Are SW trains allowed to not offer delay repay?

[ic250]

After a journey to Clapham Junction was delayed the other day, I went to the ticket office to ask for a delay repay form, as my journey was delayed by approximately 40 minutes. I was told that 'South-west trains don't do delay repay', and therefore there was no form.

Is this even allowed? It seems incredulous that the operator gets reimbursed by Network Rail for delays, but that this money is not passed on to the fare-paying public. I would have thought that the conditions of them operating the franchise would ensure that they have to refund travellers. All other operators I have travelled on have refunded me if my journey is delayed by more than half an hour.

Has anyone else experienced this problem with them? Can I complain to the fare watchdog about it?

 

[bussnapperwm]

They work on the old passenger charter system

 

[yorkie]

You may be interested to read our

RailUK Fares & Ticketing Guide which covers various matters, including this one. As you can see from 9.8 Compensation: Delay Repay Schemes, South West Trains are not a participant of the scheme as the DfT have not (yet) required them to be.

SWT are bound by the NRCoC but can, of course, be more generous than this. Their usual compensation policy is only to offer compensation in the event of delays of an hour or more (30 minutes on their Island Line trains), and even then only if it was within the control of the railway industry, but you could write to them with details of your complaint and they might apply discretion.

 

[91103eastcoast]

IIRC on SWT you have to be delayed for an hour or more before any compensation is due.

 

[PermitToTravel]

IIRC Correctly on SWT you have to be delayed for an hour or more before any compensation is due.

If you recall correctly correctly?

 

[Wild Swan]

It seems incredulous that the operator gets reimbursed by Network Rail for delays, but that this money is not passed on to the fare-paying public.

There is no connection between a train operator's arrangements to compensate passengers (whether it be Delay-Repay or Passengers' Charter) and the Performance Regime between train operator and Network Rail, known as Schedule 8. Schedule 8 works to a complex formula which, in the event of poor levels of performance by Network Rail, is designed to compensate a train operator for the damage to its business and consequent loss of revenue. It isn't designed to fund an operator's compensation payments to passengers - this is an artificial connection invented by the media keen to find any opportunity to bash the TOCs on the head.

 

[ic250]

There is no connection between a train operator's arrangements to compensate passengers (whether it be Delay-Repay or Passengers' Charter) and the Performance Regime between train operator and Network Rail, known as Schedule 8. Schedule 8 works to a complex formula which, in the event of poor levels of performance by Network Rail, is designed to compensate a train operator for the damage to its business and consequent loss of revenue. It isn't designed to fund an operator's compensation payments to passengers - this is an artificial connection invented by the media keen to find any opportunity to bash the TOCs on the head.

Surely the only source of revenue they lose is that of having to refund passengers who a) decide not to travel because of the delay, or b) are delayed and then have to be compensated as a result.

This comes from the mistaken belief that travel by train is a choice. To commute to work every day I don't have the luxury of choosing not to travel by train - it is the only way I can reasonably get there on time from where I live. If I drove, I would spend hours stuck in traffic, and it is too far to walk/cycle. I could move, but it would cost me significantly more in rent which I cannot afford. I have to take the train, so a train company refusing to not compensate me for its own incompetence (or not passing on compensation it receives itself) is abuse of its market power position as the only method of transporting me from my home to my workplace. This is also the reason why Virgin are cancelling East Coast rewards - there is no incentive for them to reward frequent travellers, as its loyal customers have no-other choice than to use the service. This is the utter folly of a privatised monopoly that is our rail system.

Given that it is a privatised monopoly, it is up to the regulator to ensure that passengers get a fair deal. It is not a fair deal that my 30 minute delay in one part of the country is not compensated, but it is elsewhere - this is a postcode lottery. There should be a minimum standard of service and compensation enforced by the regulator, which in the case of south west trains does not seem to apply.

This is yet another example of passengers being ripped off, but having no choice to put up with it because where they live or work. Would the government prefer it if I stayed at home and claimed benefits?

 

[infobleep]

I was told by a member of South West Trains Twitter team that since forming an alliance with Network Rail, no compensation is paid between either company for delays. Clearly different arrangements would be in place with a Southern service delayed a South West Trains one and visa versa.

