Responsibility for delay repay

tombarker1 · 28 Mar 2025

Hi all - I'd be really grateful for the forum's expertise as I am being passed between SWR and LNER on a delay repay claim.

I was travelling with split tickets from Grateley to Doncaster on Friday 7 March. I was booked on the 9.59 GRT- WAT. The late arrival of my train from Grateley into London Waterloo meant I missed my planned 12.33 departure from KGX to DON. This is because the late arrival of the SWR service (arriving into Waterloo at 11.40 against a scheduled arrival time of 11.15) meant I had less than the minimum possible connection time between WAT and KGX.

I therefore took the 13.03 service to Leeds, which was due to arrive at 14.39, 26 minutes after my scheduled arrival time. However, this service was late, meaning I arrive c. 45 mins late.

I think the answer here is to claim delay repay from LNER, because the ultimate cause of my delay going over the 30 min threshold for delay repay the delay to the LNER service. Grateful for advice on this.

RailUK Forums

jfollows · 28 Mar 2025

No.
You claim from the operator causing the first delay, SWR, and subsequent delays are only relevant in terms of the total delay you claim for. So you claim for “c. 45” minutes’ delay from SWR for the whole journey, for the total cost of both split tickets.

If you had made the booked 12:33 you would claim from LNER, but you didn’t.

The 13:03 arrived 23 minutes late into Doncaster, at 15:02, but your original train was due to arrive at 14:13, so you were 49 minutes late.

See https://www.recenttraintimes.co.uk/Home/Service?ServiceId=131342772

Haywain · 28 Mar 2025

tombarker1 said:
Grateful for advice on this.

There us absolutely nodoubt that you should be claiming from SWR. They caused you to miss your booked train from King's Cross and are therefore responsible for the whole delay.

jfollows · 28 Mar 2025

PS Both @Haywain and I can explain this in seconds, so why do SWR & LNER mess you around? There’s no excuse for it. I don’t and have never worked for any kind of railway company!

HughT · 28 Mar 2025

No doubt that this is an SWR responsibility. ButI need to add a note of caution (assuming I've understood the rules correctly, that is...) - the minimum connection time between the two stations at that time of day, i.e. the published connection times at both ends (15 mins each) plus the official "fixed link" journey time (23 mins) comes to a total of 53 mins. Which is exactly the time you say you had between arrival at Waterloo (11.40) and departure from King's Cross (12.33). So you might need to be prepared for some push-back from SWR... MIght they say you should have been able to catch the 12.33?

(That you were using split tickets isn't at all relevant to any part of this thread, of course)

yorkie · 28 Mar 2025

tombarker1 said:
Hi all - I'd be really grateful for the forum's expertise as I am being passed between SWR and LNER on a delay repay claim.

If SWR are denying liability, they are very wrong.

Unfortunately, such behaviour is not uncommon by companies such as SWR; it's endemic.

tombarker1 said:
I was travelling with split tickets from Grateley to Doncaster on Friday 7 March. I was booked on the 9.59 GRT- WAT. The late arrival of my train from Grateley into London Waterloo meant I missed my planned 12.33 departure from KGX to DON....

As SWR caused the delay, SWR become liable for the full delay, irrespective of any further delays.

So if LNER are stating that SWR are liable, then LNER are in fact correct on this occasion (though LNER have been wrong themselves in other instances!)

Passengers cannot rely on train companies to get this right; however, you can rely on this forum to provide an accurate answer.

jfollows · 28 Mar 2025

HughT said:
No doubt that this is an SWR responsibility. ButI need to add a note of caution (assuming I've understood the rules correctly, that is...) - the minimum connection time between the two stations at that time of day, i.e. the published connection times at both ends (15 mins each) plus the official "fixed link" journey time (23 mins) comes to a total of 53 mins. Which is exactly the time you say you had between arrival at Waterloo (11.40) and departure from King's Cross (12.33). So you might need to be prepared for some push-back from SWR... MIght they say you should have been able to catch the 12.33?

(That you were using split tickets isn't at all relevant to any part of this thread, of course)

I agree with your analysis and also that 11:40-12:33 is a valid interchange time. 12:32 wouldn’t have been.

yorkie said:
If SWR are denying liability, they are very wrong.

Unfortunately, such behaviour is not uncommon by companies such as SWR; it's endemic.

As SWR caused the delay, SWR become liable for the full delay, irrespective of any further delays.

So if LNER are stating that SWR are liable, then LNER are in fact correct on this occasion (though LNER have been wrong themselves in other instances!)

