Delay repay on a split ticket

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed with all the above, except (perhaps) missed connections on split advances. The desire to get all the cost benefits of split ticketing and still retain all the entitlements of a through journey is having one’s cake and eating it.

I wouldn't mind if Advances were available for every journey, but often they are not, and the only sensible course of action is to buy a walk-up to the main station and an Advance from there. Indeed, a lot of people don't realise you *can* buy a through ticket from, say, a Merseyrail station to London.

Splitting the local journey from the journey from the big city is such normal practice that I can see no case for stranding people. This isn't "saving money", this is the fares system not, in some cases, being set up properly.

 

[island]

Yeah, that’s fair, and that’s why I put (perhaps) – I’m not wedded to the idea.

 

[bb21]

The most likely outcome in my view of a campaign is for Delay Repay's wording to be changed to refer to the ticketed journey on one ticket, a bit like the way fares anomalies posted here always get "fixed".

FWIW my personal take is that the railway shouldn't strand people just because they chose to split tickets, nor should it insist on an Advance being repurchased if missed because of a connecting split-ticketed train (note however that airlines will do both of these things). However I can equally see why Delay Repay perhaps should be paid based on delays to the journey on one ticket.

The only sensible way for the wording to improve is to follow SWR's lead.

https://www.southwesternrailway.com/other/about-us/passengers-charter

If you have a combination of tickets for your journey, we will compensate you for your whole journey

If you start debating which proportion of a split-ticketed journey a company should be liable for you start opening various cans of worms.

What would be useful is however for "journey" to be more clearly defined. Some recent threads illustrated well how in some cases this can be open to interpretation, but in the majority of cases there should be no doubt.

 

[yorkie]

Exactly! If I hold a ticket from London to South Gyle and I get delayed then it's entirely reasonable for Delay Repay to be based on the price of that ticket. Where have chosen to split my journey at Waverley, it's entirely reasonable that the VTEC should pay compensation for the the entire journey if I'm late arriving to Waverley causing me to miss my train to South Gyle. What is questionably unreasonable to expect Scotrail to pay out for the entire London to South Gyle journey because their train from Waverley is delayed - they might have to pay out a couple hundred pounds on a £2.60 fare.

If your journey is from London to South Gyle you are entitled to Delay Repay if your journey is delayed by 30 or more minutes. The company whose train was delayed is the company that pays out.

Whether or not the journey is on one ticket, or more than one ticket, is irrelevant to the principle.

The only sensible way for the wording to improve is to follow SWR's lead.....

Agreed. GWR also do this. Other train companies should ensure their wording is up to scratch so that there is no room for misinterpretation (as some people have done on this thread).

 

[najaB]

If you start debating which proportion of a split-ticketed journey a company should be liable for you start opening various cans of worms.

If they have that wording then it is unquestionably clear.

Whether or not the journey is on one ticket, or more than one ticket, is irrelevant to the principle.

Yet, in a recent case where one ticket had different thresholds you were quite vociferous that that segment should be treated in isolation. Cake: eaten and had.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

No.

It is not true that using a combination of fares for one journey is always cheaper than buying one fare. It is also not true that purchasing a cheaper fare (how would you even define that) means you get a lower proportion of the original fare back in the event of delays.

There are many reasons why a passenger may use a combination of fares (e.g. Season ticket holder extending their journey).

Passengers are entitled to Delay Repay compensation based on their journey.

Oh no, I'm not disagreeing. The opposite - I don't see why people with multiple tickets should lose the right to compensation completely. But I think the fact that they are paying less in the first place is balanced out by the fact that any delays will also result in them receiving less compensation, by nature of the percentage-based compensation, rather than a fixed amount like EC261 flight delay compensation.

I was just disagreeing with island, who said:

The desire to get all the cost benefits of split ticketing and still retain all the entitlements of a through journey is having one’s cake and eating it.

... by pointing out that you don't really have your cake and eat it, as you won't get as much compensation for delays (in terms of the actual amount) with a cheaper ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

Agreed with all the above, except (perhaps) missed connections on split advances. The desire to get all the cost benefits of split ticketing and still retain all the entitlements of a through journey is having one’s cake and eating it.

Sometimes however the railway’s pricing system does encourage split ticketing. For example, being unable to secure a Woking to Newcastle Advance, but a London to Newcastle Advance for the same booked train is on sale. This would encourage a lot of people to buy separate tickets. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to accommodate those people.

