Downgrade in Delay Compensation Scheme on TfL Rail / Elizabeth Line, Comare to GWR / Greater Anglia

hkstudent

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
534
Location
SE London
Before the routes transfer from Greater Anglia / GWR to TfL, Sheffield - London Liverpool Street and Reading - London Paddington are enjoying delay repay at a lower time threshold and better payout chance in many cases, as breakdown below:

Outside of TOC control:
GWR / Greater Anglia VS TfL
15-29: 25% single journey (including connecting journeys) vs 0%
30-59: 50% single journey (including connecting journeys) vs 0%
60+: 100% single journey (including connecting journeys) vs 50% single journey
120+: 100% return journey (including connecting journeys) vs 50% single journey

Within TOC control
GWR / Greater Anglia VS TfL
15-29: 25% single journey (including connecting journeys) vs 0%
30-59: 50% single journey (including connecting journeys) vs 100% on a single journey (PAYG fare on TfL section only)
60+: 100% single journey (including connecting journeys) vs 100% on a single journey (PAYG fare on TfL section only) or 50% single journey (including connecting journeys)
120+: 100% return journey (including connecting journeys) vs 100% on a single journey (PAYG fare on TfL section only) or 50% single journey (including connecting journeys)

It appears that it is much harder to get delay repay on TfL scheme, as most delays would not be hitting 30 minutes threshold or be beyond TfL's control (including the breakdown of other TOC trains blocking the pathway, or Network Rail infrastructure failure, which in one post here, TfL rejected the claim as out of TfL control).
Meanwhile, the potential payout may also be less, as PAYG fare is less than a paper fare, and also TfL will not be paying return fare if the delay is over 120 minutes.
TfL also will not payout any connecting journeys within 30-59 minutes delay (e.g. West Ealing - Oxford, TfL just pay for West Ealing - Reading), or at a lower rate on 60+ delay (50% on a full journey, if it is more expensive than 100% TfL section). For a case like Ealing Broadway - Cambridge Off-Peak return, with 30-59 delay, a passenger may lose out 4.95 compensation (EAL - CBG = 31 / 4 = 7.75 vs TfL EAL - KGX: 2.80)

I am thinking whether there is overlooked by the DfT when transferring infrastructure to TfL, while not requiring TfL to provide the same level of delay compensation scheme as GWR / Greater Anglia has done. Not sure whether London Travelwatch has spotted the issue. TfL always claims the transfer of NR service to TfL means an upgrade in experience, but it appears to me that, delay protection side is a big downgrade.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Speed43125

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2019
Messages
474
Location
Dunblane
I suppose this is due to it being seen as a more metro type service? For example, compare provisions on LU with National Rail, I would imagine this is meant to be just a move in towards the former. Certainly an interesting issue
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Events Co-ordinator
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
15,050
Location
Manchester
Compensation is set at very low levels on Mersyrail, Grand Central and Eurostar too. The minimum provision in the EU passenger rights obligations, which do still apply to the UK, are very low.
 

Horizon22

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
654
Location
London
Its odd if they're running on the exact same infrastructure too. For instance say there's a major signal failure and you happened to join a TfL service at Ealing Broadway, just a few minutes before a GWR 387 arrived. If both are held up on the relief lines for similar amount of time, one would get a lot more compensation despite the issue being identical.

The same issue occurs on the Overground and it doesn't seem right.
 

Horizon22

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
654
Location
London
I suppose this is due to it being seen as a more metro type service? For example, compare provisions on LU with National Rail, I would imagine this is meant to be just a move in towards the former. Certainly an interesting issue
Hardly when metro TOCs (Southern and Southeastern for example) both have 15 min delay repay. Frequency might be lower at some (but not all) and the argument doesn't really hold up.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Events Co-ordinator
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
15,050
Location
Manchester
It would be rather easy to standardise, or at least raise the baseline, simply by making the compensation a matter of law rather than a right of contract.

One assumes that the government doesn't consider it enough of a priority to spend time on.

The opposite argument is easily made too - compensation of values of less than £1 for short trips with 15 minute delays are extraordinarily wasteful in terms of processing cost and the cost of the user's time in lodging the claim, in relation to the actual compensatory effect enjoyed by the consumer. Consumers would clearly prefer to have trains running on time than to waste everyone's time and much more money claiming back £0.83 a day, but instead of actually doing something useful about the problem, DfT have often just extended compensation for it. The worst by far is when a trivial amount of compensation ends up being paid by a cheque which is posted out to me, only for me to then have to deposit it by post. Staff time, days of delay and wasted paper, the use of an expensive automatic cheque printing machine and two costs of postage all for the benefit of a few pounds back.
 
