As per title. It's struck me on several occasions that delay repay would be better administered the the RDG or some other central body than by individual TOCs. This would be better for both passengers and TOCs.
Case in point. Today I was 1 hour 2 minutes late on my Attleborough to Sleaford journey. The 0652 GA service to Cambridge was cancelled. As often happens in these situation, the following EMR to Liverpool made additional stops at Wymondham and Attleborough, so I got my first connection.
Unfortunately the EMR service was a few minutes late leaving Norwich and was further delayed by the additional stops, so I missed my connection at Peterborough.
It's only an 11 minute connection, but if the EMR hadn't been further delayed by making additional stops I think I'd have just about made the connection at Peterborough.
So Greater Anglia can legitimately say they didn't delay me as they arranged for EMR to pick us up. But EMR can say they aren't responsible as if the GA train had run as planned we'd still have made Peterborough in time.
So I risk having to appeal claims and the TOCs risk pinging the claim back and forth till one of them caves. What a waste of everyone's time and effort.
If it was centrally administered "the railway" would accept the delay was genuine, pay my compensation without delay and then sort out the attribution as an internal matter for "the railway".
"The railway" would also avoid the cost of duplicating administrative functions to manage delay repay.
Win win? Why is it split by TOC (most of whome seem to use the same third party technology provider in any case)?
I know not all TOCs have the same delay repay thresholds etc, but a central clearing house would be able to manage that.
I don't really want to claim against EMR, as that will only encourage them to not make additional stops when the GA service is cancelled.
Case in point. Today I was 1 hour 2 minutes late on my Attleborough to Sleaford journey. The 0652 GA service to Cambridge was cancelled. As often happens in these situation, the following EMR to Liverpool made additional stops at Wymondham and Attleborough, so I got my first connection.
Unfortunately the EMR service was a few minutes late leaving Norwich and was further delayed by the additional stops, so I missed my connection at Peterborough.
It's only an 11 minute connection, but if the EMR hadn't been further delayed by making additional stops I think I'd have just about made the connection at Peterborough.
So Greater Anglia can legitimately say they didn't delay me as they arranged for EMR to pick us up. But EMR can say they aren't responsible as if the GA train had run as planned we'd still have made Peterborough in time.
So I risk having to appeal claims and the TOCs risk pinging the claim back and forth till one of them caves. What a waste of everyone's time and effort.
If it was centrally administered "the railway" would accept the delay was genuine, pay my compensation without delay and then sort out the attribution as an internal matter for "the railway".
"The railway" would also avoid the cost of duplicating administrative functions to manage delay repay.
Win win? Why is it split by TOC (most of whome seem to use the same third party technology provider in any case)?
I know not all TOCs have the same delay repay thresholds etc, but a central clearing house would be able to manage that.
I don't really want to claim against EMR, as that will only encourage them to not make additional stops when the GA service is cancelled.