EDIT: hadn’t seen @Bletchleyite had made basically the same point upthread.

 

[yorkie]

Oh no, I'm not disagreeing. The opposite - I don't see why people with multiple tickets should lose the right to compensation completely. But I think the fact that they are paying less in the first place is balanced out by the fact that any delays will also result in them receiving less compensation, by nature of the percentage-based compensation, rather than a fixed amount like EC261 flight delay compensation.

Yes it is true that people who buy cheaper fares are compensated less because it's based on the amount paid. So using NajaB's South Gyle example, Scotrail need to pay less money to the holder of a London to South Gyle SSR than they would have to pay the holder of a London to Stevenage Season ticket plus a Stevenage to South Gyle SOR. That is nothing to do with "split ticketing" and is purely because the first person paid less than the second.

There is no need to say that anyone who paid less should somehow have part of their journey excluded from the calculations. This is wrong; Delay Repay is based on the journey and a customer may use two or more tickets for their journey.

People can disagree with me all they like but what I have posted here is correct.

... by pointing out that you don't really have your cake and eat it, as you won't get as much compensation for delays (in terms of the actual amount) with a cheaper ticket.

Sometimes however the railway’s pricing system does encourage split ticketing. For example, being unable to secure a Woking to Newcastle Advance, but a London to Newcastle Advance for the same booked train is on sale. This would encourage a lot of people to buy separate tickets. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to accommodate those people.

EDIT: hadn’t seen @Bletchleyite had made basically the same point upthread.

Exactly.

Train companies often will encourage people to purchase a combination of fares, such as when there is either no through fare, or when they are advertising Advance fares and there is no through Advance fare, which is not uncommon for for journeys involving multiple train companies.

There is no loss of rights when customers do this, whether or not it is through necessity or the train company's suggestion or the passenger's own idea/research or the suggestion of an accredited third party retailer.

 

[robbeech]

When there are point to point journeys on the network where no through ticket is available a toc cannot possibly argue* that they will not pay out in full on split tickets.

*of course they will and do but this is not following the rules.

 

[yorkie]

Agreed with all the above, except (perhaps) missed connections on split advances. The desire to get all the cost benefits of split ticketing and still retain all the entitlements of a through journey is having one’s cake and eating it.

Complying with the Conditions of Travel is not having one's cake and eating it.

Exactly! If I hold a ticket from London to South Gyle and I get delayed then it's entirely reasonable for Delay Repay to be based on the price of that ticket. Where have chosen to split my journey at Waverley, it's entirely reasonable that the VTEC should pay compensation for the the entire journey if I'm late arriving to Waverley causing me to miss my train to South Gyle. What is questionably unreasonable to expect Scotrail to pay out for the entire London to South Gyle journey because their train from Waverley is delayed - they might have to pay out a couple hundred pounds on a £2.60 fare.

Delay Repay is based on the journey.

If your journey is London to South Gyle and Scotrail cause you to be 30+ minutes late into South Gyle, then Scotrail are liable for compensating the passenger for their journey from London to South Gyle. Yes, that even applies if the customer has an Anytime Return costing £311 with only the last few miles on Scotrail. You can say it's unfair or unreasonable all you want (it's irrelevant) but those are the facts.

 

[najaB]

You can say it's unfair or unreasonable all you want (it's irrelevant) but those are the facts.

Seeing as there is no definition of 'journey' you can't really say that those are the facts.

 

[yorkie]

Fact: NRCoT states "...you may use a combination of two or more Tickets to make a journey..."

The arguments over what does or doesn't constitute a journey are utterly irrelevant to this thread.

Whatever a journey is, it may be made on a combination of two or more tickets.

Using a combination of two or more tickets does not, in itself, mean that a journey becomes two or more journeys.

It really is that simple.

 

[najaB]

Fact: NRCoT states "...you may use a combination of two or more Tickets to make a journey..."

Fact: All cows have four legs*.

That doesn't make all four-legged animals cows.

*Ignoring genetic mutations, accidents, etc.

 

[yorkie]

Irrelevant.

Using a combination of tickets does not in any way redefine the journey.

The OP's journey was Darlington to London. You can argue about how to define a journey all day if you want but the fact that the journey was Darlington to London is not in any way in doubt by the use of two or more tickets to make that journey.

 

[AlterEgo]

Irrelevant.

Using a combination of tickets does not in any way redefine the journey.

