Delay repay right after invalid connection?

[miklcct]

It's well known that, if I attempt to make an invalid connection, I am not protected of the incoming train is delayed causing the connection to be missed.

I have a different question though. If I successfully make an invalid connection (for example, a 15-minute connection between King's Cross and St Prancas), but the delay occurs after the invalid connection, can I still claim compensation for the whole journey, based on the connection I have successfully made?

Example: I get into King's Cross and make my way onto a Thameslink train within 15 minutes to cross London which departs on time, and an incident occurs on Thameslink core which makes me delayed into my destination compared to the timetable of the Thameslink train, or miss a valid connection afterwards, can I claim delay repay from Thameslink for my whole journey or just the part of the journey from St Pancras? Will it have any difference if I hold a flexible ticket compared to an advance ticket where the LNER train is reserved and Thameslink is the unreserved connection?

 

[Watershed]

It's well known that, if I attempt to make an illegal connection, I am not protected of the incoming train is delayed causing the connection to be missed.

I have a different question though. If I successfully make an illegal connection (for example, a 15-minute connection between King's Cross and St Prancas), but the delay occurs after the illegal connection, can I still claim compensation for the whole journey, based on the connection I have successfully made?

Example: I get into King's Cross and make my way onto a Thameslink train within 15 minutes to cross London which departs on time, and an incident occurs on Thameslink core which makes me delayed into my destination compared to the timetable of the Thameslink train, or miss a legal connection afterwards, can I claim delay repay from Thameslink for my whole journey or just the part of the journey from St Pancras? Will it have any difference if I hold a flexible ticket compared to an advance ticket where the LNER train is reserved and Thameslink is the unreserved connection?

Delay Repay will only be paid against the time you were due to have arrived (i.e. with a connection meeting the MCT). The arguably excessive cross-London connection times mean that you will often get less compensation than might seem "fair".

 

[yorkie]

It's well known that, if I attempt to make an illegal connection, I am not protected of the incoming train is delayed causing the connection to be missed.

I have a different question though. If I successfully make an illegal connection (for example, a 15-minute connection between King's Cross and St Prancas), but the delay occurs after the illegal connection, can I still claim compensation for the whole journey, based on the connection I have successfully made?

Example: I get into King's Cross and make my way onto a Thameslink train within 15 minutes to cross London which departs on time, and an incident occurs on Thameslink core which makes me delayed into my destination compared to the timetable of the Thameslink train, or miss a legal connection afterwards, can I claim delay repay from Thameslink for my whole journey or just the part of the journey from St Pancras?

Delay Repay is calculated by comparing the booked arrival time with your actual arrival time.

If you make an earlier connection in one part of your journey but experience a delay in another, that does not change how the calculation is made.

Will it have any difference if I hold a flexible ticket compared to an advance ticket where the LNER train is reserved and Thameslink is the unreserved connection?

It makes no difference.

 

[Haywain]

To some extent, minimum connection times can be in place to mitigate against late running. This does have the effect for some people if wiping out any eligibility for DR claims because most of us want to get to our destination as soon as possible. However, the minimum connection times are usually generous enough to allow time for a pint or a bit of shopping instead

 

[AlbertBeale]

Delay Repay will only be paid against the time you were due to have arrived (i.e. with a connection meeting the MCT). The arguably excessive cross-London connection times mean that you will often get less compensation than might seem "fair".

I can understand that you can't claim a delay repay for the full journey in this case. But can't you forget the earlier leg of the journey and claim for the delay for the journey from StP T/L to wherever, based on the time you started that leg of the journey, if a delay makes that part run late (late compared to the proper timing for that start at StP that is)? Or is that not being disputed here?

 

[robbeech]

I can understand that you can't claim a delay repay for the full journey in this case. But can't you forget the earlier leg of the journey and claim for the delay for the journey from StP T/L to wherever, based on the time you started that leg of the journey, if a delay makes that part run late (late compared to the proper timing for that start at StP that is)? Or is that not being disputed here?

