Do you need your ticket for "delay repay" (Northern)?

Howardh said:

How long does it take to get to the gate, put your ticket in and collect it after it's zipped through?
That long. Except there isn't a gate to open.

But if that's too slow for you I'll back down and suggest instead of physically putting your ticket through a machine - every door has two small machines which you press a button and out comes a "refund due" ticket with the train number, unique reference and date/time on; so you send that off with your ticket which proves you were on that train, and it also works for e-tickets as when you apply for the refund you can include the unique reference number on your refund due ticket?

Click to expand...

How good do you think operators will be at maintaining thousands of these machines? How often will people have to say these machines weren't working?

Silverdale said:

The potential for fraud arises because a dishonest ticket holder can find out which trains have actually been delayed and make a claim about their intended travel retrospectively, claiming for a delay they haven't suffered. The only way to verify what the customer's true intention was, is to make them state it before they depart. Time-stamping at the origin would be a proxy for the customer stating their intended departure time.

So, to answer your question, yes. It would have to be done, just in case of a delay repay claim being required.

Time-stamping at the origin wouldn't allow all fraudulent claims to be caught. e.g. a customer could travel without delay via one valid routing for their ticket, but claim they had been delayed by using another valid route. The time stamp wouldn't verify which route had been intended, but it would at least narrow down the time window within which that kind of fraud would be possible.

Maybe even time-stamping (or an electronic equivalent) of tickets prior to departure is too onerous?

Click to expand...

I can't see the problem with having a stamper on the train; similar to the old strippenkarten machines you had on Amsterdam trams (but in reverse). Hundreds used to get on trams at stops and they inserted their card, quick stamp and go to their seat, I can't remember trams being delayed as folks did that. In my case, you would have these stamp machines two or more to each door, and if the train is late then they are activated by the guard and pax simply, on exit, get the ticket stamped with 15' or 30' or 1hr delay as they leave. Although to get over the mobile app problem, it would be better if pax could simply push a button and a "delay promise to repay ticket" comes out.

I read above that fraud is only a "small issue" - well if you only catch one fraudster per day it may well be. But how many are getting away with it because they aren't caught?? It's a bit like you don't know how many drivers are jumping red lights because only a handful have been caught.

But it's a only suggestion from a keyboard warrior; the TOC's can take it or leave it.

Deerfold said:

How good do you think operators will be at maintaining thousands of these machines? How often will people have to say these machines weren't working?

Click to expand...

How often do Oyster card terminals go down? Gates where you input tickets?? If that happens you have to go to the default position where you hope the pax is telling the truth when they send in their unmarked ticket for refund....ie the position we have today.
And the Amsterdam tram machines managed to be well maintained - is it beyond us?!
Now, instead of knocking it, please come up with a better solution than mine!!

Howardh said:

In my case, you would have these stamp machines two or more to each door, and if the train is late then they are activated by the guard and pax simply, on exit, get the ticket stamped with 15' or 30' or 1hr delay as they leave.

Click to expand...

So how would that work?

Pax #1, intending to catch the 18:05, actually catches the 17:35, which is running 25 late. He arrives at his destination 5 mins earlier than he planned, but gets an exit ticket stamp entitling him to a 15 min delay payout.

Pax #2, intending to catch the 19:05, finds it has been cancelled. Catches the 19:35 which runs on time. She arrives at her destination 30 mins later than planned, but because the train she actually travelled on ran on time, she doesn't get an exit ticket stamp entitling her to compensation.

Time-stamping at the origin station, rather than on exit of the train, would resolve these anomalous situations. Pax #1 would have needed to be at the origin station and have stamped their ticket before the departure time of 17:35 in order to claim a delay as a result of its late arrival at his destination. Pax #2, having stamped her ticket prior to 19:05 can show she was actually delayed by the cancellation, even though the 19:35 ran on time.

Silverdale said:

So how would that work?

Pax #1, intending to catch the 18:05, actually catches the 17:35, which is running 25 late. He arrives at his destination 5 mins earlier than he planned, but gets an exit ticket stamp entitling him to a 15 min delay payout.

Click to expand...

It's definatly possible;
The situation given is what he could do today, claim for that particular journey - he's be entitled to as there's nothing on his ticket saying that wasn't his intended train **UNLESS his ticket was bought at the station just before he boarded and that time was registered on the ticket/strip (which would catch him out if he applied for a refund)???

Nothing against time-stamping at stations, but how would it work in practice; say you arrived at 1300, and your 1305 train was delayed, do you stamp your ticket when it's announced it's delayed, or when it arrives (and it leaves later as it waits for everyone to get stamped - and what about those with e-tickets? If it's the former, what if it's delayed 16 mins and then turns up 13 mins late (it's caught up?); if it's stamped and the train catches up time en route and you apply for a refund it could be rejected I suppose.

I'm not suggesting it's a bad idea; I think it's actually most plausible - but as with mine it has it's difficulties; maybe both systems could be used in tandem as an experiment? Think if the authorities sat down and worked out machines at stations and on trains that give a promise of refund ticket which are time-stamped and have a unique number it could be done.

