Interesting Delay Repay refusal - GTR contend Travelcard season not valid if tap in was after scheduled departure time of train

[infobleep]

I think the award for the worst final sentence is from Penalty Services - Thank you for using Penalty Services. As if you have a choice!

You do have a choice. Don't bother.

I don't agree with GTR on this.

Here is my example.

Today I noticed the Great Western Railway 16:38 Guildford to Gatwock Airport was cancelled due to shortage of staff but the 17:07 wasn't. I want to catch the 17:07 and as I don't trust them to not cancel both services, I checked mutiple times, the last time after 15:20.

At 16:38 I checked again and now the 16:38 departed on time and the 17:07 is now cancelled due to a shortage of staff.

I will not be going to the station until before the departure of the 17:37 as I don't need to but I will be late for my intented evening class, especially as it is making extra stops. As an aside the 18:44 Guildford to Reading is cancelled as it was earlier so I wonder if someone cancelled the wrong train by mistake.

As I have a paper ticket, I will get delay repay. I would expect the same were I using Pay and Go.

 

[popmonkey]

Is there any update on this claim? Have you taken it to the ombudsman?

 

[redreni]

I first submitted my delay repay claim on 30th Jan, but they denied receiving it. The first communication from me they admit having received was on 11th March.

My last email to them was on 26th March asking for either a reversal of their decision or a letter of deadlock. I've just sent them a chaser, but I don't think I'm inclined to go to the Ombudsman until 19th May (or when I get a letter of deadlock if that happens first), as I'm not in any particular hurry and by then, the 40 working days will have expired, unambiguously.

 

[redreni]

UPDATE:

Two days ago I received an automated email from GTR saying my case had been open for 40 days, so providing I didn't owe them a response to a request for information I could now approach the Ombudsman.

So yesterday I put in a complaint to the Ombudsman and this morning I have received:

1. An email from the Ombudsman saying they've asked GTR for a response, and
2. An email from GTR in the following terms.

Thanks for getting back in touch regarding your return journey on 29 January 2025. I appreciate the points you make.



Please be assured that I've logged your feedback as a complaint on our system to show that you're unhappy with the Delay Repay claims process. Customer feedback about all of our services, onboard and at the station, is important for us in order to improve our services throughout the network, so thank you again for highlighting your concern.



To save you further hassle, I’ve reviewed your claim manually, and I can see you were delayed between 15–29 minutes. Based on your ticket type and cost, this will give a Delay Repay amount of £9.80. Please see here how we calculate your compensation based on the length of your delay and your ticket type.



I'm pleased to offer a rail travel voucher for £9.80, these will be sent to you by post, and you should expect to receive them in 5-7 working days. You can spend or exchange these for cash at any Southern, Thameslink, Great Northern or Gatwick Express ticket office within 1 year.


For any future journeys, please ensure you always tap in at the start of your journey before your intended service is scheduled to depart, as we use the tap data to ensure the ticket is valid for the journey you claimed for. We use this as evidence that you were at the station at that time. The system works by reviewing your tap data, so it's important to do this, even if the ticket barrier gates are open, which may happen during severe disruption.

This requirement has always been in place to check ticket validity, and we're currently taking more steps to be more vigilant. This applies to paper tickets also, as the ticket does need to be printed/purchased before your intended service is scheduled to depart.

I am prepared to overlook the fact they've miscalculated the amount as that goes in my favour, but I must say I do find their last two paragraphs faintly enraging. How would this work at Brighton during times of disruption, I wonder, if people were to follow that advice?

I am tempted to contact the Ombudsman and explain that, while I am grateful GTR has relented on the improper refusal of my delay repay claim, I remain concerned that if the advice in the last two paragraphs continues to be given out then, to the extent passengers follow it (and passengers are being incentivised financially to follow it), it will tend to exacerbate overcrowding on station platforms during service disruption. Is the Ombudsman the correct avenue to pursue a safety concern, though?

In truth I am also concerned that GTR is going to continue to refuse perfectly valid delay repay claims submitted by other people, but I appreciate that is not a matter the Ombudsman would be able to deal with, so I'm not going to pursue that aspect.

 

[AdamWW]

UPDATE:

Two days ago I received an automated email from GTR saying my case had been open for 40 days, so providing I didn't owe them a response to a request for information I could now approach the Ombudsman.

So yesterday I put in a complaint to the Ombudsman and this morning I have received:

1. An email from the Ombudsman saying they've asked GTR for a response, and
2. An email from GTR in the following terms.



I am prepared to overlook the fact they've miscalculated the amount as that goes in my favour, but I must say I do find their last two paragraphs faintly enraging. How would this work at Brighton during times of disruption, I wonder, if people were to follow that advice?

I am tempted to contact the Ombudsman and explain that, while I am grateful GTR has relented on the improper refusal of my delay repay claim, I remain concerned that if the advice in the last two paragraphs continues to be given out then, to the extent passengers follow it (and passengers are being incentivised financially to follow it), it will tend to exacerbate overcrowding on station platforms during service disruption. Is the Ombudsman the correct avenue to pursue a safety concern, though?

In truth I am also concerned that GTR is going to continue to refuse perfectly valid delay repay claims submitted by other people, but I appreciate that is not a matter the Ombudsman would be able to deal with, so I'm not going to pursue that aspect.

Since they're paying out I presume there is nothing more the Ombudsman can do on either of your concerns, because they just consider individual occurances and that has now been resolved in your case.

I don't think GTR's position is reasonable and while they might try to justify it with regard to contactless travel on the grounds that until you tap in you don't have a valid ticket, I don't see what grounds they have for their theory that in general you have to be at the station before the timetabled departure time in order to make a valid claim and that evidence to the contrary can be used to refuse a claim.

Edit: And I've just remembered you were using a season ticket not pay as you go, so your ticket was definitely valid before you passed through a barrier.

 

[setdown]

Maddening. The amount of times I've seen my intended train as "Cancelled" on my phone and then stayed at the pub/wherever, before then arriving at the station for the next train. I've still been delayed! Is this requirement displayed in the terms and conditions of Delay Repay anywhere?

I suppose this is another advantage for using credit card paper tickets, whilst they're still available.

 

[Watershed]

Maddening. The amount of times I've seen my intended train as "Cancelled" on my phone and then stayed at the pub/wherever, before then arriving at the station for the next train. I've still been delayed! Is this requirement displayed in the terms and conditions of Delay Repay anywhere?

I suppose this is another advantage for using credit card paper tickets, whilst they're still available.

It's not a condition of the scheme; it's just something GTR have made up.

I would continue to claim in the normal way and if claims are refused, escalate them as necessary. It might be more economical to do so in bulk as there is no contractual basis for any deadline to appeal once you have submitted a claim, just the civil statute of limitations (6 years).

 

[AdamWW]

Maddening. The amount of times I've seen my intended train as "Cancelled" on my phone and then stayed at the pub/wherever, before then arriving at the station for the next train. I've still been delayed! Is this requirement displayed in the terms and conditions of Delay Repay anywhere?

Quite. Why go to the station to hang around for a train you've been told isn't running unless you're so desparate to get the train it's worth the small chance that it might get reinstated?

They appear to be arguing that their approach is justified by the requirement to hold a valid ticket for the delayed journey.

Maybe this is a valid argument if someone is using pay as you go, though unreasonable in my view, but they also appear to be claiming that somehow a season ticket isn't valid until tapped at a barrier and that by passing through an open barrier without tapping a season ticket you have rendered yourself ineligable for delay repay.

I suppose it could be worse - they could be trying to prosecute someone for not having tapped their season ticket to "validate" it.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Even ignoring the staying at the pub / wherever point, as others have said some stations you can't even pass the barriers (and so tap in) until you are allowed access to the platforms which in some stations isn't until the train is boarding! What would GTR have said if OP was at Victoria wanting a Southern service for example!

 

[Starmill]

GTR are entirely in the wrong with regard to making taps on tickets stored on cards, printing of tickets or presence at a station in advance of the scheduled departure time. You are within your rights to point this out to them although as you've already done so yourself it could be a good job for your MP's office to do.

They may be correct to point out that you should have purchased a ticket. However that doesn't seem the first bit relevant here as you had already purchased it and that's not in dispute.

I am prepared to overlook the fact they've miscalculated the amount as that goes in my favour

You are entitled to insist on the (correct, presumably lower) amount in cash if you wish.

 

[AdamWW]

You are entitled to insist on the (correct, presumably lower) amount in cash if you wish.

It would probably be quicker just to cash the voucher in at a ticket office.

 

[Hophead]

You do wonder if whoever has come up with this new "rule" has ever used a train, or perhaps their travel is so punctual that the situation has never arisen? Who, in their right mind, says to themselves: "oh no, the train's cancelled - better get myself to the platform as soon as I can"?

 

[infobleep]

Since they're paying out I presume there is nothing more the Ombudsman can do on either of your concerns, because they just consider individual occurances and that has now been resolved in your case.

Whilst I approxatw rhe ombudsman might do nothing, I think they should.

 

[AdamWW]

Whilst I approxatw rhe ombudsman might do nothing, I think they should.

I think it's completely outside their remit.

A passenger complained about not getting Delay Repay. The TOC has said they will get it. The incident is resolved.

Yes the overall situation is most unsatisfactory, but I don't think that the Ombudsman is (are?) the right organisation to pursue this any more.

 

[infobleep]

I think it's completely outside their remit.

A passenger complained about not getting Delay Repay. The TOC has said they will get it. The incident is resolved.

Yes the overall situation is most unsatisfactory, but I don't think that the Ombudsman is (are?) the right organisation to pursue this any more.

So which organisation is? None? Their is London Travel Watch, if I've remembered their name correctly.

 

[AdamWW]

So which organisation is? None? Their is London Travel Watch, if I've remembered their name correctly.

I don't know what would be appropriate in this case.

When I tried to put something too generic to the Ombudsman, they passed it on to Transport Focus, who actually made a valient (but futile) attempt to get TfW to give a sensible response.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

Perhaps the next step is the Press (eg what's left of the Standard)?

As you are season ticket holder, in my view GTR is in effect adding a new legal term in your contract with them -- that you have never agreed to (and which is therefore unenforceable).