But that isn’t your journey. Your journey is what you define before you start it based upon your ticket(s). Delay repay is based upon a delay to your journey but the system will take minimum connection times into account. Of course, if you contact the operator by email they may be happy to pay out either as a gesture of good will or as a sign they have misunderstood the rules so there’s no harm in trying.

if you’re using split tickets, many people will suggest you should use tickets together or individually to claim the maximum compensation. I personally think this is having your cake and eating it and feel it is inappropriate to do this.

 

[infobleep]

But that isn’t your journey. Your journey is what you define before you start it based upon your ticket(s). Delay repay is based upon a delay to your journey but the system will take minimum connection times into account. Of course, if you contact the operator by email they may be happy to pay out either as a gesture of good will or as a sign they have misunderstood the rules so there’s no harm in trying.

if you’re using split tickets, many people will suggest you should use tickets together or individually to claim the maximum compensation. I personally think this is having your cake and eating it and feel it is inappropriate to do this.

I usually wouldn't claim for each separate ticket but the exception to this was a season ticket. In that case, I might claim from Euston to Harrow and Wealdstone rather than Guildford to Harrie and Wealdstone. That was some years ago now.

 

[robbeech]

I usually wouldn't claim for each separate ticket but the exception to this was a season ticket. In that case, I might claim from Euston to Harrow and Wealdstone rather than Guildford to Harrie and Wealdstone. That was some years ago now.

I’m not really into this as a concept at all, though I appreciate the workings are more ambiguous with a season ticket. People should define a journey as what it is and stick to it. If they’re prepared to fiddle about with it to maximise payout they can’t really complain when the railway swaps and changes things in order to MINIMISE payout.

 

[hkstudent]

I can understand that you can't claim a delay repay for the full journey in this case. But can't you forget the earlier leg of the journey and claim for the delay for the journey from StP T/L to wherever, based on the time you started that leg of the journey, if a delay makes that part run late (late compared to the proper timing for that start at StP that is)? Or is that not being disputed here?

I feel the same, especially if OP is using flexible tickets with a break of journeys be possible, then starting mid-way early by making faster cross-London would not be not permissible then?
The advance ticket is another case though.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think there's an element of us trying to have our cake and eat it here! We can't argue that when it benefits the passenger that of course when you're using multiple tickets it's one journey therefore my rights apply throughout and at the same time argue that when it benefits the passenger that of course using separate tickets means it's individual journeys therefore I should get compensation accordingly!

I feel like it's one thing or the other really

 

[robbeech]

I think there's an element of us trying to have our cake and eat it here! We can't argue that when it benefits the passenger that of course when you're using multiple tickets it's one journey therefore my rights apply throughout and at the same time argue that when it benefits the passenger that of course using separate tickets means it's individual journeys therefore I should get compensation accordingly!

I feel like it's one thing or the other really

Absolutely agree 100%

This sort of attitude from passengers is a sure way to get the rules changed which will make it less flexible for passengers as does every rule change.

 

[arb]

Sometimes I've made an unofficial connection across London and then been delayed on the second leg, as described here. I have sometimes, not always, been able to get an itinerary from National Rail Enquiries showing the unofficial connection by ticking the "Allow less time to transfer through London" option, and I have successfully claimed by submitting a copy of such an itinerary with my claim. I guess the trick is not to push it if they reject such a case.

As to "having your cake and eating it", personally I feel that it's the TOCs to blame here. Several times I've had a perfectly valid split-ticket claim denied, and got into long-winded written arguments that ultimately went nowhere. As a result I do now "optimise" my claims by sometimes submitting a claim for just one ticket from a split-ticket journey when it's financially better for me to do so, or using the cross-London trick that I've just described. But ... you win some, you lose some, and I figure that over time my "optimisations" are going to roughly average out with the times I've had a TOC incorrectly reduce a split-ticket claim. If nothing else, it's certainly easier than trying to argue about split tickets with customer services!

 

[infobleep]

I usually wouldn't claim for each separate ticket but the exception to this was a season ticket. In that case, I might claim from Euston to Harrow and Wealdstone rather than Guildford to Harrie and Wealdstone. That was some years ago now.

I will always try to make a connection if I have been delayed on my forts journey, even if it means running and by walking I could have missed it and claimed delay repay.

With the season ticket, I regularly could make x train and so if that train was cancelled and I had to wait 30 minutes I'd claim.

I wouldn't claim if I missed that train due to my first train being late. Only if the train from Euston was cancelled.

