...people looking at an app and seeing the train they want to catch is late so they stay in the pub/office and catch a later train and then put in a delay repay claim based on the original train....
I think we would need to know what time the passenger intended to travel, and compare that to when they actually travelled.
If you intend to depart at 0800, and no train departs that station until 1100, and you are watching events and arrive in time for that first train, then that's a legitimate claim.
However if you intend to depart at 0800, and a train departs at, say, 0810 which doesn't qualify you for Delay Repay, and you arrive in time for a train departing at 1100, then the claim cannot reasonably be that your actual arrival is a delay in relation to the originally intended arrival time.
The Customer Charter and Delay Repay form don't specify that you have to enter the station....
I agree, but by not entering the station you do risk a train unexpectedly providing a journey opportunity, and it wouldn't be correct to deny that this journey opportunity existed. So, yes, you can do this (and I sometimes will), but it comes with risks.
For example if my train was the 1802 York-London and I noted the inbound arrival was due to arrive 1815, and I chose not to arrive at York station until 1815, we departed at 1825, got further delayed and arrived 31 minutes late, it's questionable whether a Delay Repay claim would be valid, if the preceding non-stop train due at 1757 departed at 1802 and passengers for London were told they should catch it, and assuming there were sufficient seats available for them. Would a Delay Repay claim be appropriate, if you made choices which meant you did not take the Company up on an offer not to be delayed?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I take it that there's no provision (as part of the Delay Repay scheme, or otherwise) for compensation for abandoned journeys, where the choice to abandon was made after purchase of a [period] ticket and as a direct result of "serious" disruption?
I don't think so.
Under the old scheme (still in use at other Train Companies, e.g. South West Trains) it was arguably better for Season ticket holders making short, but frequently served, journeys, as a day like that would probably be declared a "void day". This meant you got a free day when you next renewed (irrespective of whether you actually travelled or not, or indeed whether you were delayed or not).
The 1045 was actually a London Bridge / London Cannon Street service; but I wanted to travel to Charing Cross. Do I disqualify myself from Delay Repay if I don't take the first train that's going in vaguely the right direction?
That's a good question which may be difficult to answer. To cover myself I'd seek staff advice. If it was not possible to do this (e.g. help point not working or not responding, ticket office unstaffed or long queues) then I would try to adopt a common sense approach (and each journey is different) and if my chosen option wasn't the best, I'd note it wasn't possible to obtain advice.
Of course I could have taken the 1045 and changed somewhere en-route, but given that the information I had at the time was that there was a Charing Cross train a few minutes behind, it seemed reasonable to let the 1045 go. As it was, the 1103 did arrive a few minutes later.. and I nearly sat down(!) before they announced that it was being taken out of service.
If the next train wasn't a slower train and was advertised as being just behind, then that sounds reasonable to me to wait for it.
I'm not sure I understand this point Clearly it would be unsporting and outside the spirit of Delay Repay to go searching for delayed trains to catch... but that's not what happened. (And I know that's not what you're suggesting I did.)
Agreed.
Indeed - that feels like the right thing to do "morally speaking", although there's some feeling that to do so would be outside the rules. Practically speaking, my Oyster record wouldn't show me as touching in until 1130, so there'd instantly be a problem.
Indeed. But there is no harm in a brief, concise letter explaining the circumstances.
If it came down to it, I suspect the fact that I usually make that journey at that time most days of most weeks would put that beyond reasonable doubt.
Indeed, and may well result in 'discretion' or a 'common sense' approach being shown. That's not something we can easily debate here!
Thanks again - and apologies for not knowing how to quote properly :-\
No worries
