Avanti denying full Delay Repay: we should have taken next service, even though that was scheduled to be overtaken

[MKB]

Avanti seem to have invented a new rule with Delay Repay. You must be psychic!

There were two of us travelling on the return leg of a Super Off-Peak Return ticket from Euston to Coventry on Sunday 18 July.

Intended train:

VT: EUS 20:11 due COV 21:20 - Cancelled​

​

Actual train:

VT: EUS 20:54 due COV 22:26, but departed 21:42 and arrived 23:30​

I claimed for a delay of 130 minutes. This has now been declined three times by Avanti saying they will pay only for a 70-minute delay. Apparently, we should have been sufficiently psychic to know to catch the slow London North Western service that departed at 20:33 and arrived COV at 22:30, even though this was due to be overtaken by the 20:54. (My recollection is that there were general WCML delays, but nothing to indicate it wasn't affecting LM as well. In fact, in my experience, when there are problems, LM often gets deprioritised in favour of VT. We certainly didn't want to be on an LM service that gets cancelled mid-route, as has happened to us many times before.)

We had no desire to be delayed any longer than necessary, and, as a passenger claiming Delay Repay, my duty is to show that I took all reasonable steps to minimise my delay. To me, that means taking the train that you expect to arrive at your destination earliest, which is not necessarily the train that leaves your origin first. Had these trains run on time and had we taken the first (LM) train, which would have been overtaken, I am sure Avanti would have rejected the length of delay of that slow train, saying, rightly, we should have waited for the fast VT service that overtook it.

This has been appealed and rejected twice now. This is all I have been able to get out of Avanti by way of explanation:

After reviewing your delay repay claim, I can see the decision was based on you travelling on the next available service, this departed for Birmingham New Street from London Euston at 20:33 and arrived into Coventry at 22:30.

As your ticket was valid for any permitted service, we cannot increase the compensation as you waited for another service. We can only compensate for you travelling on the next available service.

What's the next step? Is it to ask if this is their final answer and to escalate to the Railway Ombudsman? It's a hell of a lot of effort for £25.05 we are still due, but I don't think I should let them get away with this.

 

[Watershed]

Avanti seem to have invented a new rule with Delay Repay. You must be psychic!

There were two of us travelling on the return leg of a Super Off-Peak Return ticket from Euston to Coventry on Sunday 18 July.

Intended train:

VT: EUS 20:11 due COV 21:20 - Cancelled​

​

Actual train:

VT: EUS 20:54 due COV 22:26, but departed 21:42 and arrived 23:30​

I claimed for a delay of 130 minutes. This has now been declined three times by Avanti saying they will pay only for a 70-minute delay. Apparently, we should have been sufficiently psychic to know to catch the slow London North Western service that departed at 20:33 and arrived COV at 22:30, even though this was due to be overtaken by the 20:54. (My recollection is that there were general WCML delays, but nothing to indicate it wasn't affecting LM as well. In fact, in my experience, when there are problems, LM often gets deprioritised in favour of VT. We certainly didn't want to be on an LM service that gets cancelled mid-route, as has happened to us many times before.)

We had no desire to be delayed any longer than necessary, and, as a passenger claiming Delay Repay, my duty is to show that I took all reasonable steps to minimise my delay. To me, that means taking the train that you expect to arrive at your destination earliest, which is not necessarily the train that leaves your origin first. Had these trains run on time and had we taken the first (LM) train, which would have been overtaken, I am sure Avanti would have rejected the length of delay of that slow train, saying, rightly, we should have waited for the fast VT service that overtook it.

This has been appealed and rejected twice now. This is all I have been able to get out of Avanti by way of explanation:



What's the next step? Is it to ask if this is their final answer and to escalate to the Railway Ombudsman? It's a hell of a lot of effort for £25.05 we are still due, but I don't think I should let them get away with this.

The Rail Ombudsman might be a worthwhile port of call, albeit I've not heard very many success stories from going to them. They seem to have very little knowledge and often just take what TOCs say at face value.

You need to raise a complaint and get a deadlock letter (or wait 8 weeks) before you can take it to the Ombudsman.

The next (or alternative) option is to take Avanti to court, but I appreciate that might not be a very attractive option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Was the severe delay to the 2054 not shown on the screens at Euston by 2033? If it was going to leave Euston nearly an hour late it's clear that the overtake wouldn't have happened, though I know Euston don't always put delays up on the screens or hides them in the notes.