If they are concerned about potentially fraudulent DR claims (as indeed many TOCs are), they can seek to vary the terms and conditions of carriage for all TOCs (if they want to take the PR hit) for all future ticket purchases.

In other words, you currently have a contractual entitlment to a DR remedy when a season ticket is used; it is not a discretionary 'goodwill' payment in the way that some of the operators might prefer it was.

 

[Kite159]

Even ignoring the staying at the pub / wherever point, as others have said some stations you can't even pass the barriers (and so tap in) until you are allowed access to the platforms which in some stations isn't until the train is boarding! What would GTR have said if OP was at Victoria wanting a Southern service for example!

Or even at Brighton where there is nothing beyond the barriers, and in some cases they might be set to exit only.

I'm sure the staff there won't want hundreds of people hanging on the platform for a train to roll in etc.

 

[drueberflug]

As you are season ticket holder, in my view GTR is in effect adding a new legal term in your contract with them -- that you have never agreed to (and which is therefore unenforceable).

I've recently been on contact with TfL, and, I guess, they too insist on the unwritten touch-in/touch-out rule...

If your Travelcard is loaded onto a smartcard (such as ITSO), you are generally required to touch in and out to ensure correct charging.

 

[Vexed]

I've recently been on contact with TfL, and, I guess, they too insist on the unwritten touch-in/touch-out rule...

That only applies if you have Tap2Go or keyGo loaded as otherwise there's nothing to charge so what TfL said is baseless!

And if you have a Travelcard on an Oyster you aren't required to tap in or out if you're within the zones it's valid, so they aren't confusing Oyster and National Rail smartcards here.

 

[unsatisfied]

This is clearly unjust. There should be no expectation for you to wait at the platform rather than at work or home if you are aware your travel will be delayed. Should customers be rejected from delay repay claims if they were able to reschedule the event they were travelling for, or if they listen to a podcast while on the platform, as this doesn't spend time the same way as waiting aimlessly on a platform? You shouldn't be penalised just because there's a possibility you were claiming intent to travel on a journey you weren't going to - innocent until proven guilty! You should have no burden to prove you were actually going to take that train, let alone by physically being on the platform!

 

[AdamWW]

This is clearly unjust. There should be no expectation for you to wait at the platform rather than at work or home if you are aware your travel will be delayed. Should customers be rejected from delay repay claims if they were able to reschedule the event they were travelling for, or if they listen to a podcast while on the platform, as this doesn't spend time the same way as waiting aimlessly on a platform? You shouldn't be penalised just because there's a possibility you were claiming intent to travel on a journey you weren't going to - innocent until proven guilty! You should have no burden to prove you were actually going to take that train, let alone by physically being on the platform!

Quite but I don't suppose there's much to be done now given that this isn't a position they're taking publicly.

Just have to wait to see if they do it again and if so one more challenge it.

 

[infobleep]

Quite but I don't suppose there's much to be done now given that this isn't a position they're taking publicly.

Just have to wait to see if they do it again and if so one more challenge it.

Could OP ask customer services if a train is delayed do they want hundreds of passengers on the station concourse? If they say no then raise what happened.

If they are going to be delayed another time and they know staff don't want them on the platform, have all the e-mails to hand and the insisted they go onto the platform in order that they can gwt their delay repay hassle free. Then if the staff say no, discuss with them what they should do in this case? I'm just thinking out loud here.

 

[sheff1]

This requirement has always been in place to check ticket validity, and we're currently taking more steps to be more vigilant. This applies to paper tickets also, as the ticket does need to be printed/purchased before your intended service is scheduled to depart.

Complete nonsense of course.

 

[redreni]

Thanks for the replies, All!

I've replied to GTR thanking them for reviewing and correcting their decision.

I couldn't resist observing in passing that if they really continue to believe my ticket wasn't valid because it wasn't tapped until 4 minutes after my intended train was scheduled to depart, as intimated in the last two paragraphs of their email, then they shouldn't have paid up at this stage. They should have allowed the Ombudsman to consider whether the ticket was valid. They seem keen, for whatever reason, that the Ombudsman should not be asked to decide that point.

I said I continue to expect that any delays I may experience when travelling will attract delay repay as provided for in the NRCoT and GTR's Passenger Charter and that I will escalate any incorrect refusals based on tap-in time as necessary. As will others, I hope!

 

[Joe Paxton]

The sooner we accept the inevitability of universal Homo sapien perma geo-location the better, then such matters can be resolved with a definitive and indelible record.

 

[unsatisfied]

The sooner we accept the inevitability of universal Homo sapien perma geo-location the better, then such matters can be resolved with a definitive and indelible record.

Unfortunately this won't always prove intent to travel as subjects' travel patterns aren't completely predictable.

 

[t0ffeeman]

as ex traincrew, many trains can be cancelled only for a manager to coax traincrew to do extra work at very short notice like 5mins

 

[Joe Paxton]

Unfortunately this won't always prove intent to travel as subjects' travel patterns aren't completely predictable.

Couple it with neural implants that record intent, with data regularly uploaded to a central server for analysis.