It needs people to get together, think of the solutions (like we have here) and work out what to do.

Meanwhile
- suppose I have three separate single tickets for one trip - Bolton-Manchester (fiver); Manchester-London (50) and London-Gatwick (15??), and the very first train is 30 mins late, meaning I miss the Manchester train and then miss the Gatwick train; would I only get the compensation for the first train as all the others ran on time - yet I arrived at my destination late?? If I booked Bolton - Gatwick as one ticket would I get a bigger refund??

Howardh said:

It's definatly possible;
The situation given is what he could do today, claim for that particular journey - he's be entitled to as there's nothing on his ticket saying that wasn't his intended train **UNLESS his ticket was bought at the station just before he boarded and that time was registered on the ticket/strip (which would catch him out if he applied for a refund)???

Click to expand...

In a way you are making the case for origin station stamping. Not having bought the ticket until after the advertised departure of the train claimed as his intended would indeed prove he was fibbing. But so would time stamping a pre-bought ticket after that same advertised departure time.

Howardh said:

say you arrived at 1300, and your 1305 train was delayed, do you stamp your ticket when it's announced it's delayed, or when it arrives (and it leaves later as it waits for everyone to get stamped

Click to expand...

Maybe I didn't explain it very well. The purpose of time-stamping at the origin is not to record the delay of departure, but to prove that the ticket holder was intending to catch the train he is claiming at the intended (advertised) departure time. Nothing more nothing less. Waiting until a delayed train was actually ready to depart, before requiring a stamp wouldn't separate the honest claimant from the happy chancers like pax #1, who simply stumbles across a delayed train, never having intended to catch it at the advertised time.

There is no real need for time-stamping to record a delay. The timetable and routing rules show what the advertised arrival times are at the destination consequent to the intended departure time from the origin and the industry's train running data show which trains were actually delayed and therefore what the delay was to the claimant, so processing the claim would work, using that data, as it does now.

Time-stamping at the origin would not prevent all kinds of fraudulent claims but it would catch the most obvious and common ones, based on stumbling upon or scouring train running data for instances of delayed journeys for which the ticket held is valid, but which the claimant had no intention of making.

Silverdale said:

Not having bought the ticket until after the advertised departure of the train claimed as his intended would indeed prove he was fibbing. But so would time stamping a pre-bought ticket after that same advertised departure time

Click to expand...

What if you saw the train was delayed and decided to stay in the pub for an extra half hour?
You've still been delayed despite not having the ticket stamped at the right time.

BlueFox said:

What if you saw the train was delayed and decided to stay in the pub for an extra half hour?
You've still been delayed despite not having the ticket stamped at the right time.

Click to expand...

Same as if you saw the train was delayed and put in an extra half hour overtime at work. If the time stamp was required to validate your claim, it would be rejected. Essentially you would have traded what you could have gained from delay repay, for 30 mins of paid work/brownie points or 30 mins of sinking pints.

If you are claiming for a delay, I don't think it unreasonable to expect you to present yourself at the station at the advertised departure time to stamp your ticket. If you then chose to go to the pub, while you are waiting for the delayed train, I don't see why that should make the claim invalid.

I think all this talk of stamping is missing the wood for the trees. Electronic tickets of all varieties are becoming ever more prevalent. Even a notable portion of "old-fashioned" paper tickets have electronic barcodes and the like. A perfectly good way of preventing and detecting fraudulent claims is simply to look at the barcode and see what the scan history is. As I said before, the majority of journeys will involve travelling through at least one gate, so a reasonable approximation of whether or not a claim is plausible ought to be possible now already.

Completely "dumb" tickets are only going to get ever rarer, until we get to the point where they're like paper tickets for travel within the London Zones now. Not gone, but very much the minority. There's no reason for TOCs to invest thousands into new fraud detection kit when the potential benefits and savings from it are marginal now, and continuously decreasing.

This would perhaps have been a smart idea 15 years ago, when compensation and open data started becoming more of 'a thing' on the railways, but it's already obselete now. Sorry!

I agree that electronic ticketing is going to become more prevalent, which is why I referred to the electronic equivalent of a time stamp, upthread.

The point I was trying to make was that however it's done, preventing the most obvious forms of fraud of delay repay involves verifying the claimed journey had been planned and/or attempted, rather than requiring the claimant to show that they had travelled on a particular delayed train.

That will remain the case, whatever form of ticket/barcode/data/device is employed to do it.

Silverdale said:

If you are claiming for a delay, I don't think it unreasonable to expect you to present yourself at the station at the advertised departure time to stamp your ticket.

Click to expand...

I cannot agree. If I am sitting in the Guildford Arms in Edinburgh and see the 1934 to Aberdeen, which I was intending to catch, is cancelled, I don't think it is at all reasonable that I should have to make my way across Princes St and down Waverley Steps to the station to stamp my ticket and then retrace my steps only to return again for the 2032.

