Accidentally bought ticket twice

[r37]

Morning everyone, was wondering if I could get some advice.

My friend booked some tickets about a month ago using the trainline website. She was intending to get two advance singles (one in each direction) but she has realised today that she was charged twice and has two of each ticket, one with a railcard and one without. The dates of travel is today (7th June).

She thinks that when she booked and paid, the price she was shown was the accurate price for the tickets and she would have noticed if the price she'd shown was more than double what she should have paid.

My question is: will it be possible for her to get a refund on the unused ticket? I know advance singles are not refundable but obviously it was bought in error, *possibly* due to the trainline showing the incorrect amount. (She could have just not been paying attention, but she is usually very careful when booking and making sure she's paying the correct amount. She obviously can't prove that it was the trainline's mistake though!)

Thanks in advance.

 

[greatkingrat]

I think it is very unlikely that The Trainline showed the wrong total price. What probably happened is she searched for the tickets without adding the railcard, put them in her basket, then remembered the railcard and searched again with the railcard, not realising there were already two tickets in the basket.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Should be possible to refund one to a voucher using the Book with Confidence scheme, but you'll need to go through customer services if it's not the full booking.

 

[A Challenge]

Should be possible to refund one to a voucher using the Book with Confidence scheme, but you'll need to go through customer services if it's not the full booking.

If travel is today, that option is no longer available

 

[Bletchleyite]

If travel is today, that option is no longer available

Ah yes, sorry, I missed that.

If it's under £10 it's probably lost, then. If over £10 and a journey the OP makes often, perhaps change one of them to a future date for a £10 admin fee? May need to do this via customer services.

 

[Haywain]

If it's under £10 it's probably lost, then. If over £10 and a journey the OP makes often, perhaps change one of them to a future date for a £10 admin fee? May need to do this via customer services.

This will still need to be done before the departure of the first booked train.

 

[Vespa]

That happened to me I brought two tickets on train line without reakusung as I timed out on one ticket purchase and started again, as soon as I realised what happen, I immediately contacted customer service who looked into my purchase history and accepted was a unintentional double booking and refunded the extra ticket.

It would be worth contacting customer service and explain the circumstances.

 

[Class800]

A family member has bought the wrong ticket on two separate occasions and both times got refunded on the day of purchase - this was with SWR if makes any difference.

 

[r37]

That happened to me I brought two tickets on train line without reakusung as I timed out on one ticket purchase and started again, as soon as I realised what happen, I immediately contacted customer service who looked into my purchase history and accepted was a unintentional double booking and refunded the extra ticket.

It would be worth contacting customer service and explain the circumstances.

How long after you bought the tickets did you realise and contact customer services? Also did you email them or ring them?

 

[Vespa]

How long after you bought the tickets did you realise and contact customer services? Also did you email them or ring them?

Emailed straight away as soon as I realised I got two sets of tickets, they noticed the first purchase and the second duplicate, they conceded it could be a website issue and refunded the first ticket.

 

[island]

I think it is very unlikely that The Trainline showed the wrong total price. What probably happened is she searched for the tickets without adding the railcard, put them in her basket, then remembered the railcard and searched again with the railcard, not realising there were already two tickets in the basket.

I suspect this is what happened.

As others mention, had this been realised before today, a voucher refund could have been arranged. Indeed, if the OP's friend had realised right away and called up, a full refund would probably have been given.

For future reference, the OP's friend should be advised not to use the Trainline to buy in advance as it adds completely avoidable booking fees.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Trainline customer service is very good, I'm sure they'll refund an unused set purchased in error, but the sooner they are told the better. If they are paper tickets and uncollected even better. But certainly call customer services. You've absolutely nothing to loose, and potentially a refund to gain.
If they do refuse, possible if its after train departure time, then you could try asking the bank to refund the money as you didn't ask for the tickets and were sold without your consent. However, this could be more problematic.

 

[r37]

For future reference, the OP's friend should be advised not to use the Trainline to buy in advance as it adds completely avoidable booking fees.

I have told my friends this several times before, but for some reason a few of them seem to really like booking through Trainline, not sure why!

Thanks everyone else for your help, hopefully she will be able to get a refund!

