A case was brought before the Rail Ombudsman where Northern had contravened the National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) by refusing to pay compensation on tickets because they were discriminating according to ticket type.
The customer had requested compensation for a delay when a train was cancelled. We know from the recent thread that the interpretation of NRCoT from the Department for Transport (DfT) is that compensation applies to "all ticket types" and this includes "the rail element of multi-modal tickets". In light of the wording of NRCoT and the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 it is very difficult to take any interpretation of this other than the one taken by the DfT - that is to say the train operator cannot use the ticket type as a reason not to pay compensation.
Unfortunately Northern did so, and in their adjudication, the Rail Ombudsman decided to contradict the DfT by saying, in respect of delay compensation, that Northern "is clear in the exclusion of multi-modal tickets from the delay repay scheme."
Embarrassingly, their ajudication tried to mitigate their own failure of expertise and competence in consumer advocacy by saying that the ticket type "was a multi-modal ticket, which covered a vast system of transportation." and "allows the effect of delays or cancellations to be off-set by the number of alternate methods of transportation available" - as if this somehow means customers will always experience less delay with these type of tickets, or that this actually affects the legally binding nature of the contract between the customer and the business!
Unfortunately they did not provide a name, so we don't know who at the new organisation is so misinformed.
The Rail Ombudsman makes the following bold claims on their website, which are in direct contradiction to the adjudication:-
https://www.railombudsman.org/
Passengers had previously made it clear they were unhappy with the ineffective and unknowledgeable Transport Focus, but early indications are that the Rail Ombudsman may be dogged by exactly the same issues regarding lack of expertise.
The customer had requested compensation for a delay when a train was cancelled. We know from the recent thread that the interpretation of NRCoT from the Department for Transport (DfT) is that compensation applies to "all ticket types" and this includes "the rail element of multi-modal tickets". In light of the wording of NRCoT and the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 it is very difficult to take any interpretation of this other than the one taken by the DfT - that is to say the train operator cannot use the ticket type as a reason not to pay compensation.
Unfortunately Northern did so, and in their adjudication, the Rail Ombudsman decided to contradict the DfT by saying, in respect of delay compensation, that Northern "is clear in the exclusion of multi-modal tickets from the delay repay scheme."
Embarrassingly, their ajudication tried to mitigate their own failure of expertise and competence in consumer advocacy by saying that the ticket type "was a multi-modal ticket, which covered a vast system of transportation." and "allows the effect of delays or cancellations to be off-set by the number of alternate methods of transportation available" - as if this somehow means customers will always experience less delay with these type of tickets, or that this actually affects the legally binding nature of the contract between the customer and the business!
Unfortunately they did not provide a name, so we don't know who at the new organisation is so misinformed.
The Rail Ombudsman makes the following bold claims on their website, which are in direct contradiction to the adjudication:-
https://www.railombudsman.org/
The Rail Ombudsman is an independent, not-for-profit organisation. We offer a free, expert service to help sort out unresolved customer complaints about service providers within the rail industry.
Our vision is to inspire customer confidence and to deliver our service fairly to ensure the right outcome in every case. We also support the rail industry to raise standards.
Passengers had previously made it clear they were unhappy with the ineffective and unknowledgeable Transport Focus, but early indications are that the Rail Ombudsman may be dogged by exactly the same issues regarding lack of expertise.
Last edited: