Delay Repay on split tickets.

[Trainfan344]

If a passenger was making a journey from Station A to Station D using split tickets

During their journey between Station A and station B the train is delayed enough to claim delay repay. However the passenger continues their journey onwards to station C where they have a long connection to a train to station D.

The passenger then gets to station D on time.

Would the passenger be entitled to delay repay on the tickets used between A and B where the journey that they were making was affected by a delay?

What does it matter that the rest of the journey wasn't delayed when that specific leg of the journey which they purchased a ticket which entitles them to make said journey was delayed?

I appreciate that this might be a simple no; but I thought it might be an interesting idea for a debate as surely the point I make in the last paragraph comes into play?

 

[Mike395]

Personally I wouldn't claim in this context. If the status quo of being able to claim for an entire journey on split tickets is abused too much in this way, the TOCs/RDG/DfT will simply say that you can only claim for specific tickets rather than the entire journey as now.

 

[zero]

I don't see how the TOCs would necessarily know that certain tickets were intended to be used in conjunction.

However I would only claim if I was actually delayed between A and B. By this I mean, if my sole intention was merely to travel to D regardless of the long connection, then I would not have been actually delayed if I arrive at D on time.

But if I had always intended to travel to C in order to do certain activities during the long connection, for example go to a particular shop, or meet someone briefly, then the delay getting to B/C would have prevented me from achieving some of my purposes of travel. (This is not just hypothetical, my plans for 60 minute stops have been messed up multiple times by delays.)

If this is the case I would definitely claim - but DR is typically not sufficient to compensate me for needing to make the (partial) journey again - I would be better off abandoning the whole thing and getting a refund. But generally I would rather achieve my tasks at D and try to get to C again later, than not achieve anything.

 

[island]

I think this type of claim is at risk of having one's cake and eating it.

 

[mirodo]

the status quo of being able to claim for an entire journey on split tickets

So in this situation:

I have a split ticket Kings Cross > Wakefield Westgate > Leeds (same train throughout).

I'm under the Delay Repay threshold at Wakefield, but am sufficiently delayed between there and Leeds to allow me to claim.

I should be able to claim for the entire journey, rather than just the Wakefield > Leeds portion?

 

[Mike395]

So in this situation:

I have a split ticket Kings Cross > Wakefield Westgate > Leeds (same train throughout).

I'm under the Delay Repay threshold at Wakefield, but am sufficiently delayed between there and Leeds to allow me to claim.

I should be able to claim for the entire journey, rather than just the Wakefield > Leeds portion?

Yes - it's your journey as a whole that counts, not any specific leg.

 

[yorkie]

If a passenger was making a journey from Station A to Station D using split tickets

During their journey between Station A and station B the train is delayed enough to claim delay repay. However the passenger continues their journey onwards to station C where they have a long connection to a train to station D.

The passenger then gets to station D on time.

Would the passenger be entitled to delay repay on the tickets used between A and B where the journey that they were making was affected by a delay?

What does it matter that the rest of the journey wasn't delayed when that specific leg of the journey which they purchased a ticket which entitles them to make said journey was delayed?

I appreciate that this might be a simple no; but I thought it might be an interesting idea for a debate as surely the point I make in the last paragraph comes into play?

You'd almost certainly get away with it but that doesn't mean it's correct to do so.

 

[MrJeeves]

Would the passenger be entitled to delay repay on the tickets used between A and B where the journey that they were making was affected by a delay?

I think it's worth noting that even a through ticket from A to D would be valid in this case for delay repay from A to B, considering break of journey.

For example, on my commute, I often go from A to C, breaking at B to grab a few things from a shop. If both my intended legs were delayed, I would make two claims on my ticket (A to B, and B to C). I have never had issues submitting a claim for these two journeys, covered by the single ticket.

I wouldn't claim the delay on a part of my overall journey if I was solely changing trains. If I was going to break my journey (e.g., spend a bit of time in London with a ticket that crosses London) then I would, though.

 

[yorkie]

What does it matter that the rest of the journey wasn't delayed when that specific leg of the journey which they purchased a ticket which entitles them to make said journey was delayed?