 

[Deafdoggie]

In any other business there would be desperate attempts made to win back custom from a third party site selling exacting what you do, but dearer. But this is Britain's Railways and they really aren't bothered about the loss of income.
But it does show how good Trainline are that people like them so much

 

[mmh]

I have told my friends this several times before, but for some reason a few of them seem to really like booking through Trainline, not sure why!

They are very good at app design and responsive web design. Many TOC and other third party retailers' interfaces are pretty poor, some very poor, I'd say.

 

[Haywain]

In any other business there would be desperate attempts made to win back custom from a third party site selling exacting what you do, but dearer. But this is Britain's Railways and they really aren't bothered about the loss of income.

You’re very wrong. The TOCs would love to get that business in house but they know that they cannot compete with Trainline on advertising. They are also keenly aware that a very significant amount of their ticket sales are made through Trainline.

 

[Watershed]

but they know that they cannot compete with Trainline on advertising

Of course they could. They are just too disorganised to do so.

 

[kristiang85]

That happened to me I brought two tickets on train line without reakusung as I timed out on one ticket purchase and started again, as soon as I realised what happen, I immediately contacted customer service who looked into my purchase history and accepted was a unintentional double booking and refunded the extra ticket.

It would be worth contacting customer service and explain the circumstances.

Does the railway come under the consumer law that if a purchase is made online, a full refund can be made if claimed in 14 days without question?

 

[mmh]

Of course they could. They are just too disorganised to do so.

Was there anything to stop them joining forces and having a single site, perhaps run by ATOC/RDG or a subsidiary, other than corporate fiefdom? That would surely have had a far better chance of competing against Trainline.

Does the railway come under the consumer law that if a purchase is made online, a full refund can be made if claimed in 14 days without question?

I wondered that yesterday. I imagine they've thought about that though. Perhaps there'll be something about goods vs services? Other ticket retailers (sports, concerts, airlines etc) must be avoiding that in some legal way.

 

[Watershed]

Does the railway come under the consumer law that if a purchase is made online, a full refund can be made if claimed in 14 days without question?

That is indeed the default position for most distance contracts (e.g. online purchases). But there are a number of types of contract which are excluded from this right, including passenger transport services (Regulation 27(2)(c)). So unfortunately rail tickets don't qualify for a "change of mind" refund under this legislation.

Nevertheless, refund fees are liable to be assessed for fairness under Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, particularly paragraph 5 of Schedule 2 (which lists terms which may be regarded as unfair):

A term which has the object or effect of requiring that, where the consumer decides not to conclude or perform the contract, the consumer must pay the trader a disproportionately high sum in compensation or for services which have not been supplied.

Given that an ORR review recently concluded that retailers' actual costs of processing refunds are less than £4 per ticket (and likely much less than that where the process is automated and no ticket has been collected), charging £10 on a blanket basis could constitute an unfair term.

Was there anything to stop them joining forces and having a single site, perhaps run by ATOC/RDG or a subsidiary, other than corporate fiefdom? That would surely have had a far better chance of competing against Trainline.

I'm sure someone would have thought up an excuse about competition and collusion. But the reality is that if NRE had always sold tickets, that would simply be accepted as 'the way things work'.

I almost don't want to know how many millions the DfT has wasted over the last 25 years, subsidising TOCs to run competing booking engines...

 

[Haywain]

Was there anything to stop them joining forces and having a single site, perhaps run by ATOC/RDG or a subsidiary, other than corporate fiefdom? That would surely have had a far better chance of competing against Trainline.

I believe franchise agreements have required them to have their own websites, so that was not an option.

Of course they could. They are just too disorganised to do so.

Nothing to do with money then?

 

[Adam Williams]

Given that an ORR review recently concluded that retailers' actual costs of processing refunds are less than £4 per ticket (and likely much less than that where the process is automated and no ticket has been collected), charging £10 on a blanket basis could constitute an unfair term.

Where do you think these automated systems come from? They don't materialise out of thin air, and they require almost continuous maintenance as the industry's refund policies (which are already complex) evolve.