Passengers cannot rely on train companies to get this right; however, you can rely on this forum to provide an accurate answer.

It’s pathetic.
It seems that people have job descriptions to avoid payment of valid Delay Repay claims if possible. We’re talking about relatively small sums of money, but they seem to think that it’s worth playing some kind of game.
Fortunately there are people here like you who can give good advice.

yorkie · 28 Mar 2025

HughT said:
No doubt that this is an SWR responsibility. ButI need to add a note of caution (assuming I've understood the rules correctly, that is...) - the minimum connection time between the two stations at that time of day, i.e. the published connection times at both ends (15 mins each) plus the official "fixed link" journey time (23 mins) comes to a total of 53 mins. Which is exactly the time you say you had between arrival at Waterloo (11.40) and departure from King's Cross (12.33). So you might need to be prepared for some push-back from SWR... MIght they say you should have been able to catch the 12.33?

(That you were using split tickets isn't at all relevant to any part of this thread, of course)

Edit: I have since re-read the opening post, and this post, and realised something is amiss: the delay should not have been sufficient to result in the onward train being missed. The opening post is silent as to why this may be, which is a cause for concern. Without more information, I wouldn't like to provide advice either way on this matter.

On the matter of concerns over whether a connection is valid (not an issue in this case), then my general advice is that I would recommend obtaining a through itinerary for any journey of this nature. It doesn't matter if the tickets are "split", but obtaining a through itinerary is clear evidence of a contract, which can be crucial in the event of one of the trains being retimed and/or cancelled between the date of booking and the date of travel, which can cause the connection to be broken.

I would always advise booking any journey in one transaction, and not as separate transactions (if anyone wants to avoid paper tickets and/or the cost of cross-London transfers, then the forum's site has the option for you to use PAYG for cross-London transfers, which will enable this, where available). Anyone who was denied their rights when booking a through journey with us, would be supported by us.

That said, booking separate tickets in separate transactions does not in any way reduce rights; it just means you can have a battle on your hands, if a train company denies you your rights (which, sadly, happens far more often than it should).

Haywain · 28 Mar 2025

yorkie said:
Just to confirm, it is absolutely a valid connection.

To be honest, the planned arrival at Waterloo of 11:15 left that beyond doubt for a King's Cross departure at 12:33.

Mainline421 · 28 Mar 2025

HughT said:
No doubt that this is an SWR responsibility. ButI need to add a note of caution (assuming I've understood the rules correctly, that is...) - the minimum connection time between the two stations at that time of day, i.e. the published connection times at both ends (15 mins each) plus the official "fixed link" journey time (23 mins) comes to a total of 53 mins. Which is exactly the time you say you had between arrival at Waterloo (11.40) and departure from King's Cross (12.33). So you might need to be prepared for some push-back from SWR... MIght they say you should have been able to catch the 12.33?

(That you were using split tickets isn't at all relevant to any part of this thread, of course)

Indeed, I would be claiming from LNER for a 15 minute delay in this case.

yorkie · 28 Mar 2025

Mainline421 said:
Indeed, I would be claiming from LNER for a 15 minute delay in this case.

LNER do not do 15-minute Delay Repay; it would have to be 30 minutes or more.

redreni · 28 Mar 2025

Given the Edit: Minimum Connection Time (MCT) is 53 minutes and the time available for the cross-London transfer was 53 minutes, I would think a manual claim (to SWR) accompanied by an explanation would be appropriate, wouldn't it?

I say that because, as I understand it, TOCs' automated systems for determining delay repay claims just assume that if the time available for a transfer is less than the MCT, the passenger always misses the connection, and if it is equal to or greater than the MCT, the passenger always makes the connection. So in this case I would expect it to assume the passenger made the connection onto the booked LNER train, in which case it won't pay (it may forward the claim to LNER, or it may just reject it on the basis the delay was 15-29 minutes which LNER doesn't pay out for, and the SWR delay was immaterial).

The real world is different, of course. People make sub-MCT connections and they miss connections that meet the MCT. For some passengers, the MCT may not be sufficient, and those people can and do book journeys that allow them additional time to make a connection or a cross-London transfer (as was the case for the OP's booked journey). So I think the claim is reasonable, but it may require a human to look at it, and an explanation as to why 53 minutes wasn't enough to make the intended connection in this particular case.

Darandio · 28 Mar 2025

jfollows said:
PS Both @Haywain and I can explain this in seconds, so why do SWR & LNER mess you around? There’s no excuse for it. I don’t and have never worked for any kind of railway company!

