Delay Repay - Who to claim from

sefton · 10 Dec 2018

A journey on one ticket but involving two changes and three train companies with short connections, but connections suggested by National Rail Enquiries.

The train for the first part of the journey runs late and although you arrive with less than the minimum connection time you make the connection.

The train for the second part of the journey also runs late and again you arrive with less than the minimum connection time and before train three is due to depart.

However the train for the third leg had been cancelled so you even if you ran you couldn't catch it, and could never have caught it even if the second train had not been late.

I would suggest claiming from the second company, but views welcome.

And as an aside from a quick look at recent performance on the second service I cannot find a journey where customers could not have claimed Delay Repay for this itinerary. Perhaps National Rail Enquiries want people to have free or discounted travel.

RailUK Forums

bb21 · 10 Dec 2018

If you arrived before the third train was scheduled to depart then in this case I think you should claim from the company operating that third leg.

sheff1 · 10 Dec 2018

Claiming from TOC 3 'should' provide the easiest path to getting your compensation, as it was their cancelled train which ultimately resulted in late arrival at your destination. If TOC 2 has a more favourable compensation scheme than TOC 3, a claim to them would do no harm, but prepared for a knock back on the basis that their train arrived in time to make the connection (if it had actually run).

sefton · 10 Dec 2018

bb21 said:
If you arrived before the third train was scheduled to depart then in this case I think you should claim from the company operating that third leg.

Even if the minimum connection time was not met due to the late arrival of train 2? And I mean so close that most customers would not meet the connection although a determined runner might.

sheff1 said:
If TOC 2 has a more favourable compensation scheme than TOC 3, a claim to them would do no harm, but prepared for a knock back on the basis that their train arrived in time to make the connection (if it had actually run).

Train 2 did not arrive on time. It was late and arrived with less than the minimum connection time (significantly less).

35B · 10 Dec 2018

Not what was obvious from your example. I’d still go for the absolute of train 3, with train 2 as my second choice (minimum connection not met, unable to make the connection, etc.)

yorkie · 10 Dec 2018

sefton said:
A journey on one ticket but involving two changes and three train companies with short connections, but connections suggested by National Rail Enquiries.

The train for the first part of the journey runs late and although you arrive with less than the minimum connection time you make the connection.

The train for the second part of the journey also runs late and again you arrive with less than the minimum connection time and before train three is due to depart.

However the train for the third leg had been cancelled so you even if you ran you couldn't catch it, and could never have caught it even if the second train had not been late.

I would suggest claiming from the second company, but views welcome.

And as an aside from a quick look at recent performance on the second service I cannot find a journey where customers could not have claimed Delay Repay for this itinerary. Perhaps National Rail Enquiries want people to have free or discounted travel.

To give the best advice i'd want to see your intended itinerary Vs your actual travel times and a list of all tickets held.

But if you would have made train 3 had it not been cancelled then it should be fairly straightforward: claim from the TOC operating the third train.

As for your last sentence, NRE uses the SilverRail journey planner and in theory the itinerary should be a valid one and available on all journey planners, unless there is a bug you have encountered.

Whether or not the connection is usually late is a completely separate matter and not an issue for journey planners. It's up to the relevant companies to try to make their trains more reliable!

sefton · 10 Dec 2018

35B said:
Not what was obvious from your example. I’d still go for the absolute of train 3, with train 2 as my second choice (minimum connection not met, unable to make the connection, etc.)

Interesting, although my reasoning would be to go with the first failure and not the second which is somewhat irrelevant

bb21 · 10 Dec 2018

sefton said:
Even if the minimum connection time was not met due to the late arrival of train 2? And I mean so close that most customers would not meet the connection although a determined runner might.

Train 2 did not arrive on time. It was late and arrived with less than the minimum connection time (significantly less).

You are getting into some grey areas but there may be a case along your line of argument, should you wish to pursue it. Obviously without knowing what happened with the trains I can't really say anything beyond this.