 

[MKB]

Was the severe delay to the 2054 not shown on the screens at Euston by 2033? If it was going to leave Euston nearly an hour late it's clear that the overtake wouldn't have happened, though I know Euston don't always put delays up on the screens or hides them in the notes.

There were general delays being reported -- I forget now what they were saying was the cause -- but, at 20:33, we didn't know how that would affect the 20:54, only that it hadn't yet been platformed, and we couldn't work out from the inbound Pendos, which train set they were likely to use. There were options available, but they obviously assigned them to other departures.

 

[robbeech]

It would be very unfair and petty to expect someone to guess that the train that is timetabled to arrive first won’t arrive first during general disruption. This is why you’ve had this issue because they’re very unfair and petty.
You’re dammed in you do and dammed if you don’t of course, had you caught that train and it had been overtaken as normal then they’d have argued the toss the other way.
I suggest escalating to the ombudsman and outlining the issue clearly and concisely although there’s no telling whether you’ll get someone with any knowledge of the railway or not.

 

[MKB]

After the initial Delay Repay claim, three rejected appeals and referral to The Rail Ombudsman (TRO), Avanti have offered in full and final settlement to simply pay the Delay Repay that was originally due. I am being asked by TRO if I will accept that or if I still wish it to be considered by the ombudsman.

I had asked in my original submission to TRO for additional compensation from Avanti for the time I have wasted on this which should not have been necessary. Avanti have ignored that. My view is that if the outcome is that Avanti only have to pay that which was originally due, there is never any incentive for them to pay any Delay Repay; they may as well just wait to see if it is challenged. (And my experience is that they are taking that path regularly: lots of my claims have to go to appeal.)

I am minded to reject the offer, but I suspect the ombudsman has no power to award anything other than the Delay Repay originally due, and it's a fools errand. Anyone know whether that is indeed the case?

 

[Wolfie]

I suggest that you get your MP and/or the media involved and make Avanti's life unpleasant. If they make you jump through hoops solely to get what you were entitled to from the start they deserve to pay a price whether that be reputational or in management time. Yes, when it comes to companies like that l can indeed be that vindictive and petty. Play them at their own game.... There is every chance that they will offer something for you to go away....

 

[MKB]

I am just about to submit another Delay Repay claim to Avanti. This was for a Coventy-to-Euston journey two weeks ago that ran 31 minutes late (and showing as such in RealTimeTrains) on an Advance ticket bought directly from Avanti, where I am signed up for automatic Delay Repay.

There is no reason this wasn't paid automatically, but Avanti are, as usual, making me jump through additional hoops...

 

[gray1404]

After the initial Delay Repay claim, three rejected appeals and referral to The Rail Ombudsman (TRO), Avanti have offered in full and final settlement to simply pay the Delay Repay that was originally due. I am being asked by TRO if I will accept that or if I still wish it to be considered by the ombudsman.

Out of interest does the Avanti delay repay portal allow you to appeal a decision more then once? I note this one was appealed 3 times. I have a current AWC appeal pending and I'm wondering if I can appeal a second time if they still don't get it right. The likes of LNW only allow you to appeal once.

 

[MKB]

For my second/third appeals, I contacted them via [email protected]

 

[gray1404]

So following first delay repay claim you did one appeal using the online system. Therefore it was, in essence, a complaint to customer service via the above e-mail. Thanks. That's exactly how it works with LNW. Once appeal following error or rejection. Anything thereafter you have to contact Customer Service complaining asking them to look at it again.

 

[island]

After the initial Delay Repay claim, three rejected appeals and referral to The Rail Ombudsman (TRO), Avanti have offered in full and final settlement to simply pay the Delay Repay that was originally due. I am being asked by TRO if I will accept that or if I still wish it to be considered by the ombudsman.

I had asked in my original submission to TRO for additional compensation from Avanti for the time I have wasted on this which should not have been necessary. Avanti have ignored that. My view is that if the outcome is that Avanti only have to pay that which was originally due, there is never any incentive for them to pay any Delay Repay; they may as well just wait to see if it is challenged. (And my experience is that they are taking that path regularly: lots of my claims have to go to appeal.)

I am minded to reject the offer, but I suspect the ombudsman has no power to award anything other than the Delay Repay originally due, and it's a fools errand. Anyone know whether that is indeed the case?

I don’t think you will wind up with anything more, best to accept it and hope the ombudsman gets some teeth in the future.

 

[Blinkbonny]

Presumably there is some cost to Avanti for the Ombudsman looking at a case?

It may not be at financial ombudsman levels but surely something?