A simpler solution was to aim for the 8:24 as that was a valid connection off an earlier train I would catch and any issues I'd be able to claim end to end if I wished.

 

[Royston Vasey]

A few months ago I had success with a claim where I was planning to take a fast service out of Kings Cross and catch up to an overtaken (only hourly) stopping train en route, changing onto the overtaken train to my destination. I had one OPR ticket covering the entre journey (no split) and had arrived at Euston with an unofficial but easily manageable connection to the fast train from Kings Cross, which was cancelled. If I had taken the previous train into Euston, I would have caught the stopper in London, but the following train I got was not a guaranteed connection onto the cancelled fast service from Kings Cross.

I didn't even consider this to be potentially problematic until reading this thread and being unable to generate an itinerary from my arriving train onto my intended connection due to the generous MCT allowed (15 + 5 + 15 minutes). I wasn't asked for an itinerary from origin, only asked what train I intended to catch from Kings Cross and the connection, which I entered truthfully.

From my point of view I feel the claim was more than justified, as I was at the station in time for a cancelled train that would have got me home an hour earlier. I also considered the fact that a break of journey was permitted on my ticket, therefore I was not obliged to head straight to Kings Cross and could have travelled earlier, broken and resumed the journey, arriving after the stopper had gone but before the fast had departed. Also, the MCT is not published on an official website, so how is a passenger expected to know or care what is an unofficial connection when they reach a station 20 minutes before the "official" time. I had to search hard and know what I was looking for on brfares.com.

The claim was referred and then approved with no further request for information. YMMV of course!

 

[nitten_travell]

Hi all,

To resurrect this with a real life example...

Booked service:

dep Edinburgh 10:52 arr Crewe 13:57
dep Crewe 14:09 arr Cardiff 17:00

What actually happened...

dep Edinburgh 10:52 arr Crewe 14:06
navigate lots of passengers and run along the platform, up the steps, over the bridge, down the steps to see, pulling in at the platform...
dep Crewe 14:09 arr Cardiff 17:00

In other words, the first service was late arriving, turning a 12 minute connection (long enough for Crewe) into a three minute connection (physically possible, because I did it, but not possible according to route planners).

In this type of situation would I have been justified in waiting until the next service from Crewe to Cardiff (one per hour) or am I expected to dash to make a connection? I managed it, but someone who might not be so mobile would not have been able to do it.

It only occurred to me as I settled down on the service to Cardiff that, had I missed the connection (deliberately or otherwise) I'd have been in line for around 100 quid in delay repay as I held an off peak return. It would also have meant I'd have been able to buy lunch as I then discovered that there's no refreshment trolley on the service to Cardiff!

 

[robbeech]

You’re expected to make a reasonable attempt to catch a connecting train but you must not run on the railway so if you caught your train by running then it is indisputable that you would have been eligible to claim.

In straight forward terms if your train fouls the minimum connection time and you miss it then you are eligible for a claim, although many operators will reject this, and some have their system to only accept if the connection time was negative so will ‘expect’ you to catch a train with 0 minutes. It’s against the rules but it’s the railway where rules don’t apply.

You should weigh up your options in these situations. If you can SAFELY make the connection you should attempt to but if you can’t, or you’re not sure, and especially if your personal plans allow for a delay then you should catch the next service.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Hi all,

To resurrect this with a real life example...

Booked service:

dep Edinburgh 10:52 arr Crewe 13:57
dep Crewe 14:09 arr Cardiff 17:00

What actually happened...

dep Edinburgh 10:52 arr Crewe 14:06
navigate lots of passengers and run along the platform, up the steps, over the bridge, down the steps to see, pulling in at the platform...
dep Crewe 14:09 arr Cardiff 17:00

In other words, the first service was late arriving, turning a 12 minute connection (long enough for Crewe) into a three minute connection (physically possible, because I did it, but not possible according to route planners).

In this type of situation would I have been justified in waiting until the next service from Crewe to Cardiff (one per hour) or am I expected to dash to make a connection? I managed it, but someone who might not be so mobile would not have been able to do it.

