Delay repay on EMR if a train is cancelled – the latest

[SirAlf]

I did an earlier thread on this

I've now received a reply from EMR still refusing to pay out for Delay Repay

EMR said “The information regarding our amended time table has been on our website since the 19th of June, when the time table was introduced which would provided passengers with information on all services running in this time table”

So it seems that they expect people to check the timetable rather than going straight to booking tickets, even though the booking process shows the customer a timetable – just a different one from the one EMR know they are going to run

EMR then go on to say “We are not responsible for journeys being added into the ticketing system, this is down to Network Rail at this time Network Rail were only updating the journey planner on a Thursday for the following 7 days of travel”

So it seems that if anyone books more than 7 days in advance then EMR can cancel their train and just blame Network Rail. The ticket seller I used (RailEasy) would not be aware that they were selling tickets for a non-existent service

Finally EMR say “Delay repay compensation can only be provided if the service on the day which is in the time table, runs but is delayed or is cancelled on the day of travel”

The money involved here is hardly worth the effort of chasing them further but I can't understand how they think it is acceptable to amend a booking someone has made in good faith and have no comeback. My instinct is to forget about it, EMR have built themselves a bad reputation on this site over the last few months and they clearly don't care what their passengers think, but do any of you think it is worth pursuing, and if so how? Its the principle at stake, not the money which is just a few pounds

 

[Starmill]

EMR then go on to say “We are not responsible for journeys being added into the ticketing system, this is down to Network Rail at this time Network Rail were only updating the journey planner on a Thursday for the following 7 days of travel”

Ultimately this isn't true. Network Rail may or may not be the ones who upload the schedules, I don't know. But EMR are the only ones who are responsible for the correct schedules of EMR services being in place. This is a classic attempt to blame anyone they possibly can but themselves for their error.

The contract for travel lies between the consumer (in this case yourself) and the provider of the service (in this case EMR). Network Rail aren't particularly relevant.

but do any of you think it is worth pursuing, and if so how?

It's quite up to you, but if you wanted to pursue it the way to do so would be to open a case with the Rail Ombudsman.

 

[AlterEgo]

It's quite up to you, but if you wanted to pursue it the way to do so would be to open a case with the Rail Ombudsman.

As a general rule I am opposed to escalating and causing issues on principle but I think this one is important and I'd certainly be going to the Ombudsman. EMR's response is guff and seems to be clearly in breach of both common sense and the law.

 

[Watershed]

EMR said “The information regarding our amended time table has been on our website since the 19th of June, when the time table was introduced which would provided passengers with information on all services running in this time table”

Are they seriously suggesting that most passengers are going to check the timetable section of relevant operators' websites before buying a ticket? Just on the off-chance that the timetable showed in booking engines doesn't reflect the timetable the operator intends to run?

This seems no better than proverbial notice displayed in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

So it seems that they expect people to check the timetable rather than going straight to booking tickets, even though the booking process shows the customer a timetable – just a different one from the one EMR know they are going to run

The timetable shown to the customer at the time of booking is the basis of the contract.

You'd be in exactly the same situation if you'd bought your ticket through EMR's website/app (albeit noting that this is operated by Trainline). Are they really saying that you should check whether they've misled you about the timetable when selling you a ticket?

EMR then go on to say “We are not responsible for journeys being added into the ticketing system, this is down to Network Rail at this time Network Rail were only updating the journey planner on a Thursday for the following 7 days of travel”

Nonsense. Network Rail publish and control the data feed containing schedules, yes. But that's like saying that Royal Mail is responsible if you harass someone by post!

Ultimately NR are just the messengers and EMR are the ones who decided to reduce their timetable. They are the people who ultimately cause journeys to be added to (or removed from) the ticketing system.

There are several courses of action EMR could have taken to prevent this scenario from arising, such as making reservations compulsory in the data and not releasing reservations until they're certain what timetable they're going to run. Some operators have done that during Covid.

It was their decision - and their risk - not to do so. They can't go blaming other people for that.

So it seems that if anyone books more than 7 days in advance then EMR can cancel their train and just blame Network Rail. The ticket seller I used (RailEasy) would not be aware that they were selling tickets for a non-existent service

No ticket seller would be aware - there is nothing in any of the timetable data that indicates "this train is liable to be removed from the timetable".

EMR are perfectly at liberty to cancel trains, whether on the day or in advance. But they can't eliminate their liability for compensation by doing so in advance.

Finally EMR say “Delay repay compensation can only be provided if the service on the day which is in the time table, runs but is delayed or is cancelled on the day of travel”

Delay Repay compensation can be restricted in different ways, and as I noted on your previous thread, EMR's Passenger Charter does purport to exclude compensation in circumstances such as these. Whether that purported exclusion is effective is another question.

But they cannot override the NRCoT minima, which provide for 50% compensation for delays of 60+ minutes, regardless of the cause or circumstances of the delay.

The money involved here is hardly worth the effort of chasing them further but I can't understand how they think it is acceptable to amend a booking someone has made in good faith and have no comeback. My instinct is to forget about it, EMR have built themselves a bad reputation on this site over the last few months and they clearly don't care what their passengers think, but do any of you think it is worth pursuing, and if so how? Its the principle at stake, not the money which is just a few pounds

Yes, the attitude behind that response stinks. You really have to wonder how the person that wrote it (it doesn't sound like a canned response) thought "yes, I'm giving this person good service". Unfortunately, far too much of the rail industry simply doesn't have a clue - or give a damn - about customer service.

Obviously, it's up to you whether you want to spend more time chasing - but it's certainly something that TOCs with this sort of mindset need to be put straight on.

 

[WesternLancer]

I did an earlier thread on this

I've now received a reply from EMR still refusing to pay out for Delay Repay

EMR said “The information regarding our amended time table has been on our website since the 19th of June, when the time table was introduced which would provided passengers with information on all services running in this time table”

So it seems that they expect people to check the timetable rather than going straight to booking tickets, even though the booking process shows the customer a timetable – just a different one from the one EMR know they are going to run

EMR then go on to say “We are not responsible for journeys being added into the ticketing system, this is down to Network Rail at this time Network Rail were only updating the journey planner on a Thursday for the following 7 days of travel”

So it seems that if anyone books more than 7 days in advance then EMR can cancel their train and just blame Network Rail. The ticket seller I used (RailEasy) would not be aware that they were selling tickets for a non-existent service

Finally EMR say “Delay repay compensation can only be provided if the service on the day which is in the time table, runs but is delayed or is cancelled on the day of travel”

The money involved here is hardly worth the effort of chasing them further but I can't understand how they think it is acceptable to amend a booking someone has made in good faith and have no comeback. My instinct is to forget about it, EMR have built themselves a bad reputation on this site over the last few months and they clearly don't care what their passengers think, but do any of you think it is worth pursuing, and if so how? Its the principle at stake, not the money which is just a few pounds

Yes, pursue it - they are wasting your time. Waste some of theirs instead (and thus their money) justifying their stance to the Ombudsman as others have suggested. The fact that it sounds like a small sum is even more reason to do it - they rely on fobbing lots of small sums off and no one will challenge it. Good luck.

 

[RunawayTrain]

Yes, pursue it - they are wasting your time. Waste some of theirs instead (and thus their money) justifying their stance to the Ombudsman as others have suggested. The fact that it sounds like a small sum is even more reason to do it - they rely on fobbing lots of small sums off and no one will challenge it. Good luck.

Quite right. Sometimes it is about the principle.

 

[londonbridge]

On the topic of the amount of money vs the principle, in the past I’ve had concerts cancelled where the ticket agency has refunded the face value of the ticket, but not the booking fee and/or postage charge (including one where the event was cancelled before the tickets were dispatched and I never actually received the ticket in the post. Did some searching and more than one site I looked at said that if an event is cancelled you’re entitled to a full refund of all monies paid. The ticket agencies argue that their t’s and c’s say that booking fees are not refundable and they know that no one will bother to sue them for £5 or £10.

 

[Skymonster]

EMR has a rather sneaky provision in its Passenger Charter.

Where an emergency timetable or amended timetable is in place, delays are calculated according to the revised timetable. An emergency or amended timetable may be introduced for a number of reasons such as planned or emergency engineering work, industrial action or severe weather.

So although the NRCoT says that if a passenger is delayed by 60 minutes or more compensation is payable, EMR will claim there was no delay because it is operating a revised timetable.

My view is that the timetable is irrelevant. If I’ve bought a ticket that says I leave at a particular time, that’s what time I should be at the station. If the railway then fails to convey me to my destination to arrive at the time also stipulated when I bought the ticket, I am delayed.

 

[Watershed]

So although the NRCoT says that if a passenger is delayed by 60 minutes or more compensation is payable, EMR will claim there was no delay because it is operating a revised timetable.

Their Passenger's Charter can only limit claims under the Delay Repay scheme (which is offered in the Passenger's Charter), not claims under the NRCoT minima. Condition 32.1 establishes that these are two separate sorts of claims:

32.1. If you are delayed in reaching your destination as a result of a delay or cancellation of a train service, you may be entitled to claim money back. You can make a claim in one or more of the following ways:

32.1.1. through the industry arrangements provided for:​

32.1.1.1. in these Conditions; and/or​

32.1.1.2. in the Passenger’s Charter of the relevant Train Company and/or​

32.1.2. by relying on your statutory rights, e.g. under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the Rail Passengers’ Rights and Obligations Regulation as it applies in GB law.​

See also condition 33.4:

33.4. A Train Company may not be obliged to pay compensation under this Condition if the cause of the delay was entirely outside the rail industry’s control. Each Train Company’s Passenger’s Charter will set out any exclusions that applies to such claims in respect of their services. However, you are entitled to compensation if the delay was 60 minutes or longer, regardless of fault.