Personally I think that's the right course of action as I want to see the railways putting their efforts into modernising it and not being diverted by who caused which delay and who owes what. That process costs money I believe. It's cheaper to do without it as South West Trains and Network Rail have done. Again I was told that.

 

[Hadders]

This comes from the mistaken belief that travel by train is a choice. To commute to work every day I don't have the luxury of choosing not to travel by train - it is the only way I can reasonably get there on time from where I live. If I drove, I would spend hours stuck in traffic, and it is too far to walk/cycle. I could move, but it would cost me significantly more in rent which I cannot afford. I have to take the train, so a train company refusing to not compensate me for its own incompetence (or not passing on compensation it receives itself) is abuse of its market power position as the only method of transporting me from my home to my workplace. This is also the reason why Virgin are cancelling East Coast rewards - there is no incentive for them to reward frequent travellers, as its loyal customers have no-other choice than to use the service. This is the utter folly of a privatised monopoly that is our rail system.

You accept that if you drove you would get stuck in traffic (presumably due to the numbers of people trying to travel at the same time). Have you ever thought that the railway might just suffer from the same problem? Why are you less tolerant of delays on the railway compared to the roads?

Do you get compensated by the highways authorities when there are delays on the roads?

East Coast is a small operator in the grand scheme of things so it made sense for them to try and poach custom from some of the larger train operating groups (eg. First, Govia, Stagecoach), hence the generous rewards scheme. Virgin (aka Stagecoach as they own 90% of the new East Coast operator) already have a large share of the ticket retailing market due to their ownership of SWT, EMT and Virgin so there is no longer the same need for them to grow their ticket retailing operation in quite the same way.

I'm neutral over whether or not the railways are better in privatised hands but let's not go all 'gooey-eyed' for British Rail, they were far from perfect. With BR you got absolutely zilch when a train was delayed, whatever the reason.

 

[LLivery]

Is this even allowed? It seems incredulous that the operator gets reimbursed by Network Rail for delays, but that this money is not passed on to the fare-paying public. I would have thought that the conditions of them operating the franchise would ensure that they have to refund travellers. All other operators I have travelled on have refunded me if my journey is delayed by more than half an hour.

Of course it is allowed, SWT has operated the franchise before Delay Repay existed. Repay was introduced not that long ago to parts of the network, TfL have only just started it. I wasn't aware SWT didn't do it, now knowing this I'm not surprised that their passengers feel value for money is poor. Really it feels wrong not offering delay repay after screwing up big time - apologies don't make up for missing an appointment, interview, showing etc.

I do agree the alliance way is the way forward and I'm glad that GTR is becoming the next alliance with Network Rail.

Out of interest what other operators don't offer Delay Repay yet?

 

[Flamingo]

There is no connection between a train operator's arrangements to compensate passengers (whether it be Delay-Repay or Passengers' Charter) and the Performance Regime between train operator and Network Rail, known as Schedule 8. Schedule 8 works to a complex formula which, in the event of poor levels of performance by Network Rail, is designed to compensate a train operator for the damage to its business and consequent loss of revenue. It isn't designed to fund an operator's compensation payments to passengers - this is an artificial connection invented by the media keen to find any opportunity to bash the TOCs on the head.

Nicely put.

 

[Mojo]

This comes from the mistaken belief that travel by train is a choice. To commute to work every day I don't have the luxury of choosing not to travel by train - it is the only way I can reasonably get there on time from where I live. If I drove, I would spend hours stuck in traffic, and it is too far to walk/cycle. I could move, but it would cost me significantly more in rent which I cannot afford.

There must be some degree of influence. In choosing where to live I wanted to make sure that my journey to work was on the Underground as I do not feel confident in using Network Rail services due to the possibility of delays, and the time taken to deal with incidents.

Given that it is a privatised monopoly, it is up to the regulator to ensure that passengers get a fair deal. It is not a fair deal that my 30 minute delay in one part of the country is not compensated, but it is elsewhere - this is a postcode lottery. There should be a minimum standard of service and compensation enforced by the regulator, which in the case of south west trains does not seem to apply.