It only occurred to me as I settled down on the service to Cardiff that, had I missed the connection (deliberately or otherwise) I'd have been in line for around 100 quid in delay repay as I held an off peak return. It would also have meant I'd have been able to buy lunch as I then discovered that there's no refreshment trolley on the service to Cardiff!

As I understand it,
- per https://www.brtimes.com/!board?stn=CRE&date=20220203 the minimum connection time at Crewe is 10 minutes
- your ticket was valid on any train from Crewe to Cardiff
- your complete journey was Edinburgh to Cardiff (i.e. no split tickets to take you on past Cardiff)

So you were entitled to rely on the connection between the scheduled 1357 arrival and the scheduled 1409 departure.

As it happened, you made the connection, so no Delay Repay position arises.

But had you - entirely reasonably - chosen not to rush after your actual arrival at 1406 and failed to reach the Cardiff train by 1409, then you could have got the next train with no problem. You would have been able to claim Delay Repay for whatever the difference was between the scheduled arrival time at Cardiff of the 1409 (1700) and the actual arrival time of the next train.

 

[island]

As I understand it,
- per https://www.brtimes.com/!board?stn=CRE&date=20220203 the minimum connection time at Crewe is 10 minutes
- your ticket was valid on any train from Crewe to Cardiff
- your complete journey was Edinburgh to Cardiff (i.e. no split tickets to take you on past Cardiff)

So you were entitled to rely on the connection between the scheduled 1357 arrival and the scheduled 1409 departure.

As it happened, you made the connection, so no Delay Repay position arises.

But had you - entirely reasonably - chosen not to rush after your actual arrival at 1406 and failed to reach the Cardiff train by 1409, then you could have got the next train with no problem. You would have been able to claim Delay Repay for whatever the difference was between the scheduled arrival time at Cardiff of the 1409 (1700) and the actual arrival time of the next train.

I agree with this assessment in these particular circumstances.

A claim where the connection had dropped to, say, 9 minutes and the trains were on adjacent platforms might be viewed more sceptically.

 

[Class800]

You do not need to unduly rush to catch a connection that no longer fulfils the minimum connection time due to an inbound delay - it may be hazardous to do so - but should not deliberately dawdle to miss it on purpose. My take anyway

 

[Fawkes Cat]

You’re expected to make a reasonable attempt to catch a connecting train but you must not run on the railway so if you caught your train by running then it is indisputable that you would have been eligible to claim.

In straight forward terms if your train fouls the minimum connection time and you miss it then you are eligible for a claim (...)

You should weigh up your options in these situations. If you can SAFELY make the connection you should attempt to but if you can’t, or you’re not sure, and especially if your personal plans allow for a delay then you should catch the next service.

(Slightly edited in paragraph 2)

I'd agree with what I have quoted above: you're meant to make a reasonable effort to make your connection. So if you missed your connection because you stopped off for a coffee at the kiosk on the platform, then (in my view) you get no Delay Repay. But if you were not prepared to (or were unable to) run for the connection, then (in my view) you should get Delay Repay.

 

[Class800]

I personally have had no issues with my claims where there has been a connection that has had minimum connection fouled by an inbound delay - I haven't had to appeal either. The only claim issue I've ever had was a TOC disputing the arrival time of a train and paying out at a lower threshold than they should (it was 61 late at doors open) - but having appealed I didn't take it further as not high value.

 

[robbeech]

(Slightly edited in paragraph 2)

I'd agree with what I have quoted above: you're meant to make a reasonable effort to make your connection. So if you missed your connection because you stopped off for a coffee at the kiosk on the platform, then (in my view) you get no Delay Repay. But if you were not prepared to (or were unable to) run for the connection, then (in my view) you should get Delay Repay.

Do you not agree that operators deliberately have systems setup to reject this then? It can be proven, and the code for one operators system is (not publicly) available and shows that it’s calculation is based on 0 minutes so it will always reject unless the train leaves before the first one arrives.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Do you not agree that operators deliberately have systems setup to reject this then? It can be proven, and the code for one operators system is (not publicly) available and shows that it’s calculation is based on 0 minutes so it will always reject unless the train leaves before the first one arrives.

I find no need to impute malice when incompetence is an adequate explanation. And I know from your postings that your view is different, so I'm not going to insult you by trying to change your mind!