My view is that the timetable is irrelevant. If I’ve bought a ticket that says I leave at a particular time, that’s what time I should be at the station. If the railway then fails to convey me to my destination to arrive at the time also stipulated when I bought the ticket, I am delayed.

I think they might have difficulty arguing that they can eliminate their liability under the Passenger's Charter by changing the timetable after you've bought your ticket, without even notifying you of the change. Otherwise the compensation offered by the Passenger's Charter would effectively be entirely down to their goodwill and discretion, which is clearly not what condition 32.1.1.2 suggests.

 

[WesternLancer]

Quite right. Sometimes it is about the principle.

Thanks - yes and always a wider issue with Ombudsman type complaints etc as govt departments will use their stats when considering operator performance, franchise renewal bids (or whatever will replace them going forwards etc) all as part of performance indicator monitoring. No complaint, no 'statistic'...

 

[robbeech]

As a general rule I am opposed to escalating and causing issues on principle but I think this one is important and I'd certainly be going to the Ombudsman. EMR's response is guff and seems to be clearly in breach of both common sense and the law.

But where do we go? Who do we really complain to? Who will actually ensure the railway follows the law?
The ombudsman won’t because they don’t know the rules so rely on the operators to make up rules (that suit them) and tell them about it. They then generally pass on those rules to you and find in favour of the operator based on this.

 

[Super Hans]

If you book a Bluezone concert for 01/09 and you turn up at 01/09 to find that it has been cancelled that's not really you fault.

I did an earlier thread on this

I've now received a reply from EMR still refusing to pay out for Delay Repay

EMR said “The information regarding our amended time table has been on our website since the 19th of June, when the time table was introduced which would provided passengers with information on all services running in this time table”

So it seems that they expect people to check the timetable rather than going straight to booking tickets, even though the booking process shows the customer a timetable – just a different one from the one EMR know they are going to run

EMR then go on to say “We are not responsible for journeys being added into the ticketing system, this is down to Network Rail at this time Network Rail were only updating the journey planner on a Thursday for the following 7 days of travel”

So it seems that if anyone books more than 7 days in advance then EMR can cancel their train and just blame Network Rail. The ticket seller I used (RailEasy) would not be aware that they were selling tickets for a non-existent service

Finally EMR say “Delay repay compensation can only be provided if the service on the day which is in the time table, runs but is delayed or is cancelled on the day of travel”

The money involved here is hardly worth the effort of chasing them further but I can't understand how they think it is acceptable to amend a booking someone has made in good faith and have no comeback. My instinct is to forget about it, EMR have built themselves a bad reputation on this site over the last few months and they clearly don't care what their passengers think, but do any of you think it is worth pursuing, and if so how? Its the principle at stake, not the money which is just a few pounds

Was the service delayed or were you delayed because you didn't check the service?

As ax payers I'm not die we should be fottinng the bill

 

[Hadders]

If you book a Bluezone concert for 01/09 and you turn up at 01/09 to find that it has been cancelled that's not really you fault.

Was the service delayed or were you delayed because you didn't check the service?

As ax payers I'm not die we should be fottinng the bill

The difference is the tax payer doesn't fund Bluezone to put on concerts but the tax payer does pay the rail industry £Billions every year to run a passenger service to an agreed timetable.

If a concert gets cancelled you are normally notified but the organisers, the rail industry generally doesn't do this, despite often having passenger details.

 

[robbeech]

the rail industry generally doesn't do this, despite often having passenger details

This is where things break down the most. You can’t catch everyone here, some people will have bought a ticket at a ticket office or machine so there will be no details, but a large number of tickets (and I’d guess a huge majority of those bought in advance, where there is a greater time and chance of a timetable change) are bought online so there is a contact method. The retailers have that contact information, they have access to the timetable data and can automatically send emails to people booked on a train should that timetable change.

Most people will just change their plans and have a moan about the railway to their friends and colleagues if they are told in advance, they wouldn’t even consider a refund or delay repay, despite being entitled to it.

contacting passengers about changes isn’t perfect but you can’t put out every fire with that fire extinguisher in your kitchen, but that’s not an excuse to throw it away.

Of course, this is the railway, they have been getting away with zero effort for years and will continue to do so.

