Grand Central cancellation

[SuspectUsual]

I wonder if I might get some advice / info from the forum's cognoscenti.....

I'm booked on the 08:59 Grand Central from Halifax to London tomorrow (28th). Because I'm a bit OCDish I checked everything was OK this morning and discovered the train was cancelled, which was a bit of a shock.

Some questions:

1 - I booked via LNER, so would expect to be notified by them, and indeed I have been in the past when I've bought tickets for TPE via them and the train has been cancelled. Any idea why no notification this time - am I right in thinking this is a failure on GC's part?

2 - Out of interest, can anyone tell me when the service was cancelled, as I only booked the tickets about 10 days ago so it seems quite short notice

3 - GC are telling me my only options are:
(i) Get a refund and rebook with another operator, but this would cost about three times as much
(ii) Travel on the GC train before at 07:10 which is a bit early for me and would involve a taxi and additional cost
(iii) Travel on the GC train at 10:40 but that gets to London too late for what I have planned
Is this correct? Is there not also the option to be re-routed at no extra cost?

Thanks

 

[Haywain]

2 - Out of interest, can anyone tell me when the service was cancelled, as I only booked the tickets about 10 days ago so it seems quite short notice

It was cancelled on Wednesday, according to the Timetable History website.

Is this correct? Is there not also the option to be re-routed at no extra cost?

There is, but it is to have GC reroute you, rather than just jumping on another train. It increasingly appears that GC take a rather cavalier attitude to the problems their cancellations cause, so you will find this problematic.

 

[SuspectUsual]

t was cancelled on Wednesday, according to the Timetable History website

Thanks

There is, but it is to have GC reroute you, rather than just jumping on another train. It increasingly appears that GC take a rather cavalier attitude to the problems their cancellations cause, so you will find this problematic.

Thanks for this. Their twitter people are telling me that "unfortunately there's no alternative transport in place". The word "unfortunately" is particularly annoying, as to me it implies its not within their control when of course it is. Is there anything more I can do to push them to do the right thing by the customer other than appeal to their better nature?

 

[JBuchananGB]

I suggest you go for option (i). Best deal at this moment seems to be on the 9.17 with change at Leeds arriving Kings Cross 12.31. Advance Single £69 (without railcard). Of course LNER will refund you for the unused GC ticket without fee, as the train is cancelled.

 

[Watershed]

1 - I booked via LNER, so would expect to be notified by them, and indeed I have been in the past when I've bought tickets for TPE via them and the train has been cancelled. Any idea why no notification this time - am I right in thinking this is a failure on GC's part?

In theory, LNER should have notified you of the cancellation but, like other retailers, they are reliant on the (very poor) RDG Timetable Comparator Service to trigger such notifications. Quite why this hasn't triggered an email in this instance, I couldn't say. But I'd say that it's likely that the same would have happened regardless of which retailer you had used, so I wouldn't necessarily blame this one on LNER.

2 - Out of interest, can anyone tell me when the service was cancelled, as I only booked the tickets about 10 days ago so it seems quite short notice

It was cancelled on Wednesday. It is indeed quite a short notice cancellation.

Grand Central are silent about the reason for this cancellation, but the fact that their website shows (archived here in case they later delete this!) one return trip, corresponding with what seems to be an out and back crew diagram, being cancelled every day this and next week - suggests to me that it's due to a shortage of traincrew. Rather dishonest of them not to admit this, IMHO.

3 - GC are telling me my only options are:
(i) Get a refund and rebook with another operator, but this would cost about three times as much
(ii) Travel on the GC train before at 07:10 which is a bit early for me and would involve a taxi and additional cost
(iii) Travel on the GC train at 10:40 but that gets to London too late for what I have planned
Is this correct? Is there not also the option to be re-routed at no extra cost?

Whilst all of those are indeed options, GC are being 'forgetful' (in the most charitable interpretation possible) by claiming these are your only options. As the anticipated delay in arriving at Kings Cross by waiting for the 10:40 would be more than an hour, you are entitled to choose to be re-routed at the earliest opportunity under article 16 of the Passengee Rights and Obligations Regulation (PRO).

