• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

EMR Delay Repay Dispute

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ryan Pepper

Member
Joined
7 Aug 2019
Messages
7
Not sure what to do here, so just looking for some advice.

I was travelling from Hampton Court to Long Eaton last month, on the day that floods closed the line at Draycott (14th November)

I caught my scheduled train from HC to Waterloo, got the tube to St Pancras, and saw that my train was cancelled (16:31 service, which would normally get in at 18:03)

I was *just* in time after getting off the tube to catch an earlier train (the 16:05) which stopped at Beeston at 17:46. No rail replacement services were running between Nottingham and Derby until the next day, and the station staff were frankly pretty rubbish - the lady at the desk advised me that I could get a train to Leicester and then get to Long Eaton that way, despite the track being completely underwater! I'd originally planned to get a bus or taxi, but because of the road flooding, the traffic was stationary and I ended up walking home (I live about 2 minutes walk from Long Eaton station), including through some flood water at Chilwell which was fairly miserable - it's a good hour and a half walk even at the best of times, and with my bag I wasn't very speedy. I didn't get back to my house until about 20:10, so I was over two hours delayed.

I submitted a delay repay claim to EMR, on the basis that it was my original train was the one cancelled and which caused me the delay. They rejected it, and said that the reason for my delay was that the connecting Cross Country trains from Beeston to Nottingham were cancelled and therefore they'd forward on my claim to then. I appealed, explaining my journey as above, and they rejected it again with the same response.

My question is: am I right to be claiming the delay repay from EMR here? In my mind, I would have got their service at 16:32 and been home if that service hadn't run, and so the cancelled short journey at the end between Beeston and Long Eaton station is irrelevant. I'm not sure whether to appeal for a second time, or just make a formal complaint + threaten to go to the omsbudsman.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
It’s a bit of a difficult one for several reasons. Technically they could argue you were travelling without a ticket from Loughborough to Beeston, or that you didn’t help yourself by jumping on the train to Beeston rather than waiting for the next available train to Long Eaton, which I guess would have been the 17:19 from St. Pancras to Derby – or was that cancelled too? The data I can see doesn’t go back that far.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Not sure what to do here, so just looking for some advice.

I was travelling from Hampton Court to Long Eaton last month, on the day that floods closed the line at Draycott (14th November)

I caught my scheduled train from HC to Waterloo, got the tube to St Pancras, and saw that my train was cancelled (16:31 service, which would normally get in at 18:03)

I was *just* in time after getting off the tube to catch an earlier train (the 16:05) which stopped at Beeston at 17:46. No rail replacement services were running between Nottingham and Derby until the next day, and the station staff were frankly pretty rubbish - the lady at the desk advised me that I could get a train to Leicester and then get to Long Eaton that way, despite the track being completely underwater! I'd originally planned to get a bus or taxi, but because of the road flooding, the traffic was stationary and I ended up walking home (I live about 2 minutes walk from Long Eaton station), including through some flood water at Chilwell which was fairly miserable - it's a good hour and a half walk even at the best of times, and with my bag I wasn't very speedy. I didn't get back to my house until about 20:10, so I was over two hours delayed.

I submitted a delay repay claim to EMR, on the basis that it was my original train was the one cancelled and which caused me the delay. They rejected it, and said that the reason for my delay was that the connecting Cross Country trains from Beeston to Nottingham were cancelled and therefore they'd forward on my claim to then. I appealed, explaining my journey as above, and they rejected it again with the same response.

My question is: am I right to be claiming the delay repay from EMR here? In my mind, I would have got their service at 16:32 and been home if that service hadn't run, and so the cancelled short journey at the end between Beeston and Long Eaton station is irrelevant. I'm not sure whether to appeal for a second time, or just make a formal complaint + threaten to go to the omsbudsman.
does sound bad - was there no option of a Trent Barton Indigo route bus from Beeston Bus station to Long Eaton as a matter of interest? Which of course I accept you would have had to pay up for.