Claiming from the operator of the third leg is likely to be much less hassle, if any.

sefton · 10 Dec 2018

yorkie said:
To give the best advice i'd want to see your intended itinerary Vs your actual travel times and a list of all tickets held.

Sure, but the single ticket was booked using the National Rail Enquiries website. The connection between leg 1 and 2 was 12 minutes and train 1 was 4 minutes late. The connection between train 2 and 3 was 9 minutes and train 2 arrived 7 minutes late. All connections were at major stations involving changes of platform.

yorkie said:
But if you would have made train 3 had it not been cancelled then it should be fairly straightforward: claim from the TOC operating the third train.

Someone might have been able to run to catch train 3, but what was the point as it was cancelled...

As train 2 was the first point of failure that had an impact I would have thought they should suffer the financial impact.

sefton · 10 Dec 2018

bb21 said:
Obviously without knowing what happened with the trains I can't really say anything beyond this.

From looking at the performance stats of train 2 it seems the timetable is simply optimistic as every train is 5 to 10 minutes late at this point (so failing the minimum connection time) but then makes up the delay on the remainder of its journey.

Part of wanting to claim from train 2 was the sarcastic response from the train manager when I asked how late we would be was an initial "we are not late" and when pointed out we were was a "well not by much" before walking away

yorkie · 10 Dec 2018

sefton said:
Sure, but the single ticket was booked using the National Rail Enquiries website.

A moot point but NRE is not a retailer and will have redirected you to another site.

sefton said:
The connection between leg 1 and 2 was 12 minutes and train 1 was 4 minutes late. The connection between train 2 and 3 was 9 minutes and train 2 arrived 7 minutes late. All connections were at major stations involving changes of platform.

What was the minimum interchange time between trains 2 & 3? I assume it wasn't cross-platform?

I can see an argument either way, but I personally would want to be aware of the full itinerary before I made a decision. I could see TOC 2 contesting it (rightly or wrongly) while TOC 3 is clearly not going to contest it.

sefton said:
Someone might have been able to run to catch train 3, but what was the point as it was cancelled...

As train 2 was the first point of failure that had an impact I would have thought they should suffer the financial impact.

It's a grey area.

sefton said:
Part of wanting to claim from train 2 was the sarcastic response from the train manager when I asked how late we would be was an initial "we are not late" and when pointed out we were was a "well not by much" before walking away

I can see where you are coming from but there is nothing any of us can do about people like that, and some TOCs have no grip of control over staff who behave like that, so they will continue to behave this way regardless of whether you make a claim or not. It's risking going off topic though so I'd suggest not discussing this aspect any further.

sefton · 11 Dec 2018

yorkie said:
What was the minimum interchange time between trains 2 & 3? I assume it wasn't cross-platform?

According to BR Times the minimum connection time is 8 minutes and for this connection (which is scheduled at 9 minutes) it involves changing from one island platform to another.

bb21 · 11 Dec 2018

TBH as the operator of the second leg haven't caused you to miss a connection, I reckon you could have some convincing to do.

Claiming from the operator of the cancelled train is far less hassle. Are the two compensation schemes different?

I know you feel like you want to get "revenge" on the sarcasm received, but really I don't quite understand why you want to create extra work for yourself if the amount of compensation is the same. Your Delay Repay money is hardly going to make any difference to a TOC financially.

But your decision after all.

Haywain · 11 Dec 2018

sefton said:
Sure, but the single ticket was booked using the National Rail Enquiries website.

It wasn't, because NRE do not sell tickets.

sefton · 11 Dec 2018

Haywain said:
It wasn't, because NRE do not sell tickets.

For the man on the Clapham Omnibus, if you have typed National Rail Enquiries into Google, that website has displayed the available schedules and given the prices of the ticket you select, then irrespective of whoever 'sells' the ticket they would consider they have bought it from National Rail Enquiries.

bb21 said:
TBH as the operator of the second leg haven't caused you to miss a connection, I reckon you could have some convincing to do.

If the third train had operated on time but it had been missed as the second train was late as the minimum connection time wasn't met, then train two would have caused the delay.