This means that you are entitled to require GC to arrange ticket acceptance, endorse your ticket or else issue you with a new ticket, so as to allow you to travel via Leeds on LNER.

Unfortunately it's exceptionally unlikely that GC will comply with this obligation, and so you have to weigh up whether you are willing to be out of pocket by whatever amount the LNER option costs you, until you finally manage to recover this from GC. That could be many months, if not a year or longer, if (as is likely) you have to take them to Court to get your money.

What's even worse, if you accept a refund, that extinguishes any further liability on the part of GC - they wouldn't be liable to pay for your re-routing costs. Therefore you can't even reduce your out of pocket outlay by at least getting a refund in the interim.

So as you can see, your PRO rights are relatively meaningless in practice, given that the ORR seems utterly disinterested in TOCs' regular and flagrant breaches thereof. Only those who are willing and able to extend interest-free credit to TOCs, and then pursue them in Court, are able to really exercise their rights.

Thanks for this. Their twitter people are telling me that "unfortunately there's no alternative transport in place". The word "unfortunately" is particularly annoying, as to me it implies its not within their control when of course it is. Is there anything more I can do to push them to do the right thing by the customer other than appeal to their better nature?

They might as well say "unfortunately we've decided to break the law"!

 

[SuspectUsual]

Whilst all of those are indeed options, GC are being 'forgetful' (in the most charitable interpretation possible) by claiming these are your only options. As the anticipated delay in arriving at Kings Cross by waiting for the 10:40 would be more than an hour, you are entitled to choose to be re-routed at the earliest opportunity under article 16 of the Passengee Rights and Obligations Regulation (PRO)

Thanks. I did wonder if this was the case. Any idea what "under comparable transport conditions" means in article 16? Could they interpret "comparable" as "on one of our trains"?

Pragmatically, I'm not sure there's much I can do ahead of tomorrow so I'll probably get the 7:10 as the additional cost is a lot less than going at 9ish via Leeds, and then put in a complaint email with the taxi receipt and see if they'll refund it

 

[Haywain]

Pragmatically, I'm not sure there's much I can do ahead of tomorrow so I'll probably get the 7:10 as the additional cost is a lot less than going at 9ish via Leeds, and then put in a complaint email with the taxi receipt and see if they'll refund it

In this situation, I would be inclined to contact them through Twitter (and DM) and put them on notice that this is what will be required for you to meet the arrangements for which you bought your ticket. That would at least mean they can't say they weren't given an opportunity to deal with it in another way.

 

[SuspectUsual]

In this situation, I would be inclined to contact them through Twitter (and DM) and put them on notice that this is what will be required for you to meet the arrangements for which you bought your ticket. That would at least mean they can't say they weren't given an opportunity to deal with it in another way.

Just had an "interesting" chat with their phone support, both the initial call handler and a supervisor.

Reiterated the three options they gave me are the ONLY options, both claimed never to have heard of PRO let alone article 16, and told me they do not have an option to re-route, that's the company policy. Also, both adamant that they won't refund a taxi fare as "I was told the train was cancelled". When I pointed out I wasn't informed, but found the info out myself, I was told "but we're telling you now"

Absolute garbage!

 

[Watershed]

Reiterated the three options they gave me are the ONLY options, both claimed never to have heard of PRO let alone article 16

It probably is true that these individual members of staff never heard of the PRO. 99.9% of staff across the whole industry probably haven't.

However, the company was sent a letter by the ORR back in December 2019 informing it that its passenger licence now required it comply with articles 15-18 of the PRO (amongst other things). The company thus has no excuse for failing to train its staff on the existence of the PRO, and the rights which this gives passengers.

told me they do not have an option to re-route, that's the company policy

So they are admitting that it's company policy to breach the PRO and thus their licence. At least they aren't beating around the bush!