On the OP:
maybe you need to see what Cross Country say, and if no sense from either of them go to the Ombudsman.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,461
Location
Sheffield
Technically they could argue you were travelling without a ticket from Loughborough to Beeston,

It is unclear what ticket was held. A walk up ticket from Hampton Court to Long Eaton is valid via Beeston as per map NM in the Routeing Guide (Long Eaton is a member of Derby Routeing Point Group and Beeston is member of Nottingham Routeing Point Group).
>>>>>

To OP:

If you were travelling on a walk up ticket via a valid route then, as the connection from Beeston to Long Eaton was cancelled, I agree with EMR that the Delay Repay claim is against Cross Country.

If it was an Advance ticket the paraphrased 'rules' are that if a train is cancelled you should catch the next service (unless you get permission to board an earlier one) operated by the same TOC (i.e. EMR). That complicates things, so before going any further can you confirm what type of ticket you were using.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,434
Location
Yorkshire
There is a lot of text there but it's really difficult to help without a list of all ticket(s) held, the originally planned itinerary and actual itinerary in easy to read list or tabular format.
 

Belperpete

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2018
Messages
1,581
Did you seek advice from staff at St Pancras? If you made the decision to travel via Beeston without getting any advice as to whether onward transport was available from there, then I don't see that EMR can be held responsible for the lack of the onward XC service. Only if EMR staff specifically advised you to travel by that route could they be held accountable. If you decided to travel via Beeston, then EMR successfully got you there.
 

Ryan Pepper

Member
Joined
7 Aug 2019
Messages
7
Hi all,

Sorry for the missed details.

It was the return journey of an Anytime Return. I did have a seat reservation for the 16:31 service; the later services were showing as cancelled completely at St Pancras, and from what I heard from others, they didn’t run any rail replacement buses at all on the day it happened. I literally saw the board, ran and jumped on a train as fast as possible to try and avoid getting stuck in London.

I could have caught a Trent Barton bus from the station - that was my intention as I live just off of Tamworth Rd near the station and I knew the Skylink went past both stations, but as I said, the traffic was pretty gridlocked - I even saw one guy streaming videos while stationary in his car - and I forgot to mention that all of the buses were full and not letting people on at any of the stops on Queens Road. My wife was also caught up in it getting back from Leicester - she ended up catching the tram from Nottingham to her parents house as she couldn’t get on a bus after half an hour of queuing and I picked her up - it was a complete nightmare evening to be honest!
 

Belperpete

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2018
Messages
1,581
So you made the decision to travel via Beeston, which is probably what I would have done in your situation. This is a valid route, and EMR successfully got you to Beeston. So I agree with EMR that your claim should be against the operator of the first timetabled connecting service from Beeston. If the first connecting train from Beeston had been an EMR Matlock service, then your claim would have been against EMR. If it was a XC service, then your claim should be against XC.

If you had waited at St Pancras for your booked direct train to Long Eaton, you would have had a claim against EMR - but heaven knows what time you would have got back home!
 

Qwerty133

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2012
Messages
2,453
Location
Leicester/Sheffield
So you made the decision to travel via Beeston, which is probably what I would have done in your situation. This is a valid route, and EMR successfully got you to Beeston. So I agree with EMR that your claim should be against the operator of the first timetabled connecting service from Beeston. If the first connecting train from Beeston had been an EMR Matlock service, then your claim would have been against EMR. If it was a XC service, then your claim should be against XC.

If you had waited at St Pancras for your booked direct train to Long Eaton, you would have had a claim against EMR - but heaven knows what time you would have got back home!
I strongly doubt that the OP will ever get a favourable outcome in this case if they are pushing for 2 hours of delay compensation. Unfortunately, in order to have been delayed by over 2 hours the OP would have to have taken almost an hour longer than the time suggested by google maps to complete the walk between Beeston and Long Eaton, something that I very much doubt any TOC would accept to have been unavoidably the case. Furthermore there is a very good chance that the 16:05 would not have been a valid connection off of his service into London and therefore the TOC could argue that the scheduled arrival time into Long Eaton by the route chosen by the OP was significantly later than 18:03 (in fact on the current timetable it would appear to be 19:22).
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,461
Location
Sheffield
The OP was on the 1605 from St Pancras. I do not see why any travel prior to that is relevant to the delay incurred due to the cancellation of all trains from Beeston to Long Eaton. Using the 1605 gives a scheduled arrival in Long Eaton of 1825 (based on the current timetable).
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,434
Location
Yorkshire
...Furthermore there is a very good chance that the 16:05 would not have been a valid connection off of his service into London..
The OP was on the 1605 from St Pancras. I do not see why any travel prior to that is relevant to the delay incurred due to the cancellation of all trains from Beeston to Long Eaton. Using the 1605 gives a scheduled arrival in Long Eaton of 1825 (based on the current timetable).
There is conflicting advice here however a claim that was made on the basis of simply being at St Pancras in good time for the 1605 and taking that train, should be calculated on that basis.

