Is Delay Repay rejected as ticket was purchased using voucher

[Aaron1]

Hi,
So I had a rail voucher from TPE which I recently used on a journey to reduce the payable price, my journey involved a TPE and then Northern service and it was whilst I was on the Northern service I was delayed, so I claimed delay repay from Northern, and they rejected it on the grounds of tickets purchased using rail vouchers are not eligible for any delay repay claim?

Is that true? I can't see anything online about this, I can sort of understand it if they limit the pay out to just another voucher again rather than cash equivalent, but I see no justification why delay repay is not able to claimed on tickets partly purchased using rail vouchers? As they have still been purchased and the rail vouchers are still valid forms of payment of course.

 

[Watershed]

This rejection is entirely spurious. There is nothing in the National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) or Northern's Passenger Charter which gives any basis for such a rejection. You should appeal the rejection accordingly.

You're right that, at least for the portion of your ticket that you paid by RTV, you won't be entitled to receive Delay Repay in "cash". However you'd arguably still be entitled to receive Delay Repay for the remainder by means of a BACS transfer/card refund etc.

 

[Haywain]

You're right that, at least for the portion of your ticket that you paid by RTV, you won't be entitled to receive Delay Repay in "cash"

I’m not sure that’s true. Delay Repay is compensation and is not restricted to how the ticket was paid for at the outset as would be the case with a refund.

 

[Watershed]

I’m not sure that’s true. Delay Repay is compensation and is not restricted to how the ticket was paid for at the outset as would be the case with a refund.

Good point. On re-reading, he NRCoT actually explicitly say that there will always be at least one "money option" (34.1):

Compensation methods may include payment by cheque or a bank transfer payment (usually referred to as a BACS payment); by means of a refund to your debit or credit card (each of these three is a “money option”); or in rail travel vouchers. Your options, which will include at least one “money option”

 

[gray1404]

They are making this up. You are absolutely entitled to delay repay regardless of what payment method was used. Using a Rail travel voucher does not affect your entitlement to delay repay.

Once I had got this matter sorted out I would be inclined to raise a separate complaint about the mishandling of my initial claim and ask that the member of staff is dealt with accordingly for making up rules that do not exist.

If I carried out my professional role making up rules and making such errors I would be dismissed rather quickly for incompetence and misconduct.

 

[Haywain]

If I carried out my professional role making up rules and making such errors I would be dismissed rather quickly for incompetence and misconduct.

You make it sound as if you believe that it was a deliberate action that has been repeated multiple times. I doubt you have any evidence about the person concerrned to support that idea.

 

[island]

You make it sound as if you believe that it was a deliberate action that has been repeated multiple times. I doubt you have any evidence about the person concerrned to support that idea.

Indeed. This is far more likely to be a training deficiency than misconduct or other malice.

 

[AlterEgo]

Indeed. This is far more likely to be a training deficiency than misconduct or other malice.

Indeed, as well as a culture among staff to treat the railway’s money like their own.

 

[Haywain]

Indeed, as well as a culture among staff to treat the railway’s money like their own.

Well, I suppose most businesses would prefer that to it being given away like confetti.

 

[Starmill]

Well, I suppose most businesses would prefer that to it being given away like confetti.

In my experience most private businesses prioritise protection of their brand over anything to do with money in circumstances such as these. The railway industry has never really taken this approach, but that's no reason to believe that the only alternative to the current situation is for money to be "given away like confetti".

Lots of businesses will absolutely dismiss staff over what could be seen as very minor infractions, such as this one, if they're seen as brand damaging, and in general doing so will be lawful, as long as due process is followed.

Northern have put out many press releases talking about how they have secured criminal penalties against people making these kind of low-level minor mistakes too, so they at least are very clearly of the view that this is a reasonable way to treat people. Other operators are more muted in how they talk about it but act the same way.

 

[Haywain]

Lots of businesses will absolutely dismiss staff over what could be seen as very minor infractions, such as this one, if they're seen as brand damaging, and in general doing so will be lawful, as long as due process is followed.

Due process does not, however, involve dismissing anyone for a single instance of providing erroneous information.

 

[Starmill]

Due process does not, however, involve dismissing anyone for a single instance of providing erroneous information.

It absolutely could do if it is evidence that the person isn't capable of carrying out their duties in accordance with their contract.

 

[Haywain]

It absolutely could do if it is evidence that the person isn't capable of carrying out their duties in accordance with their contract.

You think you'd get that from one isolated error?

 

[Starmill]

You think you'd get that from one isolated error?

Any error could be convincing evidence of that, yes. I don't really understand how this is unclear?

If someone is authorised to represent the brand of their company and they inadvertently damage it as part of their duties in that role, that could be clear evidence they cannot perform that role. Small errors can result in large consequences. I'm not saying that it means that their company would want to dismiss them for it.

 

[gray1404]

If a member of staff is prepared to make things up on one occasion I am sure a review of their workload and cases will reveal multiple other occasions other than making it up. I do not want to get off the topic however so I would advise the original poster to appeal and complain. If this is not successful ask for a deadlock letter and escalate the matter to the Rail Ombudsman.

 

[island]

It absolutely could do if it is evidence that the person isn't capable of carrying out their duties in accordance with their contract.

Certainly not. This is not something that has multiple correct interpretations; dismissing a person for single instance of making a minor mistake such as wrongly rejecting a DelayRepay claim would inevitably be an unfair dismissal at law (assuming the staff member is not excluded from unfair dismissal protection for some reason). Regardless of how much "brand damage" you might feel was caused or how "incapable" you infer that staff member might be, there is a due process to go through including multiple stages. This isn't the USA.

 

[Aaron1]

I have appealed this and wrote and emailed a letter of complaint over their handling of this.

Not the first complaint I have made to Northern about their handling of Delay Repay claims.