The OP's journey was Darlington to London. You can argue about how to define a journey all day if you want but the fact that the journey was Darlington to London is not in any way in doubt by the use of two or more tickets to make that journey.

This really isn’t as clear cut as you might like to think.

The NRCoT says that you may use more than one ticket to make a journey, but it doesn’t mean that every time you use more than one ticket this is also always just the one journey.

The NRCoT also says under your rights to compensation that if your journey is delayed or cancelled you must submit “a ticket”. Note that also the NRCoT also provides for basic compensation for delays above an hour only and is not related to Delay Repay.

A Passenger Charter which outlines Delay Repay is a totally different document to the NRCoT and any definitions within the NRCoT may not necessarily be carried over (remember one is written by the RDG and the TOC is bound to it as a third party, and one is written by the TOC itself). Do any passenger charter documents define what a journey is or explain the number of tickets you may or may not claim for?

While I agree that the OP should be compensated for both tickets in this case this is out of a sense of moral duty, and not based on anything I can see written down anywhere.

 

[doctor123]

Have finally received a fairly incoherent reply from Virgin east Coast which advises that they are only refunding me for the one half of my journey (see the bits I have underlined and highlighted in the extract from their letter).

I bought split tickets from Darlington to Peterborough for (£38.50) which was about 25 minutes late getting into Peterborough and from Peterborough to London (£49.50) which was according to them 48 minutes late (though in reality I'm sure it was only 40 minutes for the whole Darlington to London journey rather than the random 48 minutes they have picked out for the Peterborough to London leg)

So to my mind I should receive delay repay compensation for 50% of each leg of the journey as the overall journey was in excess of 30 minutes (ie £19.25 for the Darlington to Peterborough leg and £24.75 for the Peterborough to London leg). this is using the argument presented by "Fortheloveof" ie So it's about the journey in total, not the individual ticket. Since NRCoT gives you the right to make a journey using multiple tickets, your journey is from Darlington to London and your delay compensation must, accordingly, calculated on the basis of the whole cost of your journey, not just the second ticket's value.

Instead they have offered me £19.25 for the first leg of the journey that wasn't even delayed by 30 minutes which seems rather bizarre. Any thoughts gratefully received before I go back to them

Thank you

Here is an update following my earlier post - they have simply credited my account with £19.25 and not bothered responding to my email. even if they stick to their argument that only one leg can have a delay repay applied to it they have still given me the wrong amount as they have calculated it on the wrong leg!

 

[doctor123]

and here is my email to them:

"Dear sirs

I see my account has been credited with the wrong amount without anyone having the courtesy to respond to my email below.

As detailed previously, my journey happened to have two legs but I was delayed for the whole journey. As I’m entitled to make a journey using multiple tickets (per the NRCoT) the delay repay should be on both legs. TOC’s are advised to pay out on split tickets so I would be grateful for the correct compensation

Ps in any event you have paid the delay repay on the wrong leg of the journey!

I look forward to hearing from you

Many thanks"

 

[doctor123]

and in response to the various posts that I was getting a cheaper deal by split ticketing - yes that's entirely true. I normally book well in advance but on this occasion I didn't and the direct cost was an eye watering £146 so I was able to save a fair amount by split ticketing (one advance and one anytime single ticket). I note all the arguments about having my cake and eating it but at the end of the day it's still one journey with the same seat booked for the whole trip so I'm going to pursue it and see where I get to and in any event even if I fail they have still refunded me the wrong amount as they calculated it against the wrong leg!

 

[Haywain]

I don't get the argument about getting a cheaper deal when talking about split tickets for Delay Repay purposes. In such cases the TOC should be aware that the customer made a saving on the tickets and this translates to a saving for the TOC on the compensation payment.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I don't get the argument about getting a cheaper deal when talking about split tickets for Delay Repay purposes. In such cases the TOC should be aware that the customer made a saving on the tickets and this translates to a saving for the TOC on the compensation payment.

Precisely my thoughts. I think the only circumstances where rail passengers can be said to be having their cake and eating it, in relation to delay compensation, is if they defined their journey differently to how they honestly know it to have been, resulting in more compensation being payable (or it being payable at all when it ought not to be). For example, claiming to finish the 'journey' at a point where the train is delayed by 31 minutes, ignoring the fact they finished their real journey with only 29 minutes' delay due to the train catching up time, when on a TOC with a 30-minute minimum Delay Repay policy.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't get the argument about getting a cheaper deal when talking about split tickets for Delay Repay purposes. In such cases the TOC should be aware that the customer made a saving on the tickets and this translates to a saving for the TOC on the compensation payment.