Also, both adamant that they won't refund a taxi fare as "I was told the train was cancelled". When I pointed out I wasn't informed, but found the info out myself, I was told "but we're telling you now"

On this one, I would have to agree with GC, although not for the reasons they have given. I cannot see that you are entitled to recover the cost of any taxi fare, as it is your responsibliity how you get to the station. The fact that you know of the cancellation a day in advance is irrelevant; it doesn't diminish their obligations.

 

[ainsworth74]

On this one, I would have to agree with GC, although not for the reasons they have given. I cannot see that you are entitled to recover the cost of any taxi fare, as it is your responsibliity how you get to the station. The fact that you know of the cancellation a day in advance is irrelevant; it doesn't diminish their obligations.

It would be good customer service though and likely a very cheap way of making up for their cancellation of the service. Feels like an own goal to just dig their heels in and insist that they will not countenance covering a taxi fare from home to destination (assuming it's not going to be silly money!).

 

[Haywain]

It would be good customer service though and likely a very cheap way of making up for their cancellation of the service. Feels like an own goal to just dig their heels in and insist that they will not countenance covering a taxi fare from home to destination (assuming it's not going to be silly money!).

Especially given that they are avoiding the Delay Repay compensation that would be due for using the later train.

 

[sheff1]

Just had an "interesting" chat with their phone support, both the initial call handler and a supervisor.

Reiterated the three options they gave me are the ONLY options, both claimed never to have heard of PRO let alone article 16, and told me they do not have an option to re-route, that's the company policy. Also, both adamant that they won't refund a taxi fare as "I was told the train was cancelled". When I pointed out I wasn't informed, but found the info out myself, I was told "but we're telling you now"

To use their own logic, the reply is to that "well you've heard about it now".

If it were me, I would also thank them for confirming that it is official company policy to breach both the law and the terms of their licence as said admission will be useful if the matter goes to court.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Feels like an own goal to just dig their heels in and insist that they will not countenance covering a taxi fare from home to destination (assuming it's not going to be silly money!)

It isn't. Probably £10 - £12

Especially given that they are avoiding the Delay Repay compensation that would be due for using the later train

Exactly. DR would be £40ish, and that's assuming the later train isn't itself delayed

Never mind, I'll get to Halifax for silly o'clock tomorrow morning, and I'll use some of the journey to compose a nice email to them which will use some of the useful info kindly provided in this thread to point out their deliberate decision to break the law

If it were me, I would also thank them for confirming that it is official company policy to breach both the law and the terms of their licence as such admission will be useful if the matter goes to court

It won't get to court, but it'll be useful.

I did think about complaining to my MP, but he gets free first class travel to and from London with GC so I don't suppose for a second he'll do anything other than reply with some bland nonsense that achieves nothing

 

[Merseysider]

“Unfortunately” you are far from the first person to encounter issues getting GC to honour their obligations - there have been many threads illustrating similar situations.

Search Google for “site:railforums.co.uk grand central cancellation”

One would be well advised to avoid booking with them for time critical journeys.

You could try asking LNER on social media if they’ll let you on one of their trains, given the cancellation, but their staff may not be in a position to grant permission if nothing’s been organised.

 

[Watershed]

Exactly. DR would be £40ish, and that's assuming the later train isn't itself delayed

Bear in mind that, firstly, GC might have tried to claim that the train you were booked on "didn't form part of the timetable" under the Published Timetable of the Day drivel, and so try and deny there was any qualifying delay. Even if they accepted there was a qualifying delay, they only pay the NRCoT minimum (50% of the relevant portion of your ticket) for delays of 60-119 minutes.

That they are the only long distance operator to have such a stingy compensation scheme speaks volumes, IMO.

“Unfortunately” you are far from the first person to encounter issues getting GC to honour their obligations - there have been many threads illustrating similar situations.

Search Google for “site:railforums.co.uk grand central cancellation”

One would be well advised to avoid booking with them for time critical journeys.

You could try asking LNER on social media if they’ll let you on one of their trains, given the cancellation, but their staff may not be in a position to grant permission if nothing’s been organised.