I would keep the claim simple and concise.
 

Qwerty133

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2012
Messages
2,453
Location
Leicester/Sheffield
There is conflicting advice here however a claim that was made on the basis of simply being at St Pancras in good time for the 1605 and taking that train, should be calculated on that basis.

I would keep the claim simple and concise.
I think you are confusing a couple of issues.
A dodgy TOC may try and argue that the itinerary that the delay is calculated against should be based upon the same route that was actually undertaken except in cases where railway staff suggest a different route. Separately it is entirely possible that the 16:05 was not a valid connection for the train the OP caught into Waterloo (I am not sure if you have missed that the OP was on a singular cross london journey and therefore only itineraries that meet the official transfer time can be used to calculate delay repay). Separately again is the issue that the OP claims to have taken almost an hour longer than what is already likely to be a overgenerous estimate of the time needed to walk between Beeston and Long Eaton and that it is unlikely that the TOC would believe such a claim.
Personally, I believe that the TOC would be in the wrong to try and argue that only itineraries via Beeston should be included when calculating the scheduled arrival time and should therefore calculate the delay against the expected arrival time of 18:03* that could be obtained by travelling direct from St Pancras, however that they would be perfectly reasonable to consider the OP to have arrived at Long Eaton 93 minutes after arriving at Beeston based upon the best available estimate for the journey on foot and therefore paying only for a 1 hour delay (while passengers have no obligation to walk between stations, any who choose to do so probably do have a obligation to do so at reasonable speed and without making unnecessary stops in order to minimise the overall delay).
*In this particular instance whether or not the 16:05 would have been a valid connection is irrelevant as the arrival time achievable by changing off of this service at Beeston is a couple of minutes later than the scheduled arrival by catching the direct train at 16:31
 

Qwerty133

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2012
Messages
2,453
Location
Leicester/Sheffield
The OP was on the 1605 from St Pancras. I do not see why any travel prior to that is relevant to the delay incurred due to the cancellation of all trains from Beeston to Long Eaton. Using the 1605 gives a scheduled arrival in Long Eaton of 1825 (based on the current timetable).
Delay repay applies to the entire journey and therefore can only be calculated using itineraries that are valid for the entire journey which means previous travel is relevant in this case as the minimum cross London transfer times have to be met.
 

Belperpete

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2018
Messages
1,581
The OP stated that he arrived at Beeston at 1746. He then went to get advice from the station staff, so probably didn't leave the station until about 1800, and arrived home about 2010. So just over 30 minutes longer than the Google-given time of 93 minutes. Considering he was carrying a bag, through floodwater, in the dark, that time does not seem unreasonable to me.
 

Belperpete

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2018
Messages
1,581
I think you are confusing a couple of issues.
A dodgy TOC may try and argue that the itinerary that the delay is calculated against should be based upon the same route that was actually undertaken except in cases where railway staff suggest a different route.
Let's assume there had been no flooding, and the OP had decided to travel on the 1605 via Beeston because he felt like it (as he would be perfectly entitled to do), any delay would be calculated based on that itinerary. The time that he would have arrived had he caught the originally-booked 1631 would be irrelevant.

Where a passenger voluntarily changes itinerary, any delay should be calculated against the revised itinerary, not what may originally have been booked. If you decide to catch a train two hours later than you were booked on, you can't then claim two hours delay. Likewise if you decide to take a different, slower route, you can't then claim delay because it took you longer than your originally booked route. Conversely, if you decide to catch a train two hours earlier than that you were booked on, and that train arrives two hours late, the TOC can't then say that you aren't entitled to anything as you arrived at the time you were originally booked to arrive. Where a passenger decides to travel on a different itinerary to that booked, then any delay should be based on that itinerary.