A significant number of refunds are already fee-free, to the extent that the average fee paid by customers per ticket refunded is already below £5:

The ORR report explicitly acknowledges that this is the case:

Averaged across all tickets refunded, including those where the administration fee was waived, the fees charged to passengers averaged less than £5 per ticket
refunded

There are a good number of retailers who go beyond the base entitlements in the NRCoT to offer refunds on a fee-free or reduced-cost basis as a matter of good customer service - either in a discretionary or universal way. TrainSplit's self-service fee-free same-day refund support comes to mind, and it's been nice to see a number of TOCs subsequently follow suit with similar offerings to help ensure customers aren't unfairly financially penalised for accidental booking errors. When refunds are fee-free, the independent retailer will make a loss on the booking, it's just the nature of how this stuff works - so when there's disruption, industrial action, cancellations and TOCs get their administration costs covered by the DfT and the taxpayer - TPRs are making a loss on each and every booking they refund.

The report also acknowledges the limitations with the analysis - for example, it would appear the report completely ignores the work involved in detecting and preventing fraud, incl. collaboration with train operating companies as well as more general costs from industry systems.

In the grand scheme of problems with rail retail, I don't think this one is as significant as you make out. Would I be surprised if the cap is reduced to £5? No. Do I think it will benefit the passenger experience more than solving other fundamental problems might? No.

 

[Watershed]

Nothing to do with money then?

It would save rather a lot of money if the DfT paid for one large contract with one supplier, instead of the 15-odd small contracts (one for each TOC) with 4 different suppliers that are currently in place. It seems that they have finally realised this, based on the recommendation in the Williams Report.

Where do you think these automated systems come from? They don't materialise out of thin air, and they require almost continuous maintenance as the industry's refund policies (which are already complex) evolve.

Indeed they don't, but this is part of the cost of doing business. The ORR figure of £3.77 per refund already includes these costs.

A significant number of refunds are already fee-free, to the extent that the average fee paid by customers per ticket refunded is already below £5:

The ORR report explicitly acknowledges that this is the case:

In the majority of cases, the industry is legally obliged to offer these fee-free refunds, e.g. due to disruption. It is not reasonable to expect customers to shoulder such costs; they are incurred due to failings on the part of the industry.

There are a good number of retailers who go beyond the base entitlements in the NRCoT to offer refunds on a fee-free or reduced-cost basis as a matter of good customer service - either in a discretionary or universal way. TrainSplit's self-service fee-free same-day refund support comes to mind, and it's been nice to see a number of TOCs subsequently follow suit with similar offerings to help ensure customers aren't unfairly financially penalised for accidental booking errors.

I agree, but there are still plenty of retailers who charge the full £10 even if it is an entirely automated refund. Which is really not cricket.

When refunds are fee-free, the independent retailer will make a loss on the booking, it's just the nature of how this stuff works - so when there's disruption, industrial action, cancellations and TOCs get their administration costs covered by the DfT and the taxpayer - TPRs are making a loss on each and every booking they refund.

It's certainly problematic that there is such an uneven playing field between TOC retailers and TPRs, but that is not something which particularly concerns the customer.

The report also acknowledges the limitations with the analysis - for example, it would appear the report completely ignores the work involved in detecting and preventing fraud, incl. collaboration with train operating companies as well as more general costs from industry systems.

Fraudsters are quite rightly charged with a contribution to the costs incurred in detecting their actions. Again, as with fee-free refunds, it is not fair to make other customers shoulder any of these costs.

 

[Adam Williams]

The ORR figure of £3.77 per refund already includes these costs.

Okay, let me put it this way: I've not worked with any retailer where charging £3.77 per non-fee-free refund over the last 12 months would conceivably fund the in-house staff tasked with maintaining software involved in processing refunds (let alone the staff manually reviewing refunds, infrastructure costs and e.g. card processing fees too). I don't think £5 would do it either.

Maybe it works for TTL given their volume (but I'd expect their development costs to be higher too) or the fact that they can subsidise refund costs with their booking fees (which presumably aren't subject to the CRA regulations you quote!), and I assume the ORR have averaged the submitted figures together which has had the effect of reducing higher estimates that were submitted, but the figures seem optimistic to me, to say the least, for any sort of smaller scale retailer.

Not to mention the effect this has on new entrants who will have to pay to license or develop these systems from scratch to get to the point where they can just do routine maintenance.

