-
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!
West Coast Main Line closed near Wembley (06/04)
- Thread starter rmt4ever
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
There is a big difference though, in the delay being caused by a mistake/incompetance from the rail company, and a delay caused by external factors out of anyones control. If it were me, I wouldn't be claiming for compensation if the delay was due to bad luck rather than someone cocked up. What is more important is how the railway assists the passengers who have been caught up in the chaos. When I was stuck in Florida for an extra day because bad weather delayed my domestic flight which made me miss my connection, I didn't get the air fare refunded, but I did get booked on the next available flight to Heathrow (the following evening), a voucher for a nearby hotel, and advised where to get the shuttle bus to the hotel.
Compared to all that, the £80 Virgin is gonna give me seems like nothing. So win win really
Anyway thankfully throughout the delay our guard has been very clear on our rights to claim delay repay and how much we can claim. So fingers crossed the whole train will be claiming
ilkestonian
Member
That's alright then. I'm sure none of the thousands of other passengers caught up in this have anywhere to be or anything planned to do beside sitting on a delayed train for several hours dreaming of getting their fares back.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,292
As you’re so overjoyed that everyone can get delay repay, I assume you have shared your booze out to celebrate.
As Private Eye would say “trebles all round!”
Why do you care so much what anyone else may be going to do?
Train companies have to compensate passengers.
Train companies will get generous compensation from Network Rail that will dwarf any amount passed on to passengers.
It is then up to Network Rail if they think they can get compensation from the party at fault...
If your train is delayed/cancelled and you choose not to travel, or if you are delayed en route and you return to origin, you are entitled to a refund.
If you are delayed, it is delay compensation.
This matters because (among other things) the former is from the retailer; the latter is from the train company.
Agreed. The tone isn't great.
Edit: ah, I've just worked out who the OP is. I should have worked it out years ago. All makes sense now. Will be dealt with....
Last edited:
Why not? Whoever's responsible for the fire has arguably caused a public nuisance and the railway should be able to sue
80-odd minutes delay in the end. Could have been a lot worst I think all in all! Everyone on my train carriage didn't seem to mind at all, Guard was very good at keeping everyone up to date.
Apparently VTWC offer automatic delay repay directly back onto original payment method these days... so lets see if this comes off. Certainly seems helpful if it works out that way.
Apparently VTWC offer automatic delay repay directly back onto original payment method these days... so lets see if this comes off. Certainly seems helpful if it works out that way.
Exactly. I dont see why not.. if the business was neglegent then absolutely they are liable for the disruption for services. And should be penilised financially as such.
Obviously if it was out of their hands such as faulty electrical work by a contractor they employed in good faith, or of course arson, thats a different matter
dk1
Veteran Member
Oddly enough you can make announcements & advertise delay repay until you are blue in the face but a large percentage will never bother to claim. Some because they simply can't be arsed, forget after a few days or if it's been bought for you say by your company, why would it even concern you to go for it?
Hyphen
Member
Because typically delays when travelling with work have an impact on my personal time. Work pay for me to travel to do a job, I consider the Delay Repay compensation for *my* time wasted, time I don't get paid for.
plannerman
Member
The building owner's insurance (if there is any in place) is very unlikely to cover consequential losses - ie it would probably cover physical damage to the railway, and any other property damaged, but unlikely to cover consequential fines paid by the railway owner to operators etc.
And I see someone mentioned 'force majeure' - in my industry (not rail) Force Majeure has a specific legal status. You have to formally declare that Force Majeure applies, and it has a legal impact on your operations. It's to be avoided at all costs, so if it has the same meaning on the railway then they would be extremely unlikely to invoke it for a lineside fire.
And I see someone mentioned 'force majeure' - in my industry (not rail) Force Majeure has a specific legal status. You have to formally declare that Force Majeure applies, and it has a legal impact on your operations. It's to be avoided at all costs, so if it has the same meaning on the railway then they would be extremely unlikely to invoke it for a lineside fire.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,582
In which case the building owner will need deep pockets.
