Delay repay error West Midlands Trains....some issues to consider?

[peteb]

I was on a train held outside my destination station for 15 minutes which then arrived at the platform 19 minutes late and departed on its way 21 minutes late.

Cause was a trespasser who had to be coaxed off the tracks on front of our train, which had had to come to an emergency stop 200m short of the platform.

Several police units attended so there must be timed body cam evidence of the incident and the position of the train during it.

A claim for delay repay was duly submitted but a rejection arrived almost instantaneously from WMT. "Train was not delayed for more than 15 minutes".

Bemused at this stance, given that the incident had delayed arrival by 19 minutes I looked on real-time trains. To my surprise the train was shown arriving only 3/4 of a minute late......but departing 21 late.

I'm wondering whether we all went into some sort of time-warp then, but realistically I guess the train might have entered the track section (which included the platform) 3/4 of a minute late, but then it's subsequent stop, wait, crawl to platform taking 19 minutes was not recorded?

In this case it's not about the money, the financial compensation would be very small, but the fact that such a large error surely brings into disrepute WMTs punctuality statistics, performance targets etc. If this sort of thing can happen when there's a full blown police incident with evidence of precise timings etc what about the other delays?

How can the public rely on WMT to deal with compensation fairly when clearly it relies on system data which doesn't actually reflect reality, or at least tells a biased or erroneous version of it.

 

[AlterEgo]

What was the date and time of the journey, and where were you travelling from and for? And, was the destination you were delayed into your final destination by rail, or were you making a connection further afield?

Did you appeal their decision? It sounds like you entered the signal berth at the platform on time, but not actually at the platform. Have you asked them to explain this?

 

[peteb]

0722 train Kidderminster to Whitlock's End 25/03/2025. Incident just short of Tyseley station.

No connections to make. Just 19 late arriving. It's the principle of the thing, being refused delay repay automatically could deter applicants from appealing on the basis that "oh I might have got it wrong".

However in this case with a police incident to verify times etc I thought it only fair to call this one out.

Yes I have submitted an appeal.

I'm not concerned with the financial compensation; more the fact that the "system" used to calculate whether a claim is valid or not seems to be unable to distinguish between an "on time arrival" in the section and the arrival time at the platform, which enables passengers to leave the train.

 

[redreni]

I would appeal submitting any evidence you have, and if you have none, explain clearly what happened and ask them to consult their records if they need to corroborate. You'd expect the station manager to have a record of a major police incident like that.

There's another thread somewhere dealing with the vagaries of how arrival times at stations are recorded. Apparently they're quite often done on the basis of the time the train passes a track circuit on approach, plus a fixed allowance of time based on how long the TOC believes it takes for the train to arrive at the platform once it has passed the track circuit. The wording of the entitlements to compensation under the NRCoT and WMT's Passenger Charter do not, of course, define "delay" as whatever happens to have been recorded on any industry system, although that in practice is the data they use.

A variance of 18 minutes between their data and reality is, I'm quite sure, rare. Once a driver has signal clearance to enter the platform and passes the relevant track circuit, it would obviously be very rare for them to stop before arriving at the platform, but of course a trespasser on the line would be an example of an exceptional circumstance when that is exactly what they would have to do. A variance of a few seconds, which may mean the difference between being one side or the other of a delay threshold, is common, but rather arrogantly, the rail industry pretends this isn't the case and allows no tolerance in the passenger's favour when the timings are very close. If the data says the delay was 14 minutes and 59 seconds, they don't pay even though they know full well their data could very easily be 10 or 20 seconds out either way, unless the passenger can prove the delay was actually 15 minutes or more.

 

[Haywain]

Just submit an appeal stating clearly what had happened. If your original claim was reviewed by a human, which is relatively unlikely, they almost certainly won't have known about that incident.

 

[peteb]

Just submit an appeal stating clearly what had happened. If your original claim was reviewed by a human, which is relatively unlikely, they almost certainly won't have known about that incident.

Yes, I agree

 

[peteb]

I would appeal submitting any evidence you have, and if you have none, explain clearly what happened and ask them to consult their records if they need to corroborate. You'd expect the station manager to have a record of a major police incident like that.

There's another thread somewhere dealing with the vagaries of how arrival times at stations are recorded. Apparently they're quite often done on the basis of the time the train passes a track circuit on approach, plus a fixed allowance of time based on how long the TOC believes it takes for the train to arrive at the platform once it has passed the track circuit. The wording of the entitlements to compensation under the NRCoT and WMT's Passenger Charter do not, of course, define "delay" as whatever happens to have been recorded on any industry system, although that in practice is the data they use.

A variance of 18 minutes between their data and reality is, I'm quite sure, rare. Once a driver has signal clearance to enter the platform and passes the relevant track circuit, it would obviously be very rare for them to stop before arriving at the platform, but of course a trespasser on the line would be an example of an exceptional circumstance when that is exactly what they would have to do. A variance of a few seconds, which may mean the difference between being one side or the other of a delay threshold, is common, but rather arrogantly, the rail industry pretends this isn't the case and allows no tolerance in the passenger's favour when the timings are very close. If the data says the delay was 14 minutes and 59 seconds, they don't pay even though they know full well their data could very easily be 10 or 20 seconds out either way, unless the passenger can prove the delay was actually 15 minutes or more.

Interesting, thanks.