 

[miklcct]

It would save rather a lot of money if the DfT paid for one large contract with one supplier, instead of the 15-odd small contracts (one for each TOC) with 4 different suppliers that are currently in place. It seems that they have finally realised this, based on the recommendation in the Williams Report.

Can you list which 4 are they?

- First Group
- GTR
- CrossCountry
- LNER

Are these the 4 different providers? I believe that Transport for Wales is different from all the above, is it excluded from DfT?

 

[Watershed]

Okay, let me put it this way: I've not worked with any retailer where charging £3.77 per non-fee-free refund over the last 12 months would conceivably fund the in-house staff tasked with maintaining software involved in processing refunds (let alone the staff manually reviewing refunds, infrastructure costs and e.g. card processing fees too). I don't think £5 would do it either.

Maybe it works for TTL given their volume (but I'd expect their development costs to be higher too) or the fact that they can subsidise refund costs with their booking fees (which presumably aren't subject to the CRA regulations you quote!), and I assume the ORR have averaged the submitted figures together which has had the effect of reducing higher estimates that were submitted, but the figures seem optimistic to me, to say the least, for any sort of smaller scale retailer.

Not to mention the effect this has on new entrants who will have to pay to license or develop these systems from scratch to get to the point where they can just do routine maintenance.

I can well imagine that for smaller retailers, their costs per refund will be higher. In which case, it's entirely reasonable and lawful for them to charge higher fees.

What isn't acceptable is when retailers blithely charge £10 even if the real cost to them is closer to £1. Which happens all too often.

The barrier for entry into the retailing market is indeed high, but the same is true of many other markets. Imagine how many tens of billions it would take for someone to come up with a viable competitor to Google Search?

 

[r37]

Trainline customer service is very good, I'm sure they'll refund an unused set purchased in error, but the sooner they are told the better. If they are paper tickets and uncollected even better. But certainly call customer services. You've absolutely nothing to loose, and potentially a refund to gain.
If they do refuse, possible if its after train departure time, then you could try asking the bank to refund the money as you didn't ask for the tickets and were sold without your consent. However, this could be more problematic.

Do you have a phone number or an email address for their customer service? I can't seem to find anything except an online form, although I might just be looking in the wrong place.

 

[Watershed]

Can you list which 4 are they?

- First Group
- GTR
- CrossCountry
- LNER

Are these the 4 different providers? I believe that Transport for Wales is different from all the above, is it excluded from DfT?

I'm referring to the contractors providing the TOCs' online TISs.

The Trainline are probably the biggest provider, holding the contract for:

• ScotRail
• TfW
• West Midlands Trains
• Greater Anglia
• EMR
• CrossCountry
• Northern

ATOS hold the contract for:

• GWR
• SWR
• TPE
• Hull Trains
• Lumo
• RSTL

IBM hold the contract for:

• Avanti
• C2C

Then there are four more providers whose names I'm not entirely sure of, who respectively hold the contracts for GTR and Southeastern; Chiltern and Grand Central; LNER; and Caledonian Sleeper. And then there's National Rail Enquiries, though that's not strictly a TIS.

Now that list includes some TOCs which aren't under DfT control, but clearly there are a multitude of providers and many different contracts in place. Amalgamating it into one large contract would likely save quite a bit of money and that's what the government has said it intends to do under GBR.

 

[Haywain]

Amalgamating it into one large contract would likely save quite a bit of money and that's what the government has said it intends to do under GBR.

That is what's been suggested, but I would caution against holding your breath for it to happen - politicians have a nasty habit of promising things that never happen. In any event, what is clear from posters on this forum is that there is no 'one size fits all' solution.

ATOS hold the contract for:

This is incorrect - the contract is with Worldline, who are now a completely separate company to ATOS.

 

[Hadders]

Moving everything to one contract would be a bad idea, in my view.

It’d stifle innovation and any appetite for development in the future. You’d end up with something clunky.

To demonstrate the point (and I know we don’t like comparisons to other industries) you only need to look at how hard it was to get a telephone line installed under the nationalised GPO. There was only one place you could obtain a phone handset from, a poor range of about 4 handsets, and even then you could only rent one!!!

Be careful what you wish for…