Bertie the bus
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 2,791
Whether the property owner is chased for the money is irrelevant to whether passengers should (morally or otherwise) claim Delay Repay. VTWC and WMT will be compensated by Network Rail. Passengers claim off the TOC and it will make no difference to Network Rail whatsoever whether passengers claim or not and the amount paid to the TOCs will be many multiples of the total Delay Repay claim.
So people trying to shame passengers who get delayed in these sort of incidents into not claiming are out of order.
So people trying to shame passengers who get delayed in these sort of incidents into not claiming are out of order.
matt_world2004
Established Member
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 4,504
I think the railway should refund tickets. Regardless of the delay simply because they have failed to provide the service the customer has paid for .Also there is a line of argument that the railway has some degree of control in mitigating these force majure events:
For example, the risk of suicides drop considerably at well staffed stations and drop even moreso at stations with platform edge doors.
Fires outside railway property tend to have a lesser effect services that run in tunnels . (I know it is quite impractical to run the wcml in a tunnel because of the huge financial cost that would entail)
it however should be accepted that decisions made by predcessor organisations based on cost and other factors greatly increase the risk of some kinds of disruption and these should be factored into any TOCs bidding costs.
Any reason delay repay would also incentivise the operators to implement proper service recovery strategies and incentivise them to get the customer to their destination as quickly as possible.
Strikes absolutely should not be a force majure event the operator has a high degree of control for industrial relations
For example, the risk of suicides drop considerably at well staffed stations and drop even moreso at stations with platform edge doors.
Fires outside railway property tend to have a lesser effect services that run in tunnels . (I know it is quite impractical to run the wcml in a tunnel because of the huge financial cost that would entail)
it however should be accepted that decisions made by predcessor organisations based on cost and other factors greatly increase the risk of some kinds of disruption and these should be factored into any TOCs bidding costs.
Any reason delay repay would also incentivise the operators to implement proper service recovery strategies and incentivise them to get the customer to their destination as quickly as possible.
Strikes absolutely should not be a force majure event the operator has a high degree of control for industrial relations
Last edited:
Kite159
Veteran Member
Be careful as I believe this only applies if the ticket was purchased directly from the VTWC website and is an advance ticket solely on VT services.
ilkestonian
Member
I'd have thought this would come under third party liability cover. Consequential loss in business policies normally refers to losses incurred by the business itself as a result of a fire, such as lost production, the cost of finding temporary accomodation etc.
Losses caused to third parties don't come under this.
But for a third party claim to be entertained, that third party must show that the building owner was in some way negligent; possible but most unlikely in a case like this.
Realistically, the only claim likely to succeed would be against the perpetrators, but how many scroats who carry out such arson attacks are giing to be worth suing?
Yes, thinking about it further there may be difficulties in law (in addition to any restrictions in the insurance policy), at least in a negligence action, for a TOC claiming damages for 'pure economic loss' ie loss caused by interruption to services etc without any physical damage to its property
For clarity, in my bit of the Civil Service benefits received as a consequence of work travel have to be returned to the organisation or not claimed at all. This applies to things like 'Air Miles' and, I believe (not certain, never been in a situation to claim whilst travelling for work) things like Delay Repay. The concept is to avoid the appearance of, or possibility of the reality of, selecting travel routes on the basis of personal gain rather than minimum cost to the public.
I can claim 'Travelling Time', but not for any section of my normal commute or, if that is not part of my travel, until the time that that normally takes has expired. Generally the rules ensure that we are always 'out of pocket' but not to the extent that it would lead to staff refusing to travel for work purposes.
All Line Rover
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 5,222
Interestingly, in a negligence claim brought against one of Network Rail's contractors, NR managed to claim the cost of payments made from NR to TOCs to cover TOCs' lost revenue / profit:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/644.html
That 2011 decision of the Court of Appeal was out of step with the orthodox law on 'pure economic losses'.* The public interest in allowing the claim seemed to play a part in the court's reasoning.
*And note that pure economic loss can still be such even where it is 'a consequence' of physical damage.
Last edited:
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 11,457
Exactly what I was about to write.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
If Network Rail didn't keep renting out railway arches out to garages and scrapyards...
(Yes, I know not in this case, but still).
(Yes, I know not in this case, but still).
Interesting. What bearing did the terms of the contract with the contractor have on that decision ?
- Status