Delayed - would you rather......

[crispy1978]

Assuming you know you are going to be delayed, either due to a late arrival or departure - let's assume it's down as 24 minutes when you set off from your destination, and delay repay kicks in at 30 minutes - would you rather arrive that 24 minutes late, or for the sake of 6/7 minutes, and a potential refund, would you rather hit the 30 minutes late mark?

I realise that there are a few variables which may influence your decision, but as a general rule what would you prefer?

 

[AlterEgo]

I'd take the delay repay.

 

[pemma]

It would really depend on the situation. My local service is hourly so on occasions a 30-40 minute delay wouldn't mean I would arrive late at where I am intending to go so there's no advantage in the train being 24 minutes late over being 31 minutes late.

However, if it was something important like a job interview and the delay is before I board then I might prefer it to turn up 24 minutes late over 31 even if I'd still arrive 30 minutes before the interview starts because otherwise I might start getting concerned if the train gets stopped at too many red signals or stays stopped at one for a few minutes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would prefer minimising delay. Indeed, I'd rather abolish Delay Repay entirely and go back to spending the money on minimising delay and keeping fares down.

 

[Howardh]

Interesting that when I got my delay repay - all I had to do was scan my tickets. No proof required as to whether I travelled or not!

Is this a loophole the companies have missed? I could have missed my booked train and bought a ticket on another, yet still get the compensation from the first journey I didn't take.

 

[johntea]

It depends on the situation really, as nice as it is being able to claim Delay Repay on a £100 Glasgow ticket what isn't as nice is having to sit in a taxi from Newcastle to Leeds on a Sunday evening / early morning when you have work on Monday!

 

[gordonthemoron]

depends how much the ticket costs

 

[robbeech]

In the grand scheme of things it's likely cheaper for them to accept the claims than to try and check up on every claim to ensure it is genuine. If you imagine an open return. In theory you could pick any train to travel back on within a 1 month period, if just one of those is delayed you could say you were on that train but it doesn't go without huge risks. If it were proved that you did not travel on that train (cctv at a station or on board, the guard used a specific stamp and your ticket has a different one, different data on the magnetic strip and other things) then you can end up in a lot of trouble far outweighing a few rogue claims.

To answer the original question. It rather depends, I always try to give myself time for delays if I can. For example if I absolutely have to be home for 4.30 I wouldn't catch the 1229 from st Pancras giving me an 8 minute connection at Nottingham before the hourly service to where I live. So I guess in most cases where I am able to leave a bit extra time I would rather be 31L than 27L in order to claim. But I would sooner be 15L and not have to rush anywhere. I buy a train ticket because I need or want to go somewhere.

 

[pemma]

I could have missed my booked train and bought a ticket on another, yet still get the compensation from the first journey I didn't take.

Falsely claiming Delay Repay is a criminal offence and people who have been caught doing that have been taken to court. If your ticket's been stamped or scribbled on then it may identify which service you travelled on. I'm not sure if they can tell whether your ticket has been put through a barrier by using what's on the front of the ticket.

However, if your outbound train is cancelled and you choose not to travel you can get a full refund.

 

[Howardh]

In the grand scheme of things it's likely cheaper for them to accept the claims than to try and check up on every claim to ensure it is genuine. If you imagine an open return. In theory you could pick any train to travel back on within a 1 month period, if just one of those is delayed you could say you were on that train but it doesn't go without huge risks. If it were proved that you did not travel on that train (cctv at a station or on board, the guard used a specific stamp and your ticket has a different one, different data on the magnetic strip and other things) then you can end up in a lot of trouble far outweighing a few rogue claims.

To answer the original question. It rather depends, I always try to give myself time for delays if I can. For example if I absolutely have to be home for 4.30 I wouldn't catch the 1229 from st Pancras giving me an 8 minute connection at Nottingham before the hourly service to where I live. So I guess in most cases where I am able to leave a bit extra time I would rather be 31L than 27L in order to claim. But I would sooner be 15L and not have to rush anywhere. I buy a train ticket because I need or want to go somewhere.

Maybe the guard on the delayed train could go round and give everyone a delay ticket, so there's proof they travelled? OK< sometimes the guard would be working on the delay, and that would be impossible, but that could be noted by the company if these tickets weren't issued?

 

[AlterEgo]

If your ticket's been stamped or scribbled on then it may identify which service you travelled on. I'm not sure if they can tell whether your ticket has been put through a barrier by using what's on the front of the ticket.