This is yet another example of passengers being ripped off, but having no choice to put up with it because where they live or work. Would the government prefer it if I stayed at home and claimed benefits?

Your outrage and sense of injustice is misplaced. Delay Repay is a fairly new (in comparison) scheme which the Department for Transport requires new franchisees to implement when they take over a franchise. The South West Trains franchise was originally awarded back in 2007, before the requirement for Delay Repay was introduced.[1] New franchises do have this requirement.

[1]Southeastern introduced Delay Repay mid-franchise following some controversy over statistics used to calculate season ticket discounts/void days during disruption a few years ago.

 

[user15681]

Pretty sure I've heard SWT have asked the DfT if they can move to the common Delay Repay scheme (30 minute threshold, cause irrelevant). Theoretically possible. Realistically? I don't know.

 

[Bertie the bus]

You accept that if you drove you would get stuck in traffic (presumably due to the numbers of people trying to travel at the same time). Have you ever thought that the railway might just suffer from the same problem? Why are you less tolerant of delays on the railway compared to the roads?

Do you get compensated by the highways authorities when there are delays on the roads?

Here we go again with the predictable and irrelevant comparison with driving.

When driving you do not enter into a contract and therefore it would be ridiculous to expect compensation for delays. When travelling by train you do enter into a contract, in fact a very one sided and restrictive contract, therefore if the TOC doesn't provide the service you paid for people are perfectly entitled to expect a partial refund.

 

[Mojo]

I'm neutral over whether or not the railways are better in privatised hands but let's not go all 'gooey-eyed' for British Rail, they were far from perfect. With BR you got absolutely zilch when a train was delayed, whatever the reason.

I'm not so sure about this, I am sure BR introduced the passenger charter in the early 1990s, possibly 93.

This extract from Hansard (Feb 1993) certainly says that compensation was available: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1993/feb/15/compensation, and there is an article in the Independent from 1994 which relates to void days for season ticket holders travelling into Paddington.

 

[cjohnson]

Pretty sure I've heard SWT have asked the DfT if they can move to the common Delay Repay scheme (30 minute threshold, cause irrelevant). Theoretically possible. Realistically? I don't know.

Indeed... their latest "Tweet the Manager" session late January saw a change of heart.

Previously any moans regarding Delay Repay were met with "We do not offer delay repay as it is not part of our current franchise commitment."

As of January SWT now say "We are overall reviewing how we compensate you for disruption. How this looks at the moment I cannot comment."

 

[Flamingo]

Here we go again with the predictable and irrelevant comparison with driving.

When driving you do not enter into a contract and therefore it would be ridiculous to expect compensation for delays. When travelling by train you do enter into a contract, in fact a very one sided and restrictive contract, therefore if the TOC doesn't provide the service you paid for people are perfectly entitled to expect a partial refund.

Ok, if you book a taxi and it gets stuck in traffic, do you expect the taxi firm to give you compensation?

 

[PermitToTravel]

Only if they have undertaken to compensate for delays as part of the contract for the journey

 

[iharding]

Indeed... their latest "Tweet the Manager" session late January saw a change of heart.

Previously any moans regarding Delay Repay were met with "We do not offer delay repay as it is not part of our current franchise commitment."

As of January SWT now say "We are overall reviewing how we compensate you for disruption. How this looks at the moment I cannot comment."

Possibly connected with the fact the punctuality figures are very close to the season ticket discount threshold for the first time in years.

 

[talldave]

As of January SWT now say "We are overall reviewing how we compensate you for disruption. How this looks at the moment I cannot comment."

I think they need English lessons too.

 

[wibble]

There was a letter in last week's Metro from SWT's Customer Service Director saying that they were working to introduce Delay Repay as part of their Direct Award...

 

[swt_passenger]

There was a letter in last week's Metro from SWT's Customer Service Director saying that they were working to introduce Delay Repay as part of their Direct Award...

Presumably only because DfT have told them to do so, as in every other franchise specified since about 2008, whatever public spin SWT put on it.

For the original poster's benefit, as far asI can recall SWT (in 2007) was simply the last franchise change before Delay Repay was 'invented' by DfT and then mandated for all subsequent franchise changes.