Delay repay applies to the journey being made.

In order to make any delay repay claim straightforward, it can be useful to book the journey as one journey, with a through itinerary, using a website which will issue the tickets in this manner, for example the forum's ticket booking site will do just that.

 

[Fleetmaster]

I have definitely been able to claim Delay Repay on the first portion of a split ticket, despite arriving on time or within the grade period for the overall journey. I see it as fair compensation for the stress it causes, especially if you're trying to make connections down the line. This is probably not the intention of the scheme, sadly.

 

[Watershed]

So in this situation:

I have a split ticket Kings Cross > Wakefield Westgate > Leeds (same train throughout).

I'm under the Delay Repay threshold at Wakefield, but am sufficiently delayed between there and Leeds to allow me to claim.

I should be able to claim for the entire journey, rather than just the Wakefield > Leeds portion?

Yes. You are entitled to delay compensation based on your entire journey. Some TOCs make this easier to claim than others, as they have specific functionality on their claim form to allow you to give the details of all of your tickets. However, you can claim regardless.

I think this type of claim is at risk of having one's cake and eating it.

Some might argue that. But equally you have restricted yourself to using trains that call at the split points, and there is nothing in the NRCoT which says that you must choose before setting out whether you wish to be considered to be making separate journeys or one through journey. In the absence of any such limitation, I don't see that there is anything wrong with making such a claim.

 

[island]

Some might argue that. But equally you have restricted yourself to using trains that call at the split points, and there is nothing in the NRCoT which says that you must choose before setting out whether you wish to be considered to be making separate journeys or one through journey. In the absence of any such limitation, I don't see that there is anything wrong with making such a claim.

I intentionally refrained from saying it was "wrong", but I disapprove of it.

(For the record, you quoted the posts in the wrong order; mine referred to the OP and not to mirodo's post 5.)

 

[johnr57]

Travelling from A to F one train with split tickets (off peak singles) a to b, b to c, c to d, d to e. Advance with reservation for e to f. Train cancelled at C so is delay repay due for the whole journey

 

[Mike395]

Yes - across the combined value of all the tickets, they don't have to be the same type.

 

[johnr57]

Yes - across the combined value of all the tickets, they don't have to be the same type.

Many thanks

 

[YorkC]

I think this is a bit of a grey area, isn't it? If I had a long connection at station C I might plan to do something there - go for a coffee, have a wander around. If I had to rush to make the connection to D (minimum times notwithstanding) I think I'd be pretty annoyed & inconvenienced that I was unable to do so. I'm not really sure what "journey" should reasonably mean in this context.

Completely agree with acting within the spirit of DR where possible but I think in plenty of circumstances it would be totally reasonable to claim for travel between A and C. If it just saved me sitting on the platform at C for ages then I wouldn't claim but if I was inconvenienced then I think I probably would.

 

[johnr57]

I think this is a bit of a grey area, isn't it? If I had a long connection at station C I might plan to do something there - go for a coffee, have a wander around. If I had to rush to make the connection to D (minimum times notwithstanding) I think I'd be pretty annoyed & inconvenienced that I was unable to do so. I'm not really sure what "journey" should reasonably mean in this context.

Completely agree with acting within the spirit of DR where possible but I think in plenty of circumstances it would be totally reasonable to claim for travel between A and C. If it just saved me sitting on the platform at C for ages then I wouldn't claim but if I was inconvenienced then I think I probably would.

But it was 1 train from b to f , and cancelled at c

 

[northwichcat]

Yes - it's your journey as a whole that counts, not any specific leg.

In this instance, what if the ticket for Wakefield to Leeds is a West Yorkshire DaySaver, rather than a standard single or return? My understand is train operator's don't pay Delay Repay to passengers who have rovers and rangers. So wouldn't the flip side then be if you arrive late at Wakefield but on time at Leeds, it would be fair to claim?

 

[jon81uk]

I think this is a bit of a grey area, isn't it? If I had a long connection at station C I might plan to do something there - go for a coffee, have a wander around. If I had to rush to make the connection to D (minimum times notwithstanding) I think I'd be pretty annoyed & inconvenienced that I was unable to do so. I'm not really sure what "journey" should reasonably mean in this context.