They can't.

It is very easy to defraud the Delay Repay system, one of the rail industry's many boiling frogs at the moment. It is easily possible to recoup much more than the face value of a ticket.

The TOCs are *well* behind the curve on this.

 

[yorkie]

Maybe the guard on the delayed train could go round and give everyone a delay ticket, so there's proof they travelled? OK< sometimes the guard would be working on the delay, and that would be impossible, but that could be noted by the company if these tickets weren't issued?

Totally impracticable.

 

[pemma]

Totally impracticable.

Agreed. Especially for those turning up for a cancelled train, or those who arrive at their destination late after using multiple delayed trains. Even for trains delayed by 30 minutes due to a signalling fault between the final two stations it relies on the conductor having enough 'delay tickets', not being a service operated by two units which don't have a through corridor and the train not being too crowded for the conductor to make their way through.

 

[Howardh]

Totally impracticable.

In what way? OK, if it's a fault with the train s/he would be working on it or communicating, but if s/he's meant to go round the train checking tickets when moving, why not just go round and hand a delay slip out? Seema s logical solution which could prevent "fraud" and save money, thus keeping fares down.

Clearly there are issues if you can't board the train because it's cancelled, but even so I'm sure there are ways round that even?

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is another revenue-related problem "compostage", i.e. the requirement to stamp your own ticket to validate it before boarding a train on your day of travel, could reduce significantly.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Maybe the guard on the delayed train could go round and give everyone a delay ticket, so there's proof they travelled?

Thats what I did on 1F71 yesterday. Took all pax details so I knew exactly who and how many I had on the train.

 

[Fishplate84]

I never claim delay repay because it is a system that is expensive to operate and is another thing that perpetuates the nonesense money-go-round that dogs the industry for no practical benefit.
What is interesting in the responses is the number of people who state that when planning their journey they don't rely on perfect connections and will plan their journey with enough slack time so as not to have to rush.

But the economists who run the railway assume every minute is precious and justify billions of £ of investment not on the basis that it's the sensible and pragmatic thing to do to develop the network but every minute of journey time saving will translate to economic value. I've always thought the number of people that logic applies to is tiny and for most, a quicker journey, especially over a longer distance only really means time waiting with another coffee or an extra few minutes at home before leaving for the station!

From the responses here, people routinely extend their journey by half an hour or more just to avoid being rushed.

 

[Hadders]

In what way? OK, if it's a fault with the train s/he would be working on it or communicating, but if s/he's meant to go round the train checking tickets when moving, why not just go round and hand a delay slip out? Seema s logical solution which could prevent "fraud" and save money, thus keeping fares down.

Clearly there are issues if you can't board the train because it's cancelled, but even so I'm sure there are ways round that even?

So how's it going to work on a crush loaded class 700. 12 cars full and standing with up to 2,000 passengers on board. Oh, there's no guard either!

Even if there was a guard there's no way they could do this task on such a busy service.

 

[AlterEgo]

In what way? OK, if it's a fault with the train s/he would be working on it or communicating, but if s/he's meant to go round the train checking tickets when moving, why not just go round and hand a delay slip out? Seema s logical solution which could prevent "fraud" and save money, thus keeping fares down.

Clearly there are issues if you can't board the train because it's cancelled, but even so I'm sure there are ways round that even?

The majority of large delays are caused by fouled connections. What if the train was 10 minutes late, but caused a handful of passengers to miss an hourly train at an interchange station?

A delay of even one minute can foul a connection leading to Delay Repay.

 

[cuccir]

Of course it depends on your journey/purpose, but yes I think when the delays tick up in the mid 20s there's a big part of me which is thinking - well we might as well be another 5 minutes late and get some cash out of this

 

[Howardh]

So how's it going to work on a crush loaded class 700. 12 cars full and standing with up to 2,000 passengers on board. Oh, there's no guard either!

Even if there was a guard there's no way they could do this task on such a busy service.

At some point their tickets are checked. If not on the train, then at the barriers as they get off? How's about handing out the *proof of travel* there? Might be a queue but those in a hurry would have the option not to wait for one and forgo their compensation.
Or is it a case of 2,000 don't get checked at all, so it's a free ride for all?

Also - safety wise, how come a train with 2,000 on doesn't have a guard? Are the unions aware??

 

[rebmcr]

Thats what I did on 1F71 yesterday. Took all pax details so I knew exactly who and how many I had on the train.