Last edited:

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,637
Location
Brentwood, Essex
It works both ways - whether it ultimately actually advantages or disadvantages the passenger isn't obvious. As an example, I live in what is now Zone 9, and thus travelling from Central London on the tube is one journey, as far as TfL are concerned.
This means that if the tube part of my journey is delayed >15 mins, which may only be within Zone 1 before I board TfL Rail at Liverpool Street, I get my full journey fare back, all the way to Zone 9 - so a 100% payout for an £8 journey, even if only delayed by 16 minutes on the tube which for other rail users would result in a £2.40 payout. Likewise, even if the delay concerns a TfL Rail journey only and the tube/overground etc. are not used, if the delay is >30 mins, it's a full refund, rather than only 50% as per delay repay rules.

Where the system falls down is that delays 'outside direct control' of TfL, while covered by delay repay (e.g. security incidents, industrial action, bridge strikes, trespassers, fatalities etc.), are not covered by TfL, so in those cases where with NR delay repay you might get 50% or 100% if it was a >30 or >60 minute delay, you get nothing. Of course if the delay was only 29 minutes, even under NR rules you'd get nothing regardless.

It's been a couple of years since I commuted daily into the city, but to be quite honest, for the year or so I travelled routinely (and all the sporadic occasions subsequently which averaged about once a week pre-covid) I don't think TfL's system necessarily worked out worse for me in the long run as far as amount of compensation owed. It really sucks when you get caught up in a big, say, 90 minute delay that they won't pay out for but equally, at least until TfL expanded to Reading, you weren't ever paying big sums for fares so your compensation would only ever have been fairly limited.

It's not a system I'm necessarily all that happy with, but on balance, it's not all that bad. I would also add that when a claim was submitted via TfL, it didn't require any photographs of tickets that had subsequently been binned or swallowed by ticket barriers or any of the BS other TOCs try and pull on you, it's all there in your oyster account for them to see - I usually get the money returned within 2-3 days, sometimes within 24 hours.
 

hkstudent

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
534
Location
SE London
I suppose this is due to it being seen as a more metro type service? For example, compare provisions on LU with National Rail, I would imagine this is meant to be just a move in towards the former. Certainly an interesting issue
Yeah, but even the time threshold is even worse than other TOCs (30 min vs 15 min).
It is unlikely for a metro service to have 30 min delay...

This means that if the tube part of my journey is delayed >15 mins, which may only be within Zone 1 before I board TfL Rail at Liverpool Street, I get my full journey fare back, all the way to Zone 9 - so a 100% payout for an £8 journey, even if only delayed by 16 minutes on the tube which for other rail users would result in a £2.40 payout.
But for the rail bit, 15 mins gets you nothing with TfL, but 25% with Greater Anglia.
The railway can be more vulnerable than the tube sometimes, but not severe enough for 30 mins.

Also, I am more focused on railway only passengers, for which may also travel out of the Greater London area, with connecting journeys.

It would be rather easy to standardise, or at least raise the baseline, simply by making the compensation a matter of law rather than a right of contract.

One assumes that the government doesn't consider it enough of a priority to spend time on.

The opposite argument is easily made too - compensation of values of less than £1 for short trips with 15 minute delays are extraordinarily wasteful in terms of processing cost and the cost of the user's time in lodging the claim, in relation to the actual compensatory effect enjoyed by the consumer. Consumers would clearly prefer to have trains running on time than to waste everyone's time and much more money claiming back £0.83 a day, but instead of actually doing something useful about the problem, DfT have often just extended compensation for it. The worst by far is when a trivial amount of compensation ends up being paid by a cheque which is posted out to me, only for me to then have to deposit it by post. Staff time, days of delay and wasted paper, the use of an expensive automatic cheque printing machine and two costs of postage all for the benefit of a few pounds back.
Yeah, that's the reason why C2C uses an automatic delay repay system on their smartcard, which is a great saving on manpower.
They can even use part of the cost saved to fund delay repay on 3 to 14-minute delay.
 