They seem to think that their age-old approach of "passengers will just have to wait for our next train, no matter how long the wait" remains acceptable, unfortunately. As you have said, I would only plan to use them if travelling on an interavailable ticket, or I didn't care when I arrived.

 

[Andyh82]

I see cancellations like this on Grand Central every day and I wonder if passengers are losing patience with them

The alternative is always either waiting for the next GC service a few hours later or using a specified long winded route via Northern stoppers and LNER, sometimes replacement buses and sometimes even a 3 leg routing via York

 

[SuspectUsual]

And after all that the earlier 7:10 is delayed by 45 minutes, although this is down to a pedestrian going for a walk down the track just outside Halifax rather than anything of GC’s doing

 

[redreni]

Glad this worked out not too badly for the OP in the end.

I'm booked on Grand Central's 10:43 from Kings Cross to Halifax on Saturday. It's due in at 13:20. I'm going to see a game of football which kicks off at 15:00.

It hasn't been cancelled yet and realtraintimes.co.uk indicates they haven't been in the habit of cancelling this particular service, so I'm fairly confident this will work out okay. On the principle of hoping for the best and planning for the worst, however, I'm formulating a plan B.

The next GC train wouldn't get me there for the match. There are a couple of journeys on LNER + Northern that would get me there for the match. If Grand Central cancels the 10:43 and doesn't announce ticket acceptance on LNER and Northern, therefore, I am inclined to:
1. Ask Grand Central (in person if I can find their staff at King's Cross or on Twitter if not) to re-route me via LNER and Northern.
2. If they refuse, explain that I am exercising my right to be re-routed under Article 16 of the Passenger Rights and Obligations Regulation.
3. If they still refuse, explain that I will be forced to re-route at my own expense and then claim the money back from them, through the County Court if need be.
4. Buy an off-peak Any Permitted single to Halifax for £125.20 (I think that's the cheapest walk-up fare?)
5. Write to Grand Central telling them to reimburse me or I'll sue them.
6. Sue them.

However, I'm slightly nervous of doing this because:
- the link above is to an EU Regulation, but I can't see any definition of the term "re-routing".
- I can't see anything in the regulation that says re-routing at the earliest opportunity includes making provision for the passenger to travel on the services of a third party operator. Could GC argue that it just means if my ticket was for the direct route KGX to Halifax but they, GC, also operated indirect services to Halifax via a different route (e.g. via York) then they would have to re-route me on their service up to York (but not on other operators' services)?

I don't mind being out of pocket for many months while this resolves itself. I don't mind going to court because, although it's a pain, it potentially confers a benefit on the travelling public and stops what I consider to be a cowboy operator giving the rail industry a bad name. But I don't want to go to court and lose.

Any informed opinions would be most welcome!

 

[Haywain]

I don't mind going to court because, although it's a pain, it potentially confers a benefit on the travelling public and stops what I consider to be a cowboy operator giving the rail industry a bad name.

If you think this is what would result from a claim through the county court, I'm afraid you will be sadly mistaken. It is unlikely it would have any impact, beyond a slight inconvenience, on GC.

 

[Watershed]

The next GC train wouldn't get me there for the match. There are a couple of journeys on LNER + Northern that would get me there for the match. If Grand Central cancels the 10:43 and doesn't announce ticket acceptance on LNER and Northern, therefore, I am inclined to:
1. Ask Grand Central (in person if I can find their staff at King's Cross or on Twitter if not) to re-route me via LNER and Northern.
2. If they refuse, explain that I am exercising my right to be re-routed under Article 16 of the Passenger Rights and Obligations Regulation.
3. If they still refuse, explain that I will be forced to re-route at my own expense and then claim the money back from them, through the County Court if need be.
4. Buy an off-peak Any Permitted single to Halifax for £125.20 (I think that's the cheapest walk-up fare?)
5. Write to Grand Central telling them to reimburse me or I'll sue them.
6. Sue them.

In principle, that seems a reasonable course of action to me. I would try to get some form of evidence of your request to be re-routed, preferably in writing, from which perspective, contacting GC on Twitter would potentially be a good idea.