That's great service, but doesn't cover passengers who decided not to travel, so the Repay office can't rely on it as a whitelist.

Also - safety wise, how come a train with 2,000 on doesn't have a guard? Are the unions aware??

The unions are very much aware of Southern/Thameslink's Class 700 trains.

 

[Hadders]

At some point their tickets are checked. If not on the train, then at the barriers as they get off? How's about handing out the *proof of travel* there? Might be a queue but those in a hurry would have the option not to wait for one and forgo their compensation.
Or is it a case of 2,000 don't get checked at all, so it's a free ride for all?

Also - safety wise, how come a train with 2,000 on doesn't have a guard? Are the unions aware??

Have you seen how busy trains are in London and the South East? Take Stevenage station for example, which is nowhere near the busiest station. A train arrives in the evening peak every few minutes from London. There's hardly time to clear the platforms before the next train arrives. There's absolutely no way you could introduce anything that would slow down passengers leaving the station. Stevenage does have barriers but there are times when they have to be left open on safety grounds.

As for trains with no guards we've had them on Great Northern for over 20 years. Up to 12 carriages running at up to 100 mph, some of them operate non-stop between Kings Cross and Cambridge. Even if there was a guard s/he would stand no chance of getting through on many of the trains.

 

[Crossover]

On the Delay Repay issue and the guard getting details - I had this on a ScotRail service when it broke down and it took the onboard staff an absolute age to get round everyone - in the circumstances it didn't matter as such as we were stranded for well over an hour anyway

 

[AlterEgo]

That's great service, but doesn't cover passengers who decided not to travel, so the Repay office can't rely on it as a whitelist.

Passengers who don't travel get a refund on their ticket from the point of purchase and are therefore not eligible for Delay Repay.

 

[sk688]

24 minute delay

A train fare is only 70p anyway

 

[chris89]

depends how much the ticket costs

Like wise.

Although, Many times i could have got Delay Repay. I have never bother, either due to knowing journey times will be delayed, due to weather Conditions (WCML a few years ago, with Wind based speed restrictions)

Last journey i did do, got Delay repay automatically with the system VTWC now use, if you book tickets directly from them.

17th Nov train arrived 36ish late into Edinburgh Waverley, due to 'Lovely' Children throwing stuff at trains infront of mine at Watford Junction Area. (It arrived, at Wolves 17 late, but lost it's slots) So got about 30 back from that ticket. that also was done instantly about 30 mins after, got off the train got emails saying about refund.

22nd Nov, Signal Failure at Warrington? (Sorry, get confused, for which one is closer to Crewe) Train arrived just 30 late at Wolverhampton, but only departed 17 late, took VT a few days to figure that out, But didn't actively go after it, as wasn't bothered.

 

[TrainfanBen]

Interesting that when I got my delay repay - all I had to do was scan my tickets. No proof required as to whether I travelled or not!
Is this a loophole the companies have missed? I could have missed my booked train and bought a ticket on another, yet still get the compensation from the first journey I didn't take.

If you are suggesting that you purchased train tickets for an alternative service as a result of a delayed train then I could see the arguement, however the point of not travelling just screams out as being fraudulent*

Old post above ^^^

*(as others have said)

Back on topic though, I think I'd rather just not be delayed, especially since most journey's I make on the railway usually involve connecting bus services. I pay to for the journey, therefore I'd rather be moving.

Its a bit like the "Do you wait for the quicker service" conundrum or "Pay more for the journey that departs first" dilemma. I suppose its a question of how much you value your time.

 

[sheff1]

Thats what I did on 1F71 yesterday. Took all pax details so I knew exactly who and how many I had on the train

That's great service

I do not believe it is a great service at all. I would be most unimpressed if a guard asked me for my details merely because I happened to be on a delayed train.

 

[BlueFox]

Assuming you know you are going to be delayed, either due to a late arrival or departure - let's assume it's down as 24 minutes when you set off from your destination, and delay repay kicks in at 30 minutes - would you rather arrive that 24 minutes late, or for the sake of 6/7 minutes, and a potential refund, would you rather hit the 30 minutes late mark?

I was in this situation on Saturday. My train from Sunderland to Carlisle was cancelled, so I had to get the Metro and a later train from Newcastle. I wasn't happy when I realised the next train, if it was on time, would get me to Carlisle 26 minutes late. I was hoping for another delay to push it over 30 minutes, but that didn't happen.