When DfT issued an announcement about the new compensation method I'm sure it was mentioned that it would be rolled out at every future franchise, and if all franchises were the exact same length it was therefore implicit that SWT would be the last to change.

 

[hassaanhc]

There was a letter in last week's Metro from SWT's Customer Service Director saying that they were working to introduce Delay Repay as part of their Direct Award...

Here you go

 

[Flamingo]

Here you go

Both letters are worth a read...

 

[tsr]

Both letters are worth a read...

Yes, a couple of very good letters there!

 

[Wolfie]

I'm neutral over whether or not the railways are better in privatised hands but let's not go all 'gooey-eyed' for British Rail, they were far from perfect. With BR you got absolutely zilch when a train was delayed, whatever the reason.

I'm not so sure about this, I am sure BR introduced the passenger charter in the early 1990s, possibly 93.

This extract from Hansard (Feb 1993) certainly says that compensation was available: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1993/feb/15/compensation, and there is an article in the Independent from 1994 which relates to void days for season ticket holders travelling into Paddington.

Mojo is absolutely correct. The Passenger's Charter was a Major Government pre-privatisation initiative dating from the early 1990s... See link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/22/newsid_2516000/2516139.stm

 

[Bertie the bus]

Ok, if you book a taxi and it gets stuck in traffic, do you expect the taxi firm to give you compensation?

You have a very peculiar taxi service in your area if they produce timetables or you drive the taxi yourself. Otherwise what relevance does this comment have to driving v taking the train?

 

[infobleep]

Possibly connected with the fact the punctuality figures are very close to the season ticket discount threshold for the first time in years.

If the breech the threshold, surely all they need to do is pay out accordingly and carry on with the status quo of void days as is. It's only 4 years until the franchise is relet anyway. They could change it all then.

I personally want South West Trains to get re-awarded the franchise because overall I like the work they are doing. Yes u wish certain things could be changed and it's annoying when connections are missed due to delays but they do try.

A lot of problems seem to be infrastructure related and during disruptions South West Trains seem to do a better job at managing the situation then Southern. They also seem to suffer from less delays then Southern.

Saying that I can see how it would get annoying for people if every day they travel, their train is always late.

This morning I was on the 8.29 Clapham Junction to Woking service. The most likely departure time for this train over the last hundred days is 8.33, which is the time it left was this morning.

South West Trains are lengthening their trains and improving the infrastructure with Network Rail. They claim this will in the future help improve reliability and reduce delays due to passengers boarding. If after all the infrastructure works and train lengthening, that train continues to be 4 minutes late then I think people would have a case to say, you've done all this improvement work, why is this train still late? I'm using this train just as an example. Same would apply to any train or group of trains.

I do think things will get easier if and once Cross Rail 2 is built.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Here you go

Sounds like South West Trains don't have to introduce delay repay if they don't want to. I take it when their existing franchise terms were extended the DfT didn't ask them to introduce it as part of the extension.

I wonder how a roadworks compensation scheme would work. I know councils are within their rights to fine companies when roadworks overrun. Even if they get the location site of the works wrong by less than 1m, they can be fined for not supply the right location. It's done to encourage companies to do works in good time and supply the right information, so that if sites need to be revisited later on, others know where the location of pipes and other infrastructure is.

 

[swt_passenger]

If the breech the threshold, surely all they need to do is pay out accordingly and carry on with the status quo of void days as is. It's only 4 years until the franchise is relet anyway. They could change it all then.

Not so, the upcoming 'direct award' in 2016 will be a new franchise to run for just over two years, not an 'extension', even though Stagecoach is the only possible franchisee.

Same thing is currently happening with a number of franchises, e.g. GW (2nd direct award), TPE, then MML later this year.

New franchises, new rules.

The terms extension and direct award are not the same.

 

[Clip]

You have a very peculiar taxi service in your area if they produce timetables or you drive the taxi yourself. Otherwise what relevance does this comment have to driving v taking the train?

Ok then - do bus companies compensate you when you've been sat in traffic and they don't arrive where they are meant to?