Just off the top of my head, Super Off-Peak Single to Leeds plus a single to Halifax would be considerably cheaper than an Off-Peak Single to Halifax - and there may be other cheaper splits, or Advances available on the day.

However, I'm slightly nervous of doing this because:
- the link above is to an EU Regulation, but I can't see any definition of the term "re-routing".

The term is not defined in the Regulation. However, alongside the EU and DfT interpretive guidance (which would likely be of some weight, even if not determinitive) there is considerable ECJ jurisprudence as to the meaning of re-routing in EU Regulation 261/2004, which is the equivalent Regulation for the aviation industry. It would seem highly unlikely that the same term, used in very similar circumstances, would be taken to have a totally different meaning in the PRO.

- I can't see anything in the regulation that says re-routing at the earliest opportunity includes making provision for the passenger to travel on the services of a third party operator. Could GC argue that it just means if my ticket was for the direct route KGX to Halifax but they, GC, also operated indirect services to Halifax via a different route (e.g. via York) then they would have to re-route me on their service up to York (but not on other operators' services)?

As alluded to above, ECJ precedent (e.g. LE v TAP) establishes that re-routing must consider alternative operators, or even alternative modes of transport where appropriate. There have been plenty of successful claims for the cost of re-routing on alternative operators, where the booked operator has refused to do so.

I don't mind being out of pocket for many months while this resolves itself. I don't mind going to court because, although it's a pain, it potentially confers a benefit on the travelling public and stops what I consider to be a cowboy operator giving the rail industry a bad name. But I don't want to go to court and lose.

I appreciate that. At the end of the day, nobody can ever 100% guarantee success. But I would say the odds of success in the circumstances you describe would be very high, given the EU261 jurisprudence. Ultimately, I presume that you wouldn't want to miss the football match, so you would pay extra to re-route yourself regardless. So really it is just the costs of taking the matter to Court that you could potentially lose out on. These are not very significant - the claim issue fee is £35 for a claim of this sort of value, the hearing fee (if it gets that far) is a further £27. You would then potentially be liable for GC's direct costs of attending the hearing (but not their legal costs), i.e. travel/accommodation. So clearly, still not a huge amount.

However, in my experience, it much more likely that you will either obtain a default judgment because GC ignore your claim, or they will simply settle your claim (whether on receipt of your Letter Before Claim or the claim form). In any event, it is highly unlikely that GC will change their policy of blatantly breaching the PRO. That would require intervention by the ORR, which does not seem to have the slightest interest.

 

[redreni]

If you think this is what would result from a claim through the county court, I'm afraid you will be sadly mistaken. It is unlikely it would have any impact, beyond a slight inconvenience, on GC.

Appreciate the word "potentially" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I appreciate it would take a lot of work by a lot of people to stop GC operating its unlawful policy. But obtaining a court ruling that the policy is unlawful, even if it's a non-binding first-instance decision, could be helpful in bringing pressure to bear on the ORR and, in the meantime, in emboldening others to vindicate their rights through the courts.

In principle, that seems a reasonable course of action to me. I would try to get some form of evidence of your request to be re-routed, preferably in writing, from which perspective, contacting GC on Twitter would potentially be a good idea.

Just off the top of my head, Super Off-Peak Single to Leeds plus a single to Halifax would be considerably cheaper than an Off-Peak Single to Halifax - and there may be other cheaper splits, or Advances available on the day.


The term is not defined in the Regulation. However, alongside the EU and DfT interpretive guidance (which would likely be of some weight, even if not determinitive) there is considerable ECJ jurisprudence as to the meaning of re-routing in EU Regulation 261/2004, which is the equivalent Regulation for the aviation industry. It would seem highly unlikely that the same term, used in very similar circumstances, would be taken to have a totally different meaning in the PRO.


As alluded to above, ECJ precedent (e.g. LE v TAP) establishes that re-routing must consider alternative operators, or even alternative modes of transport where appropriate. There have been plenty of successful claims for the cost of re-routing on alternative operators, where the booked operator has refused to do so.