 

[joncombe]

This is where things break down the most. You can’t catch everyone here, some people will have bought a ticket at a ticket office or machine so there will be no details, but a large number of tickets (and I’d guess a huge majority of those bought in advance, where there is a greater time and chance of a timetable change) are bought online so there is a contact method. The retailers have that contact information, they have access to the timetable data and can automatically send emails to people booked on a train should that timetable change.

Most people will just change their plans and have a moan about the railway to their friends and colleagues if they are told in advance, they wouldn’t even consider a refund or delay repay, despite being entitled to it.

contacting passengers about changes isn’t perfect but you can’t put out every fire with that fire extinguisher in your kitchen, but that’s not an excuse to throw it away.

Of course, this is the railway, they have been getting away with zero effort for years and will continue to do so.

You are quite correct and I've made the same point to a few TOCs myself that when you have booked a ticket valid only on a specific train and subsequently that train doesn't run or gets "retimed" that they don't bother to tell the passenger and hide behind "well you should have double checked before departure'. Yet the same companies can spam you with things like "looking forward to your trip to Xxxx. Why not upgrade to 1st, book a hotel etc". Even Ryanair can manage to communicate if a flight gets cancelled or rescheduled yet for a train company it still falls into the "too hard, can't be done" category.

Back to the original issue, I had a similar claim with SWR a year or two back. They cancelled all trains on the route I had booked (the route to Bristol) and also had engineering works that meant even with a change at Salisbury the first time I could arrive was about 3 hours after scheduled on the Advance ticket. I made the journey and put in a delay repay but got fobbed off that they only pay up against the amended timetable that came in after I booked the ticket and since it wasn't delayed they wouldn't be paying. I raised it with the Ombudsman who sided with SWR stating the strike was well publicised and I should have checked. In the end when I resubmitted the claim it was paid. So just bare my experience in mind if going to the ombudsman. I was going to go on to the credit card company if not, but didn't need to in the end.

 

[SirAlf]

This gets sillier the more I look. So silly that I wonder whether I'm missing something

Of course I should just let this drop, but EMR have irritated me with their customer-unfriendly attitude, so all I'm interested in now is the principle, not the money. I checked the EMR timetable TODAY for Sunday evening services from Grantham to Nottingham. The timetable on their website says it is “Valid from Sunday 16 May 2021” and shows the following trains:
GRA 2000 2102 2255
NOT 2030 2131 2324

But when I try to book a train for TOMORROW Sunday 05/09 on EMR’s own website it offers me these, as does RailEasy (and presumably all the other booking sites):
GRA 2002 NOT 2032
GRA 2037 NOT 2110
GRA 2145 NOT 2222
GRA 2214 NOT 2251

This means their own timetable contradicts their own booking site! The 2102 train that was cancelled on me is on their timetable so if (for the sake of argument) I turned up at Grantham station tomorrow without an advance booking to catch that train I’d find it didn't exist. But they tell me that I should check their timetable!

I think I’ll have another go at them unless somebody can tell me what I'm missing...

 

[Scott W]

The subject matter was raised by the Town Council I am a member of after a similar situation was brought to members attention. An extract from the response the council received:

"When a train is cancelled in this manner, we would look to contact the customer directly to let them know ahead of time that their booked service is no longer available. The customer would then have the option to choose to travel on an alternative service, or to receive a full refund.

During the course of the pandemic there have been a number of alterations to services, both planned and unplanned at short notice; and as a result the industry has also been advising passengers to check before they travel. There will always be instances whereby it is not possible to contact a customer directly in advance.

If the customer turned up to travel as per your scenario, they would not be entitled to automatic Delay Repay through this scheme as the service was cancelled in advance. But it is prudent to mention that we have a Customer Service Centre (contactable on 03457 125 678) here at EMR and we are happy to discuss specific instances with customers whereby there are extenuating circumstances to extend offers of compensation outside of the automatic process, and as such I would advise this customer to get in touch."

 

[Wolfie]

Their Passenger's Charter can only limit claims under the Delay Repay scheme (which is offered in the Passenger's Charter), not claims under the NRCoT minima. Condition 32.1 establishes that these are two separate sorts of claims:


See also condition 33.4:



I think they might have difficulty arguing that they can eliminate their liability under the Passenger's Charter by changing the timetable after you've bought your ticket, without even notifying you of the change. Otherwise the compensation offered by the Passenger's Charter would effectively be entirely down to their goodwill and discretion, which is clearly not what condition 32.1.1.2 suggests.

Not to mention almost certainly a violation of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 which replaced the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulation.

Suggest that the OP invite them to either compensate or face litigation.

Unfair terms in Consumer Contracts

A guide to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. How to tell if a term is unfair and tips on how to ensure your business terms and conditions don't fall foul of the regulations.

www.netlawman.co.uk

 

[island]

To be fair, they would not be entitled to "Delay Repay", but they would be entitled to compensation (of a lesser amount) under the NRCoT.