Completely agree with acting within the spirit of DR where possible but I think in plenty of circumstances it would be totally reasonable to claim for travel between A and C. If it just saved me sitting on the platform at C for ages then I wouldn't claim but if I was inconvenienced then I think I probably would.

I think this then comes down to is it a split ticket for pricing reasons, or two tickets to enable a different day out where you plan to spend some time at B.

 

[matt]

In this instance, what if the ticket for Wakefield to Leeds is a West Yorkshire DaySaver, rather than a standard single or return? My understand is train operator's don't pay Delay Repay to passengers who have rovers and rangers. So wouldn't the flip side then be if you arrive late at Wakefield but on time at Leeds, it would be fair to claim?

Delay repay is paid on Rovers and Rangers

 

[Watershed]

I think this is a bit of a grey area, isn't it? If I had a long connection at station C I might plan to do something there - go for a coffee, have a wander around. If I had to rush to make the connection to D (minimum times notwithstanding) I think I'd be pretty annoyed & inconvenienced that I was unable to do so. I'm not really sure what "journey" should reasonably mean in this context.

Completely agree with acting within the spirit of DR where possible but I think in plenty of circumstances it would be totally reasonable to claim for travel between A and C. If it just saved me sitting on the platform at C for ages then I wouldn't claim but if I was inconvenienced then I think I probably would.

Precisely. With no formal definition of journey, it can mean whatever you want it to, within the constraints of the tickets you hold.

 

[northwichcat]

Delay repay is paid on Rovers and Rangers

I thought there was an exception for PTE products.

 

[Snow1964]

Sorry to ask, but the delay repay info on website has left me confused.

On Saturday got delayed on a Sheffield -Bristol XC near Charfield because of flooding, missed connection to GWR local train at Bristol Temple Meads.

Bought the tickets on this site, and consisted of 4 part split tickets with last split at Cheltenham. As cross country delayed me, I assume claim off them.

It seems XC has a 30 minute minimum claim (we were not that late arriving at Temple Meads), but GWR has a 15 minute minimum, and their train was on time, but were obviously on next train after missed one.

So have submitted 2 claims to XC for missed connection (one for each passenger), did I do correct thing.

 

[Haywain]

As cross country delayed me, I assume claim off them.

Correct.

It seems XC has a 30 minute minimum claim (we were not that late arriving at Temple Meads), but GWR has a 15 minute minimum, and their train was on time, but were obviously on next train after missed one.

So have submitted 2 claims to XC for missed connection (one for each passenger), did I do correct thing.

Were you delayed at your destination by 30 minutes or more? If not, unfortunately you will not have a valid claim. The GWR threshold only applies when GWR have caused the delay.

 

[trainophile]

You’d think there would be some standardisation in delay repay conditions wouldn’t you? I know we’re probably going to lose the 15 minutes pay out anyway soon, but if that is going to apply across the board then why don’t the current rules?

 

[island]

You’d think there would be some standardisation in delay repay conditions wouldn’t you? I know we’re probably going to lose the 15 minutes pay out anyway soon, but if that is going to apply across the board then why don’t the current rules?

I fear any "standardisation" would likely be to passengers' detriment.

 

[ainsworth74]

You’d think there would be some standardisation in delay repay conditions wouldn’t you? I know we’re probably going to lose the 15 minutes pay out anyway soon, but if that is going to apply across the board then why don’t the current rules?

Absolutely, personally it should be handled by one centralised online portal (or one form posted to one address for those who can't do online forms) with one set of eligibility criteria. Working out who is liable to pay the passenger is none of the passengers concern that should be an internal industry matter. However I think that this:

I fear any "standardisation" would likely be to passengers' detriment.

Is the likely outcome of such a change!

 

[Runningaround]

I fear any "standardisation" would likely be to passengers' detriment.

Is this the same fear that if the whole journey A - F was priced at the split fare so instead of twenty tickets you got two(out and return) somehow the railway would ramp up the fares for each leg to compensate? I can't see Coventry to Birmingham jumping to £30 because a few long distance travellers have discovered it's far cheaper to split.