Therefore as train three didn't exist, the operator of train two can't say whether the customer would have caught it or not, so must still be liable for the delay.

Anyway interesting to hear the thinking which is likely to result.

As for claiming from train company two, the money isn't really relevant. It was not only the attitude of the staff member but also as far as I can see, train company two never manages to operate its service so the minimum connection time is achieved (it seems to make up the delay on the remainder of the journey). So it is a bit poor it is advertising a journey it knows it is unlikely to deliver.

ForTheLoveOf · 11 Dec 2018

sefton said:
For the man on the Clapham Omnibus, if you have typed National Rail Enquiries into Google, that website has displayed the available schedules and given the prices of the ticket you select, then irrespective of whoever 'sells' the ticket they would consider they have bought it from National Rail Enquiries.

If the third train had operated on time but it had been missed as the second train was late as the minimum connection time wasn't met, then train two would have caused the delay.

Therefore as train three didn't exist, the operator of train two can't say whether the customer would have caught it or not, so must still be liable for the delay.

Anyway interesting to hear the thinking which is likely to result.

As for claiming from train company two, the money isn't really relevant. It was not only the attitude of the staff member but also as far as I can see, train company two never manages to operate its service so the minimum connection time is achieved (it seems to make up the delay on the remainder of the journey). So it is a bit poor it is advertising a journey it knows it is unlikely to deliver.

At the end of the day you have your answer - it doesn't matter how many TOCs and connections are involved, it's the first TOC that causes your journey to be delayed that is liable. TOC 2 didn't cause your journey to become delayed, as you have said that you were there in time to make the third service (however it was cancelled). For another passenger who wouldn't have made such a tight connection (for example because they have a lot of luggage, or are a passenger of reduced mobility), it is well possible to imagine that TOC 2 could be liable for the delay despite the third train being cancelled.

The risk is that, if you put in your claim to TOC 2, they will reject your claim, but do so after the 28 days you have from the journey to put in a claim with TOC 3. TOC 3 could then quite rightfully also reject your claim, and then you wouldn't be entitled to anything.

gray1404 · 11 Dec 2018

TOC2 did not cause you to arrive at your destination late. TOC3 did because they did not operate their train. If you claim from TOC2 they may say that did not cause a delay for this reason. If you claim from TOC3 then it is a straight forward case of a cancelled train causing a delay to your journey. Had the train not have been cancelled and the delay to TOC2 caused you to miss your third train (which may not have even happen if it was say running a couple of minutes late) then it would be the second company but this is not what happened in reality. So, as advised, your claim is from TOC3.

bb21 · 11 Dec 2018

ForTheLoveOf said:
The risk is that, if you put in your claim to TOC 2, they will reject your claim, but do so after the 28 days you have from the journey to put in a claim with TOC 3. TOC 3 could then quite rightfully also reject your claim, and then you wouldn't be entitled to anything.

If TOC 2 do their job properly, I would expect the claim to be forwarded to TOC 3, should they reject it themselves, not sent back to the customer.

ForTheLoveOf · 11 Dec 2018

bb21 said:
If TOC 2 do their job properly, I would expect the claim to be forwarded to TOC 3, should they reject it themselves, not sent back to the customer.

Indeed - however TOC 2 are under no legal obligation to do this within the 28 day window for making a claim. So if they don't, that's the passenger's loss.

bb21 · 11 Dec 2018

ForTheLoveOf said:
Indeed - however TOC 2 are under no legal obligation to do this within the 28 day window for making a claim. So if they don't, that's the passenger's loss.

It is not the customer's loss. I handle lots of forwarded cases from other TOCs, some as much as 18 months after date of travel.

Train companies are supposed to work together, and still do in many areas. The customer should not be penalised for sending it to the wrong TOC. Many customers cannot even tell the difference between the myriad of brands around.

ForTheLoveOf · 11 Dec 2018

bb21 said:
It is not the customer's loss. I handle lots of forwarded cases from other TOCs, some as much as 18 months after date of travel.

