policy. Is that not national policy? I'm astounded!

If that's their policy, then I have to say that in my experience, not all their staff know about it.

Some time ago I experienced something very similar to what the OP described, but with East Coast: I was travelling on an Advance from Sheffield to Cambridge, via Doncaster and Peterborough. After I arrived in Doncaster, the train I was booked on from there was showing as delayed by over 30 minutes, which meant I'd miss the connection at Peterborough and end up an hour late in Cambridge. There was another East Coast service which would have got me to Peterborough in time to make the connection, but the staff wouldn't let me travel on it. I tried the argument of "I'll be on time and you won't have to pay compensation (win-win), or I'll be late and you do pay (lose-lose)", but it got me nowhere.

Since I wasn't in any particular hurry that day, this didn't really bother me that much - I accepted what I was being told, sat in Doncaster station for nearly an hour, arrived late, submitted the Delay Repay claim, and effectively got my journey for free. Not a problem for me that time, but if my journey had been more time critical, I'd have been pretty annoyed by the situation.

 

[westv]

I note that EC terms have been changed. It used to say "severely delayed". Now it says "more than 60 minutes"