 

[robbeech]

I find no need to impute malice when incompetence is an adequate explanation. And I know from your postings that your view is different, so I'm not going to insult you by trying to change your mind!

Automated systems don’t have ‘competence’ they’re setup in a specific way to produce the results the operator wants. If there has been incompetence from the people doing the programming or from those providing a set of instructions then this is just that. However, when it becomes apparent that it is not working as it should and is rejecting claims that should be accepted, by deliberately not doing anything about it you prove it is no longer incompetence.

I’m more than happy to put most things down to incompetence but that cannot be a long term excuse for the same issue. Once issues are highlighted and no attempt is made to solve it, it is no longer incompetence.

 

[Haywain]

You should weigh up your options in these situations. If you can SAFELY make the connection you should attempt to but if you can’t, or you’re not sure, and especially if your personal plans allow for a delay then you should catch the next service.

I agree with this but would add that one should never assume the connection will be missed - it, or the crew required to operate it, could also be running late.

 

[nitten_travell]

You should weigh up your options in these situations. If you can SAFELY make the connection you should attempt to but if you can’t, or you’re not sure, and especially if your personal plans allow for a delay then you should catch the next service.

I agree with this but would add that one should never assume the connection will be missed - it, or the crew required to operate it, could also be running late.

Thanks for all the replies. I think these two best sum it up. Morally it strikes me that trying to make a shortened connection - rather than wait it out and enjoy free money from the train operator - is the right thing to do provided it can be done safely.

 

[Class800]

Thanks for all the replies. I think these two best sum it up. Morally it strikes me that trying to make a shortened connection - rather than wait it out and enjoy free money from the train operator - is the right thing to do provided it can be done safely.

Provided it can be done safely - I had a connection at Bristol TM cut down to 2 minutes from the farthest apart platforms and decided not to go for it as too far to go without rushing. Delay accepted no issue

 

[The exile]

Isn’t the original issue the reverse of the Crewe one - I’ll stick to Bristol for an example. The 16.15 departure from Parkway does not offer a connection into the 16.30 Paddington train ( it’s about 4 minutes if on time) but provided you know what you’re doing, it’s perfectly ( and safely) manageable. DR would however, presumably not be payable if the 16.30 failed just after departure and was passed by the next London bound departure ( which I “should” have been on).

 

[Haywain]

Isn’t the original issue the reverse of the Crewe one - I’ll stick to Bristol for an example. The 16.15 departure from Parkway does not offer a connection into the 16.30 Paddington train ( it’s about 4 minutes if on time) but provided you know what you’re doing, it’s perfectly ( and safely) manageable. DR would however, presumably not be payable if the 16.30 failed just after departure and was passed by the next London bound departure ( which I “should” have been on).

It's not a valid connection and there would be no right to Delay Repay. Whether you would actually receive compensation is a matter for the operator.

 

[AlbertBeale]

A few months ago I had success with a claim where I was planning to take a fast service out of Kings Cross and catch up to an overtaken (only hourly) stopping train en route, changing onto the overtaken train to my destination. I had one OPR ticket covering the entre journey (no split) and had arrived at Euston with an unofficial but easily manageable connection to the fast train from Kings Cross, which was cancelled. If I had taken the previous train into Euston, I would have caught the stopper in London, but the following train I got was not a guaranteed connection onto the cancelled fast service from Kings Cross.

I didn't even consider this to be potentially problematic until reading this thread and being unable to generate an itinerary from my arriving train onto my intended connection due to the generous MCT allowed (15 + 5 + 15 minutes). I wasn't asked for an itinerary from origin, only asked what train I intended to catch from Kings Cross and the connection, which I entered truthfully.

From my point of view I feel the claim was more than justified, as I was at the station in time for a cancelled train that would have got me home an hour earlier. I also considered the fact that a break of journey was permitted on my ticket, therefore I was not obliged to head straight to Kings Cross and could have travelled earlier, broken and resumed the journey, arriving after the stopper had gone but before the fast had departed. Also, the MCT is not published on an official website, so how is a passenger expected to know or care what is an unofficial connection when they reach a station 20 minutes before the "official" time. I had to search hard and know what I was looking for on brfares.com.

The claim was referred and then approved with no further request for information. YMMV of course!

YMMV??