Train companies are supposed to work together, and still do in many areas. The customer should not be penalised for sending it to the wrong TOC. Many customers cannot even tell the difference between the myriad of brands around.

As a matter of customer service, I totally agree that this is normal practice and can be expected. However, if it does not happen, the customer does not have the same legal right to compensation they have if they submit the claim within the time limit, to the correct TOC. Thus if there are any points of contention on the claim (e.g. combinations of tickets for certain TOCs!) this would seem like a perfect 'get-out' clause for the TOC.

sefton · 11 Dec 2018

ForTheLoveOf said:
At the end of the day you have your answer - it doesn't matter how many TOCs and connections are involved, it's the first TOC that causes your journey to be delayed that is liable.

I completely agree.

ForTheLoveOf said:
TOC 2 didn't cause your journey to become delayed, as you have said that you were there in time to make the third service (however it was cancelled).

I think you have misread what I said.

Train company 1 had the potential to cause the delay as their train arrived late with less than the minimum connection time to catch train 2, but by running I caught train 2. If I hadn't, then train company 1 would be liable.

Train company 2 also ran late and their train also arrived with less than the minimum connection time (arriving 2 minutes before the scheduled departure of train 3 at a station with an 8 minute minimum connection time).

There was no point in running for a train that doesn't exist because it is cancelled, so whether I could or not have caught it is theoretical and anyway there is nothing in the T&C's which requires a customer to run.

So train company failed to deliver a customer with more than the minimum connection time so in my view whether train 3 ran or not is irrelevant. Train company 2 caused the delay so they should pay.

ForTheLoveOf · 11 Dec 2018

sefton said:
I completely agree.

I think you have misread what I said.

Train company 1 had the potential to cause the delay as their train arrived late with less than the minimum connection time to catch train 2, but by running I caught train 2. If I hadn't, then train company 1 would be liable.

Train company 2 also ran late and their train also arrived with less than the minimum connection time (arriving 2 minutes before the scheduled departure of train 3 at a station with an 8 minute minimum connection time).

There was no point in running for a train that doesn't exist because it is cancelled, so whether I could or not have caught it is theoretical and anyway there is nothing in the T&C's which requires a customer to run.

So train company failed to deliver a customer with more than the minimum connection time so in my view whether train 3 ran or not is irrelevant. Train company 2 caused the delay so they should pay.

There is nothing requiring you to run, and indeed it could be a breach of the Railway Byelaws to run (whether or not that is enforced is another matter!). But, I don't think the arrival time with respect to the minimum connection time is the material question. If you would have made the connection, then TOC 2 isn't liable, regardless of finely cut it was. Put it another way - had TOC 3's train been on time and not cancelled, you would have arrived at your destination on time. Thus they are liable, since they prevented that from being the case.

I recently made a journey with just one connection. TOC 1's train was quite heavily delayed, arriving into the connecting station nearly 30 minutes late. And yet, since I was scheduled to wait at the connecting station around 35 minutes, I was not in any risk of missing the connection. As it turned out, TOC 2's train was then delayed by 30 minutes, and so they were the ones liable for the delay, despite TOC 1's train also being late.

sefton · 11 Dec 2018

ForTheLoveOf said:
There is nothing requiring you to run, and indeed it could be a breach of the Railway Byelaws to run (whether or not that is enforced is another matter!). But, I don't think the arrival time with respect to the minimum connection time is the material question. If you would have made the connection, then TOC 2 isn't liable, regardless of finely cut it was. Put it another way - had TOC 3's train been on time and not cancelled, you would have arrived at your destination on time. Thus they are liable, since they prevented that from being the case.

But I wouldn't have caught train 3 if it had run as there was insufficient time to make the connection, so train 2 caused the delay.

Had train 3 run late, as in your example, then that might have got train 2 off the hook, but it didn't so it didn't.

As mentioned before the principal is the first point of failure so train 1 had failed but I rescued it, train 2 also failed but I didn't because train 3 had also failed.