Whilst it undoubtedly happens from time to time, I cannot see any such 'messing around' has happened in this case?

Haywain · 28 Mar 2025

redreni said:
Given the MCT is 53 minutes and the time available for the cross-London transfer was 53 minutes, I would think a manual claim (to SWR) accompanied by an explanation would be appropriate, wouldn't it?

According to the OP, the connection time available in the itinerary was 78 minutes, not 53.

Darandio said:
Whilst it undoubtedly happens from time to time, I cannot see any such 'messing around' has happened in this case?

What else would you call SWR refusing the claim?

Darandio · 28 Mar 2025

Haywain said:
What else would you call SWR refusing the claim?

Thought the OP was asking for advice pre-claim, saw everything barring the very first line of the post. Been a long week!

Having seen that i'm intrigued to see exactly what each party are saying.

saismee · 28 Mar 2025

redreni said:
Given the MCT is 53 minutes and the time available for the cross-London transfer was 53 minutes, I would think a manual claim (to SWR) accompanied by an explanation would be appropriate, wouldn't it?

I say that because, as I understand it, TOCs' automated systems for determining delay repay claims just assume that if the time available for a transfer is less than the MCT, the passenger always misses the connection, and if it is equal to or greater than the MCT, the passenger always makes the connection. So in this case I would expect it to assume the passenger made the connection onto the booked LNER train, in which case it won't pay (it may forward the claim to LNER, or it may just reject it on the basis the delay was 15-29 minutes which LNER doesn't pay out for, and the SWR delay was immaterial).

The real world is different, of course. People make sub-MCT connections and they miss connections that meet the MCT. For some passengers, the MCT may not be sufficient, and those people can and do book journeys that allow them additional time to make a connection or a cross-London transfer (as was the case for the OP's booked journey). So I think the claim is reasonable, but it may require a human to look at it, and an explanation as to why 53 minutes wasn't enough to make the intended connection in this particular case.

Could you edit to clarify that MCT means "minimum connection time" please? I was a little lost at first when reading this post.

redreni · 28 Mar 2025

Haywain said:
According to the OP, the connection time available in the itinerary was 78 minutes, not 53.

Agreed, but the connection time actually available given the delay inbound to Waterloo was 53, which is equal to the MCT.

yorkie · 28 Mar 2025

I've since re-read this, and I have some big concerns. @tombarker1 why did it take so long for you to get from Waterloo to King's Cross? It should only take about 25 minutes or so. Did you go straight to the Bakerloo, change at Oxford Circus, and then straight on the Victoria Line? Did delays occur?

tombarker1 · 28 Mar 2025

Thanks all - this is really helpful to understand where liability lies here.

@yorkie to your point - I have limited mobility which means it took me a long time to get between the station platforms and tube network (one of the reasons for booking such a generous connection time between WAT and KGX in the first place).

As others have pointed out in the thread, I have mis calculated the minimum connection time, so it looks like I need to chalk this up to experience - and potentially be thankful the guard on the 13.03 was content to let me travel.

Haywain · 28 Mar 2025

tombarker1 said:
I need to chalk this up to experience - and potentially be thankful the guard on the 13.03 was content to let me travel.

On the contrary, I think you need to go back to SWR and point out that you allowed extended time because of your limited mobility and it still wasn't enough in the circumstances.

yorkie · 29 Mar 2025

tombarker1 said:
Thanks all - this is really helpful to understand where liability lies here.

@yorkie to your point - I have limited mobility which means it took me a long time to get between the station platforms and tube network (one of the reasons for booking such a generous connection time between WAT and KGX in the first place).

As others have pointed out in the thread, I have mis calculated the minimum connection time, so it looks like I need to chalk this up to experience - and potentially be thankful the guard on the 13.03 was content to let me travel.

Did you book extra time on that basis? If so, I'd strongly argue that your claim is valid.

Do you have some evidence of limited mobility? If so, I'd suggest including that with your claim.

For future reference, if anyone wants to request additional interchange time, this can be done online by booking with our website, and specifying additional time at your chosen interchange location(s) in advanced options; it could alternatively be done as part of a passenger assist booking.

redreni · 29 Mar 2025

Haywain said:
On the contrary, I think you need to go back to SWR and point out that you allowed extended time because of your limited mobility and it still wasn't enough in the circumstances.

Exactly. It would have been enough if the SWR train had been on time, but the delay meant it wasn't enough. That's the point to get across.

The problem wasn't the OP's limited mobility, as the journey was planned appropriately with that in mind. The problem was the delay.

Responsibility for delay repay

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member