Last edited:

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,610
Before the routes transfer from Greater Anglia / GWR to TfL, Sheffield - London Liverpool Street and Reading - London Paddington are enjoying delay repay at a lower time threshold and better payout chance in many cases, as breakdown below:

It appears that it is much harder to get delay repay on TfL scheme, as most delays would not be hitting 30 minutes threshold or be beyond TfL's control (including the breakdown of other TOC trains blocking the pathway, or Network Rail infrastructure failure, which in one post here, TfL rejected the claim as out of TfL control).
Meanwhile, the potential payout may also be less, as PAYG fare is less than a paper fare, and also TfL will not be paying return fare if the delay is over 120 minutes.
TfL also will not payout any connecting journeys within 30-59 minutes delay (e.g. West Ealing - Oxford, TfL just pay for West Ealing - Reading), or at a lower rate on 60+ delay (50% on a full journey, if it is more expensive than 100% TfL section). For a case like Ealing Broadway - Cambridge Off-Peak return, with 30-59 delay, a passenger may lose out 4.95 compensation (EAL - CBG = 31 / 4 = 7.75 vs TfL EAL - KGX: 2.80)

I am thinking whether there is overlooked by the DfT when transferring infrastructure to TfL, while not requiring TfL to provide the same level of delay compensation scheme as GWR / Greater Anglia has done. Not sure whether London Travelwatch has spotted the issue. TfL always claims the transfer of NR service to TfL means an upgrade in experience, but it appears to me that, delay protection side is a big downgrade.
Delay repay is very a new concept and the transfer to TfL (barring minor tweaks) was agreed long before Delay Repay existed.

Delay Repay only exists on more recently refranchised or direct awarded DfT Franchises e.g. It didn't exist on SWT but does on SWR. (Still not at Chiltern either). On early delay repay schemes the threshold was 30mins, on the newer schemes 15 minutes. Delay repay schemes are effectively unique to each TOC at the detailed level as DfT thinking evolves.

Non franchised operators e.g. Open access (GC, Hull, Heathrow Express) or locally controlled e.g. TfL or MerseryRail don't have it either as they have their own schemes in many cases as there is less DfT control.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,637
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Yeah, but even the time threshold is even worse than other TOCs (30 min vs 15 min).
It is unlikely for a metro service to have 30 min delay...


But for the rail bit, 15 mins gets you nothing with TfL, but 25% with Greater Anglia.
The railway can be more vulnerable than the tube sometimes, but not severe enough for 30 mins.

Also, I am more focused on railway only passengers, for which may also travel out of the Greater London area, with connecting journeys.


Yeah, that's the reason why C2C uses an automatic delay repay system on their smartcard, which is a great saving on manpower.
They can even use part of the cost saved to fund delay repay on 3 to 14-minute delay.
It is unlikely for a 30 minute delay on the tube but it's not unusual for a 10 minute tube delay to ultimately lead to a 30 minute delay on your journey - where I've applied in cases where this has happened, they've usually paid out. TfL aren't anywhere near as evidence-hungry as TOCs as long as you don't try and game the system, whereas many TOCs in my experience do everything in their power to prevent people claiming.

25% DR15 has certainly made things better for the TOCs that honour that scheme but it's far from nationwide, to my recollection only a small number of TOCs currently offer it as delay repay isn't actually a legal requirement, just a railway operator's gentleman's agreement (I would say franchise commitment but since franchise commitments aren't actually enforced either, they're meaningless).

As for C2C, it's a nice idea in principle but ultimately a gimmick as I believe they pay something like £0.03 per minute. By the time you reach 15 minutes, that's still £0.45 whereas almost every 25% DR15 case is going to be far more than that. Unlike other TOCs, the incidence of 3-15 minute delays with C2C isn't really high enough to make any substantial dent in your ticket costs either, which is probably why, to my knowledge, they're the only TOC to offer such a scheme.
 

hkstudent

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
534
Location
SE London
Delay repay is very a new concept and the transfer to TfL (barring minor tweaks) was agreed long before Delay Repay existed.

Delay Repay only exists on more recently refranchised or direct awarded DfT Franchises e.g. It didn't exist on SWT but does on SWR. (Still not at Chiltern either). On early delay repay schemes the threshold was 30mins, on the newer schemes 15 minutes. Delay repay schemes are effectively unique to each TOC at the detailed level as DfT thinking evolves.

Non franchised operators e.g. Open access (GC, Hull, Heathrow Express) or locally controlled e.g. TfL or MerseryRail don't have it either as they have their own schemes in many cases as there is less DfT control.
I think we have to note that the infrastructure transfer agreement (from DfT to TfL) of the western section of Crossrail was signed after the implementation of DR15 on some TOCs based on a new franchise agreement, including GTR and SWR. There was not even a single mentioning regarding to DR on transfer agreement (this is available on FOI request that was made by someone)

It is unlikely for a 30 minute delay on the tube but it's not unusual for a 10 minute tube delay to ultimately lead to a 30 minute delay on your journey - where I've applied in cases where this has happened, they've usually paid out. TfL aren't anywhere near as evidence-hungry as TOCs as long as you don't try and game the system, whereas many TOCs in my experience do everything in their power to prevent people claiming.