In this case, the OP decided to travel on the 1605 via Beeston, not on the 1631 direct train he was originally booked on. He would have been perfectly entitled to wait for his booked train (and claim for any consequent delay), he was not directed to travel on the earlier train. It was entirely his choice to travel on a different train and route to that he was originally booked on. Any delay should therefore be based on that itinerary, regardless of what he may originally have been booked on.

So, as the itinerary the OP chose to travel was EMR to Beeston and then XC to Long Eaton, and EMR successfully got him to Beeston, the OP was wrong to claim against EMR, and EMR were right to forward the claim to XC. The OP should wait for XC's response. The delay should be based on what time he would have got to Long Eaton station had the XC train ran on time, and the time he actually arrived at Long Eaton station.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
You cannot have your cake and eat it, I am afraid.

If you want to claim DelayRepay against the full cost of your journey, then your full journey must be valid, including the amount of time you allow to connect between trains. And if you are fortuitous enough to be early on part of your itinerary then that part may be netted off against a later delay.
 

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
14,877
You cannot have your cake and eat it, I am afraid.

If you want to claim DelayRepay against the full cost of your journey, then your full journey must be valid, including the amount of time you allow to connect between trains. And if you are fortuitous enough to be early on part of your itinerary then that part may be netted off against a later delay.
I tend to agree with this. Some may argue that the connection times are longer than necessary, but that is the price that is paid for having protection against missed connections
 

Ryan Pepper

Member
Joined
7 Aug 2019
Messages
7
Hi all,

Thanks for all the responses. I'd never heard of the minimum connection time for journeys across London; that's a new one on me. I'll let it go through to XC and see what they say. This whole system is baffling to me!

Re: walking - yes, admittedly, I was probably pretty slow (and I did grab a coffee at McDonalds!) but I didn't really have much alternative to walking; as I said, I couldn't have got onto a bus from Beeston if I'd tried. If they reject it on the basis of time taken to walk, I'd be a little annoyed but not too upset, as it was business travel anyway.

This is an admittedly crap photo I took on the way where the pavement is underwater:
https://imgur.com/a/jqZ0BbV
From what I remember this was a little before the pub on that road near Chilwell Olympia. I had to take a detour through a hedge shortly after the pub.



Here's some comments from the local FB group on that day:
https://www.facebook.com/search/top...fbW9udGhcXFwiOlxcXCIyMDE5LTExXFxcIn1cIn0ifQ==

"Took me 2.5 hours to get home from Nottingham at 4pm today on the Indigo
Bumper to bumper out of Notts, big queues at Dunkirk Island and Flooding at The Blue Bell Chilwell"

"Was getting bad coming back through Beeston and Attenborough when I left at lunchtime. Wasn't impassable then but was very slow going in parts. Think it's got worse since then as school just said it took someone 45 mins from Beeston to Toton"

And another one:
https://www.facebook.com/search/top...fbW9udGhcXFwiOlxcXCIyMDE5LTExXFxcIn1cIn0ifQ==
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
I think a fair and reasonable outcome would be repayment of 50% of the price of your return ticket for a 60-119 minute delay, but that's a "gut feel" rather than any rules of any sort.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
I think you are confusing a couple of issues.
Separately again is the issue that the OP claims to have taken almost an hour longer than what is already likely to be a overgenerous estimate of the time needed to walk between Beeston and Long Eaton and that it is unlikely that the TOC would believe such a claim.
P (while passengers have no obligation to walk between stations, any who choose to do so probably do have a obligation to do so at reasonable speed and without making unnecessary stops in order to minimise the overall delay).

No reasonable person would expect to walk between Beeston and Long Eaton unless they choose to do so - it would not be reasonable for the TOC to debate how long it may take, or expect them to do that and then debate how much they were owed IMHO
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Let's assume there had been no flooding, and the OP had decided to travel on the 1605 via Beeston because he felt like it (as he would be perfectly entitled to do), any delay would be calculated based on that itinerary. The time that he would have arrived had he caught the originally-booked 1631 would be irrelevant.