I appreciate that. At the end of the day, nobody can ever 100% guarantee success. But I would say the odds of success in the circumstances you describe would be very high, given the EU261 jurisprudence. Ultimately, I presume that you wouldn't want to miss the football match, so you would pay extra to re-route yourself regardless. So really it is just the costs of taking the matter to Court that you could potentially lose out on. These are not very significant - the claim issue fee is £235 for a claim of this sort of value, the hearing fee (if it gets that far) is a further £27. You would then potentially be liable for GC's direct costs of attending the hearing (but not their legal costs), i.e. travel/accommodation. So clearly, still not a huge amount.

However, in my experience, it much more likely that you will either obtain a default judgment because GC ignore your claim, or they will simply settle your claim (whether on receipt of your Letter Before Claim or the claim form). In any event, it is highly unlikely that GC will change their policy of blatantly breaching the PRO. That would require intervention by the ORR, which does not seem to have the slightest interest.

Thanks for the expert advice, Watershed.

Appreciate there are no guarantees. Hopefully my booked train will run so I don't have to make a decision, but if they cancel it and don't do the right thing (and they will have plenty of opportunities to do the right thing either on the day or afterwards) I will sue them.

I'll check ticketysplit to make sure, if I end up re-routing myself, that I do so as economically as possible.

 

[SuspectUsual]

So, an update on this. After five months of emails backwards and forwards (not actually that many, as theirs tended to be weeks after mine), I've got to the point where:

- they are steadfast in their view that they are compliant with PRO16 despite not offering re-routing when the anticipated delay is over 60 minutes, and clearly state their interpretation of PRO16 does not include any obligation to arrange ticket acceptance with other TOCs.

"The information you were provided by our social media team was correct, in the event of disruption or cancellation, passengers can either; travel on the alternative their TOC puts in place, alternatively they can choose not to travel and are entitled to a full ticket refund from their retailer. This is in line with National Rail Conditions for Travel and the Terms and Conditions of your ticket and ensures that we are complying with Article 16. The options provided were a ticket refund to your method of payment or continuation or re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity. This does not mean the TOC is obliged to arrange ticket acceptance with another provider and I am sorry if you believed this to be the case".

- they are refunding me the cost of the taxi their disruption caused me to have to take

 

[ainsworth74]

Not surprising if disappointing (though at least they're paying for the taxi!). I suspect that this is going to be one of those that until someone has a good case and the resources to take the TOC to court (assuming the TOC doesn't settle which I suspect they might well do), probably several someone's taking several different TOCs seeing as I can't see a TOC appealing it to precedent setting level, the industry will continue to operate on the basis that it is fully in compliance by simply offering a refund or travel on the next train by the same operator. The ORR/DfT certainly won't give a enough of a damn to do anything.

 

[redreni]

Not surprising if disappointing (though at least they're paying for the taxi!). I suspect that this is going to be one of those that until someone has a good case and the resources to take the TOC to court (assuming the TOC doesn't settle which I suspect they might well do), probably several someone's taking several different TOCs seeing as I can't see a TOC appealing it to precedent setting level, the industry will continue to operate on the basis that it is fully in compliance by simply offering a refund or travel on the next train by the same operator. The ORR/DfT certainly won't give a enough of a damn to do anything.

Politically, of course, another way of resolving this would be to elect a party that wishes to get rid of open access operators. The problem of being delayed by many hours because of the cancellation of one train when you want to travel along a major rail corridor that has a frequent train service wouldn't arise if the open access operators didn't exist and their routes were taken over by the main operator (LNER in the case of Grand Central, Hull Trains and Lumo).