Now train 3's failure by not running is rather more definitive than train 2, but train 2 preceded train 3 so they would seem to be on the hook.

gray1404 · 11 Dec 2018

It can't be train company 2 because the delay to their service did not cause you to miss your connection. That is because you cannot miss a connection that didn't exist. It didn't exist because it was cancelled. If you claim to train company 2 they will need to check what time you got to your destination. In doing so they will see that the train you are saying you missed, due to the delay to their train, didn't actually run so therefore they didn't cause you to miss it.

To conclude, the delay to your journey (as already stated) was because TOC 3 cancelled their train. So you need to claim from them. Delay repay is based on what actually happened rather then what could have happened.

sefton · 11 Dec 2018

gray1404 said:
It can't be train company 2 because the delay to their service did not cause you to miss your connection. That is because you cannot miss a connection that didn't exist. It didn't exist because it was cancelled. If you claim to train company 2 they will need to check what time you got to your destination. In doing so they will see that the train you are saying you missed, due to the delay to their train, didn't actually run so therefore they didn't cause you to miss it.

To conclude, the delay to your journey (as already stated) was because TOC 3 cancelled their train. So you need to claim from them. Delay repay is based on what actually happened rather then what could have happened.

Sorry but train 2 being late did cause me to miss my scheduled connection.

When train 2 pulled into the platform 7 mins late, I inevitably would be delayed by 1/2 hour as that was the frequency of train 3 and train 2 had failed to arrive with more than the minimum connection time.

The only way that 1/2 delay could change would be if train 3 was late departing (meaning I could actually catch it). It wasn't so it was train 2 which was the cause.

sheff1 · 11 Dec 2018

You said in the OP "views welcome" but it seems your mind is already made up and views which are at odds with your views are not welcome at all. Therefore there seems little point in continuing.

gray1404 · 11 Dec 2018

How can TOC2 be to blame for you missing TOC3s train if the third train didn't run?

tiptoptaff · 11 Dec 2018

Your entire argument seems to be the theoretical "TOC 2 would have delayed my journey if TOC3 had ran"
But TOC 3 didn't run, and that is ultimately what delayed your journey. As the rules of Delay Repay are to claim upon what actually happened, and to claim for the first ACTUAL delay to your journey, then it is TOC3 who delayed your journey and them you should be claiming from.
The attitude of a Guard doesn't change the delay liability.

But, your mind is obviously made up. Please, go ahead and claim from TOC2, and please do come back and tell us how it goes.

Fawkes Cat · 11 Dec 2018

sefton said:
As mentioned before the principal is the first point of failure

I don't think it is. The principle is the first point of actual failure.

So although train 1 was late arriving, it didn't fail you because you actually made the connection to train 2. I think we all agree that you should not claim from the operator of train 1.

What happened with train 2? It was late arriving. Does train 2's late arrival mean that it was inevitable that you would not make booked train 3? No, because (as I understand it) train 2 arrived before train 3 was scheduled to depart. So the late arrival of train 2 is not a point of actual failure.

Now we come to train 3. As far as I can make out, you found out at an early point (presumably on arrival on train 2) that train 3 had been cancelled,and you very sensibly did not hare across to wherever train 3 should have departed from only to find out that it wasn't there. So we cannot be certain whether you would - or would not - have caught train 3 if it was running on time. Still less can we know if you would have caught it if it was running late. But we can be certain that your journey failed at this point, because train 3 was cancelled.

Relying on what actually happened, rather than what might have happened, we can see that your journey actually failed because train 3 was cancelled. So you need to pursue the operator of train 3 for delay repay (or whatever scheme they happen to run).

'But', I hear you cry, 'what about the dreadful behaviour of train 2's staff?'

Happily, there is a remedy.

Make a complaint to the operator of train 2, and claim delay repay from the operator of train 3.

Delay Repay - Who to claim from

Member

RailUK Forums

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Member

Emeritus Moderator

Member

Member

Forum Staff

Member

Emeritus Moderator

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member