Where a passenger voluntarily changes itinerary, any delay should be calculated against the revised itinerary, not what may originally have been booked. If you decide to catch a train two hours later than you were booked on, you can't then claim two hours delay. Likewise if you decide to take a different, slower route, you can't then claim delay because it took you longer than your originally booked route. Conversely, if you decide to catch a train two hours earlier than that you were booked on, and that train arrives two hours late, the TOC can't then say that you aren't entitled to anything as you arrived at the time you were originally booked to arrive. Where a passenger decides to travel on a different itinerary to that booked, then any delay should be based on that itinerary.

In this case, the OP decided to travel on the 1605 via Beeston, not on the 1631 direct train he was originally booked on. He would have been perfectly entitled to wait for his booked train (and claim for any consequent delay), he was not directed to travel on the earlier train. It was entirely his choice to travel on a different train and route to that he was originally booked on. Any delay should therefore be based on that itinerary, regardless of what he may originally have been booked on.

So, as the itinerary the OP chose to travel was EMR to Beeston and then XC to Long Eaton, and EMR successfully got him to Beeston, the OP was wrong to claim against EMR, and EMR were right to forward the claim to XC. The OP should wait for XC's response. The delay should be based on what time he would have got to Long Eaton station had the XC train ran on time, and the time he actually arrived at Long Eaton station.
FWIW I agree with this analysis - the OP says they will wait and see what XC say, which I think is correct thing to do.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Hi all,

Thanks for all the responses. I'd never heard of the minimum connection time for journeys across London; that's a new one on me. I'll let it go through to XC and see what they say. This whole system is baffling to me!

Re: walking - yes, admittedly, I was probably pretty slow (and I did grab a coffee at McDonalds!) but I didn't really have much alternative to walking; as I said, I couldn't have got onto a bus from Beeston if I'd tried. If they reject it on the basis of time taken to walk, I'd be a little annoyed but not too upset, as it was business travel anyway.

This is an admittedly crap photo I took on the way where the pavement is underwater:
https://imgur.com/a/jqZ0BbV
From what I remember this was a little before the pub on that road near Chilwell Olympia. I had to take a detour through a hedge shortly after the pub.



Here's some comments from the local FB group on that day:
https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=beeston flooding&epa=FILTERS&filters=eyJycF9jcmVhdGlvbl90aW1lIjoie1wibmFtZVwiOlwiY3JlYXRpb25fdGltZVwiLFwiYXJnc1wiOlwie1xcXCJzdGFydF9tb250aFxcXCI6XFxcIjIwMTktMTFcXFwiLFxcXCJlbmRfbW9udGhcXFwiOlxcXCIyMDE5LTExXFxcIn1cIn0ifQ==

"Took me 2.5 hours to get home from Nottingham at 4pm today on the Indigo
Bumper to bumper out of Notts, big queues at Dunkirk Island and Flooding at The Blue Bell Chilwell"

"Was getting bad coming back through Beeston and Attenborough when I left at lunchtime. Wasn't impassable then but was very slow going in parts. Think it's got worse since then as school just said it took someone 45 mins from Beeston to Toton"

And another one:
https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=attenborough flooding&epa=FILTERS&filters=eyJycF9jcmVhdGlvbl90aW1lIjoie1wibmFtZVwiOlwiY3JlYXRpb25fdGltZVwiLFwiYXJnc1wiOlwie1xcXCJzdGFydF9tb250aFxcXCI6XFxcIjIwMTktMTFcXFwiLFxcXCJlbmRfbW9udGhcXFwiOlxcXCIyMDE5LTExXFxcIn1cIn0ifQ==

Good luck with the claim via XC - will be interesting to learn what happens if you are able to post an update in the fullness of time.
I recall that night and can well imagine that walking was a better option than being in a car / bus - albeit not an easy one.
Good luck with it and seasons greetings.
 

Ryan Pepper

Member
Joined
7 Aug 2019
Messages
7
Will try and update when it's done :) That reminds me to go and post what happened on a previous claim!

Happy Christmas!
 

pelli

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2016
Messages
244
I'm admittedly not an expert in delay repay or that part of the country, but could I please express a dissenting opinion. In my mind, delay repay occurs when the following criteria are met: 1. The passenger originally has a valid intended itinerary. 2. The rail industry fails to deliver on that itinerary. 3. The passenger makes reasonable efforts to get to their destination as quickly as possible. 4. The actual arrival time at the destination is sufficiently late compared with the original intended itinerary.