Strangely enough in the EU the disastrous decision to introduce open access operators has been taken. Does anybody have any experience of their interpretation of PRO? I would find it hard to imagine German regulators, for instance, allowing passengers to be treated this way.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Not surprising if disappointing (though at least they're paying for the taxi!). I suspect that this is going to be one of those that until someone has a good case and the resources to take the TOC to court (assuming the TOC doesn't settle which I suspect they might well do), probably several someone's taking several different TOCs seeing as I can't see a TOC appealing it to precedent setting level, the industry will continue to operate on the basis that it is fully in compliance by simply offering a refund or travel on the next train by the same operator. The ORR/DfT certainly won't give a enough of a damn to do anything.

Indeed

I expected nothing financially, so anything is a bonus

I expected to be fobbed off about the point of principle, and I wasn't disappointed

 

[Haywain]

Strangely enough in the EU the disastrous decision to introduce open access operators has been taken. Does anybody have any experience of their interpretation of PRO? I would find it hard to imagine German regulators, for instance, allowing passengers to be treated this way.

Whilst the EU may (or may not) afford better protection in respect of PRO, it is not all a beacon of good practice, as travelling with split tickets between operators means you forego protection against delays and missed connections.

 

[redreni]

Whilst the EU may (or may not) afford better protection in respect of PRO, it is not all a beacon of good practice, as travelling with split tickets between operators means you forego protection against delays and missed connections.

Yes, that's true, and I understand cross-border journeys in general are a bit of a disaster.

 

[Haywain]

Yes, that's true, and I understand cross-border journeys in general are a bit of a disaster.

Indeed, and we need to also be aware that the number of OA operators on the continent os increasing all the time, which works against through ticketing and any form of protection. However, this is drifting away from the topic.

 

[redreni]

Appreciate the word "potentially" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I appreciate it would take a lot of work by a lot of people to stop GC operating its unlawful policy. But obtaining a court ruling that the policy is unlawful, even if it's a non-binding first-instance decision, could be helpful in bringing pressure to bear on the ORR and, in the meantime, in emboldening others to vindicate their rights through the courts.


Thanks for the expert advice, Watershed.

Appreciate there are no guarantees. Hopefully my booked train will run so I don't have to make a decision, but if they cancel it and don't do the right thing (and they will have plenty of opportunities to do the right thing either on the day or afterwards) I will sue them.

I'll check ticketysplit to make sure, if I end up re-routing myself, that I do so as economically as possible.

Just to confirm, for completeness, when I travelled to Halifax the train ran.

(Wasn't much quicker than the coach that I took on the return leg, but it ran!). Realistically I was lucky, looking at the number of cancellations of the same train in the weeks prior. I'll choose LNER next time I go to Halifax because of the risk of cancellation..

 

[Watershed]

So, an update on this. After five months of emails backwards and forwards (not actually that many, as theirs tended to be weeks after mine), I've got to the point where:

- they are steadfast in their view that they are compliant with PRO16 despite not offering re-routing when the anticipated delay is over 60 minutes, and clearly state their interpretation of PRO16 does not include any obligation to arrange ticket acceptance with other TOCs.

"The information you were provided by our social media team was correct, in the event of disruption or cancellation, passengers can either; travel on the alternative their TOC puts in place, alternatively they can choose not to travel and are entitled to a full ticket refund from their retailer. This is in line with National Rail Conditions for Travel and the Terms and Conditions of your ticket and ensures that we are complying with Article 16. The options provided were a ticket refund to your method of payment or continuation or re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity. This does not mean the TOC is obliged to arrange ticket acceptance with another provider and I am sorry if you believed this to be the case".

- they are refunding me the cost of the taxi their disruption caused me to have to take

In an ideal world, you'd now raise this with the ORR and the ORR would set GC straight. Sadly, the ORR doesn't seem to care about operators' licence obligations to comply with the PRO in the slightest, and so I think you'll struggle to convince them to get involved. If they even respond to you (and don't try to fob you off to the chocolate teapot Ombudsman) they'll probably claim it's an "isolated incident" and that they need evidence of a "wider pattern" of problems to investigate. It seems to be the same with most such regulators.

Clearly, by refunding you the cost of the taxi, GC have made it difficult for you to obtain any further recourse here. You can't exactly take them to Court over £0, so they'll continue to fob others off in the future.