 

[gordonthemoron]

Beware of another Avanti trick, I had a Standard Premier ticket from Manchester to Milton Keynes, after I'd booked they changed the arrival time due to being diverted via Crewe and then having to wait at Stafford for connecting passengers from Stoke, it was then delayed between Rugby and Milton Keynes. So rather than pay me for the 30+ minute delay on the original booking, they only paid out for the delay between Rugby and Milton Keynes (15 mins) despite me sending the booking email with the trai times on it

 

[mad_rich]

Common sense says to do exactly what you did, and take the train due to arrive soonest. I know I would!

But if the advice is to take the next available train, I can see why they are sticking to that. It’s a quirk and you’ve lost out this time, but it might work out in your favour next time.

 

[MotCO]

Has anyone had the reverse done to them by Avanti? i.e., you took the next available train which arrived later than a later, faster train, and Avanti only allowed delay repay on the later train.

 

[gray1404]

It is definitely worth standing your ground with Avanti. It is worth remembering that delay-repay is based on what actually happens rather than what could have happened.

 

[AlterEgo]

My personal advice is "never let a good train go" and I'd have been on the LNWR train, but denying Delay Repay under these circumstances is harsh at best.

The Ombudsman is completely useless, as we all know, and I am very wary of advising people to take their complaints to it because of the risk of them setting precedents which are unhelpful.

 

[MKB]

UPDATE:

As I said above, Avanti offered to pay the amount that was originally due under Delay Repay (DR), and I was minded to reject that, as I didn't think it right that Avanti can continue to reject most of my DR claims, and then only settle up after I have had to battle through multiple appeals. I told the Ombudsman's office I wanted additional compensation, primarily to active as a punitive measure on Avanti, and I rejected the offer.

Before it got to the Ombudsman his/herself, a very helpful lady there liaised with Avanti and I accepted the following revised offer:

- Payment of the outstanding DR
- 50% off four future Advance tickets
- A recommendation (that carries some weight I am told, but no timescales promised) that Avanti improve DR procedures to allow supporting information and multiple ticket numbers to be submitted with an initial DR claim

I was happy with that. Except, today, another Avanti DR claim, a very straightforward one, has again been denied. We were travelling from Liverpool to Nuneaton, their train was delayed so we missed our connection (at Stafford), resulting in a 70-minute delay. Avanti say the delay was less than 15 minutes.

I no longer believe this is incompetence, as the ineptitude required is staggering. It's happening on every other claim. It has to be deliberate policy.

 

[robbeech]

I no longer believe this is incompetence, as the ineptitude required is staggering. It's happening on every other claim. It has to be deliberate policy.

Yours will be one of many incorrect rejections today and you might be the only one that bothers to take it further. As nobody is bothered about bringing them to account (sorry the promise made will have been an outright lie) there is no incentive to change. Their actions need to be made very public and more people need to be encouraged to stop them getting away with it.

 

[Haywain]

As nobody is bothered about bringing them to account

The ORR seem to be taking an interest in such matters - I've just posted in a new thread here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/orr-acts-on-delay-repay.226239/

 

[robbeech]

The ORR seem to be taking an interest in such matters - I've just posted in a new thread here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/orr-acts-on-delay-repay.226239/

Spotted this. Let’s hope this has some positive results. It seems to be focussed on making it easier to claim in the first place and potentially appeal rather than what to do when they play dirty but hopefully it will be a catch all thing.

 

[Haywain]

Let’s hope this has some positive results. It seems to be focussed on making it easier to claim in the first place and potentially appeal rather than what to do when they play dirty but hopefully it will be a catch all thing.

Absolutely agreed. Whilst I feel you often paint this element of the industry darker than is really the case, it is inefficient and the process does need to be simpler and more user friendly.

 

[Deafdoggie]

I think there ought to be a "name & shame" approach, with league tables of TOCs who reject the most claims and the TOCs who accept the most after an appeal (or 2, or 3, or 4...) with a penalty for being at the top of both!!

 

[robbeech]

I think there ought to be a "name & shame" approach, with league tables of TOCs who reject the most claims and the TOCs who accept the most after an appeal (or 2, or 3, or 4...) with a penalty for being at the top of both!!

At least some of this data is available although in itself it might not be that much use.

What REALLY needs to happen is a series of examples of appalling behaviour from operators needs collating, putting into a document and that document doing the rounds with the so called regulators but also being pushed to media and general public to show the railway as a whole up for what it is when it comes to this.