Delay Repay bills are often not actually paid for by the TOC - it very much depends on the cause of the delay.

 

[Haywain]

Delay Repay bills are often not actually paid for by the TOC - it very much depends on the cause of the delay.

I know that, but it is the TOC that decides if a claim is valid and makes decisions about split tickets.

 

[najaB]

Irrelevant.

Using a combination of tickets does not in any way redefine the journey.

Then why do you keep banging on about the NRCoT saying you can use a combination of tickets? And we're still no closer to the definition of a journey.

 

[bb21]

Please keep us posted OP by sending one of the forum staff a message so that the thread can be reopened for discussion if needed. It would be good finding out whether you were successful. Good luck.

Other than that I think both sides have made their position and reasoning perfectly clear, and we are clearly just going round in circles, so thread is locked pending further progress update from OP, before I despair and bash my head on the droplight of my train.

 

[doctor123]

After some delays Virgin East coast have finally got back to me: not entirely unexpectedly they have denied my claim for the other leg of the split ticket and ignored my other point that if their logic was correct they had still awarded me the wrong amount for the other split ticket. does anyone have any good suggestions on what next or to let it lie?

this was my email from about a month ago

"Dear sirs

I see my account has been credited with the wrong amount without anyone having the courtesy to respond to my email below.

As detailed previously, my journey happened to have two legs but I was delayed for the whole journey. As I’m entitled to make a journey using multiple tickets (per the NRCoT) the delay repay should be on both legs. TOC’s are advised to pay out on split tickets so I would be grateful for the correct compensation

Ps in any event you have paid the delay repay on the wrong leg of the journey!

I look forward to hearing from you

Many thanks"

and this is their reply:

"REF: VTN-xxxxxxxxxx

Hello there!

Dear xxxx

Thank you for getting in touch with us at Virgin Trains East Coast.

I’m grateful that you’ve taken the time to let me know that you’re unhappy with the compensation previously awarded, and I’ve been more than happy to look at this again for you.

Whilst I appreciate that your journey experience was poor and you were disappointed, we do have guidelines in place for the level of compensation to be awarded. This is laid out in our Passenger’s Charter and on this occasion I can confirm that we have awarded the amount relevant to your case.

If you’d like to view the terms and conditions of our compensation schemes you can do so on our website at www.virgintrainseastcoast.com.

I’m sorry that you remain disappointed, as this is not the outcome that either of us would have wanted. I hope you’ll understand however that to ensure fairness and consistency for all of our customers we must follow the guidelines wherever possible.

Thanks again for getting in touch with us - and thanks for providing us your feedback.

Yours sincerely

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Customer Solutions Representative
Virgin Trains East Coast"

 

[doctor123]

I have emailed senior management as follows:

Dear sirs

Regarding the email below from xxxxxxxxxxxxxx of your Customer Solutions Team and the attached email (both of which are the same incident despite Virgin applying different reference numbers!) I should be grateful if someone could escalate this matter as I believe she is incorrect – I made one journey using a combination of tickets which is explicitly permitted under NRCoT Condition 14.

Many thanks in advance

 

[island]

VTEC policy seems to be to pay DelayRepay only for that portion of a split journey that was delayed. A thread from a few months ago said PF had backed them up on this. And for the reasons I gave in post 4, enforcing it will be tricky.

 

[Kite159]

I wonder (completely in theory) you could take VTEC to the small claims court for the difference in delay repay pay-outs?

(No doubt as soon as the court papers hit the mat they will pay out to avoid additional costs of defending the case, although is there something in the NRCoT which will limit this option?)

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I wonder (completely in theory) you could take VTEC to the small claims court for the difference in delay repay pay-outs?

(No doubt as soon as the court papers hit the mat they will pay out to avoid additional costs of defending the case, although is there something in the NRCoT which will limit this option?)

There is nothing in the NRCoT which excludes this - but equally there is no provision for Delay Repay for delays of less than 1 hour or those outside the control of the rail industry.

 

[robbeech]

Sorry to hear you’re not having much luck with this. Do keep at them, and escalate it as far as you need to. there’s more help around here should you require it. I was surprised at this response from VTEC as whilst I have had a couple of initial mistakes they’ve always been rectified afterwards.