Mind you, places like Wigan Central have train departure screens in the bar. - building on that perhaps they, the Guildford Arms and other pubs close to stations could have a stamping machine for punters to use if their intending train was cancelled and they wanted to stay for another pint

sheff1 said:

I cannot agree. If I am sitting in the Guildford Arms in Edinburgh and see the 1934 to Aberdeen, which I was intending to catch, is cancelled, I don't think it is at all reasonable that I should have to make my way across Princes St and down Waverley Steps to the station to stamp my ticket and then retrace my steps only to return again for the 2032.

Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting you would need to stamp your ticket prior to the advertised departure time in order to travel. Of course that would be fine. You have a valid ticket to travel and that's all you need.

But once you've got to Aberdeen and it comes to claiming delay repay, what means do you have to show that you have been actually delayed?

Proving you travelled on the delayed train, e.g. by having your ticket stamped on the train, or that the barcode shows you passed through the barrier prior to its actual departure time, is not proof you were delayed, as you are indistinguishable from a customer who had no intention of catching the 19:34, but managed to, simply because it was delayed.

sheff1 said:

Mind you, places like Wigan Central have train departure screens in the bar. - building on that perhaps they, the Guildford Arms and other pubs close to stations could have a stamping machine for punters to use if their intending train was cancelled and they wanted to stay for another pint

Click to expand...

See. Now you are coming round to the idea.

Or perhaps "checking-in" using an app, with geolocation.

Silverdale said:

Or perhaps "checking-in" using an app, with geolocation.

Click to expand...

When someone goes to an airport, they scan the barcode as you enter security; which not only shows you are entitled to be there but also tells the airline you are here so they can check you off getting onto the plane. So if the plane's delayed you have proof you were present and at what time.
I suppose that's the way the railways will go, but every station, no matter how small, will have to have a reader or there will have to be one on the train.
Then again you will have the "big brother" lobby saying "they" have way too much information on us, tracking our movements etc. OK, that's another debate, but with data protection, how long would the railways (and airlines) keep that information, and who would have access to it until deleted?

Does anyone have a figure for the cost to the railways of bogus Delay Repay claims, and how this compares with (a) the value of legitimate claims that aren't actually made and (b) the cost of all this time stamping kit that folk are advocating?

xotGD said:

Does anyone have a figure for the cost to the railways of bogus Delay Repay claims, and how this compares with (a) the value of legitimate claims that aren't actually made and (b) the cost of all this time stamping kit that folk are advocating?

Click to expand...

There can't be a figure as you only know the ones that have been caught. And it might be more expensive prosecuting them (or even just dealing with them) than just letting them have 12.5% of their ticket back

To be frank, this is all a lot of nonsense over what is a very small problem with some very expensive solutions.

Some people on this forum seem to think TOCs have entire teams of people making it as hard as possible to claim delay repay as it loses the railway massive amounts of money!

In reality, people who don't pay their fare at all are a much bigger problem.

td97 said:

Even if the delay repay amounts to pennies, if Northern have left me waiting on a freezing unstaffed platform for half an hour then the only satisfaction I can get out of the experience is sending in a delay repay for them to post out by cheque.

Click to expand...

Have to say I did get a certain , perverse, pleasure of getting a hand written cheque for £1.24.

Of course even then they have messed it up as they seem to have ignored the other claims that were made at the same time (both outward and return were delayed)

causton said:

To be frank, this is all a lot of nonsense over what is a very small problem with some very expensive solutions.

Click to expand...

It's a small problem for the TOCs but one which the industry has created by itself. The bigger problem is wretchedly poor performance.

I don't think any customer of the railway would seriously expect to get compensated for a one-off 15 min delay. What they want, particularly commuters, are trains which at least turn up, and get them to where they need to be, most of the time. That's not what they are getting, in many places. Instead they are being told to suck it up and claim their compensation, as if Delay Repay was the solution.

Delay Repay shouldn't need to exist, but in it's current form it allows those who have bought a ticket to claim some or all of their fare back, even if they haven't been delayed. On the one hand TOCs rightly point to the unfairness which exists when most pay their fare but some don't. But TOCs being tough on fare dodgers, for that reason, does ring a bit hollow when a system of compensation which they have devised allows free train rides to be proffered, without any means of checking who is entitled and who isn't?

Silverdale said:

I don't think any customer of the railway would seriously expect to get compensated for a one-off 15 min delay.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm not your typical customer, but I was certainly annoyed when I was a commuter and the trains were 15 minutes late. Back then there was no such thing as Delay Repay 15.

It might not sound like a lot but if you have to account for the uncertainty that is brought by such delays, it may well mean you have to get a train half an hour or even an hour earlier than you should have to, were the trains always to run in accordance with the timetable. That's time that's completely wasted for a lot of people (given that most employers won't pay you any more if you turn up before the booked start time, but will heavily penalise you if you're late).

The way I saw it - if the TOCs are going to break their promise (represented by the timetable they publish), the least they can do is to show that they recognise that it's a breach of trust, by digging where it hurts companies the most (their coffers). Acting with impunity by claiming no compensation is due is rankling.