Specifically, I argue that there's no rule that says that you must wait until your cancelled train should have departed before you can get on another train or that you have to follow the same route as your original intended itinerary - those are rules about advance/routed/split ticket validity on alternative services, not rules about eligibility for delay repay.

For example, suppose a passenger intends to travel from London to Cambridge on the fast Great Northern King's Cross 08.12 - Cambridge 09.01 train but it is cancelled. If they are coming from east London and on the ball then they might make it on to the Greater Anglia Liverpool Street 08.03 - Cambridge 09.07 train instead. If that train is delayed to arrive at 09.17, then the passenger is due a 15min delay repay from Great Northern. GN cannot argue that, because of the different route and earlier departure, and the ticket being valid for that route, the passenger never intended to travel with GN and their actual intended itinerary was with GA arriving 09.07, so that GA becomes liable for the delay repay (and in addition the delay then fails to pass the threshold for delay repay).

When it comes to more complicated cases where a passenger completes their journey by non-rail methods, or chooses a questionable route, then in my opinion the delay repay should at the very least be paid out based on either the passenger's true arrival time or their hypothetical arrival time had they obeyed staff instructions or done more reasonable things (without being prescient such as knowing that a cancelled train would be reinstated), whichever is earlier.

So to summarise, assuming the original itinerary with the 16.31 EMR departure obeyed minimum cross-London connection times, the fact that the passenger had to take a different train in face of its cancellation (not delaying themselves unnecessarily, and which will cause them to arrive later than intended even if everything subsequently runs to time) puts EMR - as the first TOC to cause the intended itinerary to fail - on the hook for any delay repay payout, measured relative to the scheduled arrival time of the original 16.31 service. The payout should be based on when the passenger arrived in the end, or would have arrived if they took a more reasonable rail route, whichever is earlier.
 

Ryan Pepper

Member
Joined
7 Aug 2019
Messages
7
That was certainly the logic I'd used in making the original claim to EMR. I would have waited for the train if it was running rather than running for the early service, because it was a busy weekday night at peak commuter time, and I could guarantee a seat on it as I had a reservation. As it was, I ended up sitting on the floor in the empty wheelchair space on the service I did catch.

It's really not very joined up; in my mind the way to operate such a system should allow people to make delay repay claims centrally through some industry body representing all TOCs, which then decides which company is liable for the claim.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,461
Location
Sheffield
You cannot have your cake and eat it, I am afraid.

If you want to claim DelayRepay against the full cost of your journey, then your full journey must be valid, including the amount of time you allow to connect between trains.

What this and other posts seem to be saying is that the OP can only claim against the 1631 from St Pancras. Yet that train was cancelled so if they had waited, rather than catching the 1605 in an attempt to minimise the delay, the actual delay would have been longer than the one being claimed for. But we are also told that you can only claim for the journey you made, not some hypothetical alternative journey, so a claim cannot be based on travel on the (cancelled) 1631 when the journey was on the 1605.

As travel on the 1605 is valid with an Anytime ticket (and it has separately been suggested that the TOC could argue that the OP had travelled without a valid ticket from Loughborough to Beeston even though they had done no such thing) it seems to me that some believe TOCs can have their cake and eat it by claiming a valid ticket was invalid and declining/reducing Delay Repay compensation based on such false claims.

It's really not very joined up; in my mind the way to operate such a system should allow people to make delay repay claims centrally through some industry body representing all TOCs, which then decides which company is liable for the claim.

I agree there should be a central (but independent) body to pay Delay Repay claims. Who is liable for the delay should be of no concern to the passenger and arguments on that score should be behind the scenes.

I too will be interested to see how you get on with Cross Country.
 
Last edited:

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
14,877
it has separately been suggested that the TOC could argue that the OP had travelled without a valid ticket from Loughborough to Beeston
Just because someone has suggested that the TOC could make such a claim does not mean such a claim would be made. The suggestion was made by someone apparently believing that the ticket was not valid for travel via Beeston but that is definitely not the case and we have no evidence to suggest that a TOC, whether it be EMR or CrossCountry, would rely on such a claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top