25% DR15 has certainly made things better for the TOCs that honour that scheme but it's far from nationwide, to my recollection only a small number of TOCs currently offer it as delay repay isn't actually a legal requirement, just a railway operator's gentleman's agreement (I would say franchise commitment but since franchise commitments aren't actually enforced either, they're meaningless).

As for C2C, it's a nice idea in principle but ultimately a gimmick as I believe they pay something like £0.03 per minute. By the time you reach 15 minutes, that's still £0.45 whereas almost every 25% DR15 case is going to be far more than that. Unlike other TOCs, the incidence of 3-15 minute delays with C2C isn't really high enough to make any substantial dent in your ticket costs either, which is probably why, to my knowledge, they're the only TOC to offer such a scheme.
They are not evidenced hungry as they have the information on hand already, compare to other train companies.
Most of the journeys on TfL are using Oystercard / Contactless, which they have a full record of your journey.

They still need a bit more evidence if you use a paper ticket to claim.
 

Horizon22

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
654
Location
London
There are specific areaas where this falls down, especially when you have TfL and TOC services side by side and really the average passenger would get on whatever service is useful to them and I think this what the OP is getting at. Also the removal of the "outside direct control". Passengers don't care - they've been delayed and want compensation.

Off the top of my head this might include (and I'm sure there are more):
- London Overground / Southern from Crystal Palace / Norwood Junction to New Cross Gate
- TfL Rail / GWR services from Hayes / Ealing Broadway etc. to Paddington.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,610
I think we have to note that the infrastructure transfer agreement (from DfT to TfL) of the western section of Crossrail was signed after the implementation of DR15 on some TOCs based on a new franchise agreement, including GTR and SWR. There was not even a single mentioning regarding to DR on transfer agreement (this is available on FOI request that was made by someone)
That is the late minor tweak I was referring to, that was an update to the previous plan to include Reading. DR would not be applicable in the Core, Eastern section (or probably Heathrow/ Maidenhead services that were also covered by the old agreement.), Hence illogical to include for Reading services on a small section of the route...
DfT had agreed to devolve Crossrail to DfT a long time ago with certain conditions hence no fundamental changes to happen as regards that.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Events Co-ordinator
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
15,050
Location
Manchester
Delay repay is very a new concept and the transfer to TfL (barring minor tweaks) was agreed long before Delay Repay existed.

Delay Repay only exists on more recently refranchised or direct awarded DfT Franchises e.g. It didn't exist on SWT but does on SWR. (Still not at Chiltern either). On early delay repay schemes the threshold was 30mins, on the newer schemes 15 minutes. Delay repay schemes are effectively unique to each TOC at the detailed level as DfT thinking evolves.

Non franchised operators e.g. Open access (GC, Hull, Heathrow Express) or locally controlled e.g. TfL or MerseryRail don't have it either as they have their own schemes in many cases as there is less DfT control.
The Hull Trains compensation scheme is almost as generous as most 30 minutes Delay Repay scheme, despite them not being contracted to offer it. The main difference with the other charter compensation schemes is the retention of the exceptions for delays outwith "industry control".

Chiltern is the only company contracted by DfT not to have moved to 'Delay Repay' (subject to transitional arrangements at GWR which I don't know the timescales of).
 

Horizon22

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
654
Location
London
That is the late minor tweak I was referring to, that was an update to the previous plan to include Reading. DR would not be applicable in the Core, Eastern section (or probably Heathrow/ Maidenhead services that were also covered by the old agreement.), Hence illogical to include for Reading services on a small section of the route...
DfT had agreed to devolve Crossrail to DfT a long time ago with certain conditions hence no fundamental changes to happen as regards that.
How does that work in practice though when these trains can very practically and realistically be delayed by NR infrastructure or say other TOCs and FOCs?
 

matt_world2004

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2014
Messages
2,781
How does that work in practice though when these trains can very practically and realistically be delayed by NR infrastructure or say other TOCs and FOCs?
While there have been some incidents where customer services at TfL have got it wrong on this. Generally TfL will treat delays caused by other operators and NR as within their control. And as they should.
 

hkstudent

Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
534
Location
SE London
That is the late minor tweak I was referring to, that was an update to the previous plan to include Reading. DR would not be applicable in the Core, Eastern section (or probably Heathrow/ Maidenhead services that were also covered by the old agreement.), Hence illogical to include for Reading services on a small section of the route...
DfT had agreed to devolve Crossrail to DfT a long time ago with certain conditions hence no fundamental changes to happen as regards that.
The issue, is, despite small, but there are still groups of people be deprived.
Especially, there would be some regular non-London commuters between Maidenhead and Reading, to travel to places further north or west.
 

Top