LNER sell tickets for train that doesn't exist?

[ainsworth74]

Spotted this story in the Yorkshire Post where it seems that LNER (though they claim it's just Trainline) sold tickets for a train that didn't exist:

Passengers furious after LNER sells them tickets for a Leeds to London 'ghost' train that didn't exist

Train operator LNER has been criticised after selling tickets for a Sunday train that didn't exist.

Passengers took to Twitter to complain that the 8.05 service from Leeds to London King's Cross had not turned up at Leeds Station this morning and was not listed on the departures board.

Several people had bought specified tickets for the train via either the LNER website or through booking agent Trainline.

They included NFL fans who had been heading to Wembley Stadium to watch the match between Houston Texans and Jacksonville Jaguars.

LNER responded by blaming Trainline for selling tickets to a service that had been removed due to 'planned cancellations' caused by engineering work at King's Cross.

Yet several passengers hit back by providing evidence that they had booked seats on the 8.05 train directly through LNER, despite the operator saying that they had not been released for sale.

Travellers intending to catch the 'ghost train' were instead told to take a Northern service to Doncaster and change onto another LNER train heading south from York.

A customer travelling in the other direction to Leeds from London was told that trains would start from Finsbury Park instead of King's Cross, but complained about a lack of clear information about the changes.

....

Link

Seems like something has gone very wrong here! Passengers clearly booked the 0805 but when you look at RTT it's not there at all. As if it was never even existed rather than having been cancelled at late notice. So have LNER put a service into the data which they didn't intend to run?

It seems like something similar must have happened last night as well. This tweet (including a screengrab of their booking) shows someone who appears to be booked on the 2200 from Kings Cross but in fact the last train was the 2102! Thankfully for this gentleman they noticed before the 2102 left so seemed to travel on that instead but I can't help but fear there will have been people who rocked up at 2145 expecting their train and to find that there was no train and not even a message saying the train had been cancelled as, again, it doesn't appear to exist!!

So it rather seems that LNER are having a problem with putting trains into the system and then deleting them very close to the time of travel.

 

[JB_B]

Timetable history shows it as cancelled, reinstated, retimed and finally cancelled again on 30 October.

http://timetablehistory.com/times.aspx?uid=Y75511&date=20191103

 

[30907]

It looks as though there has been considerable confusion over the duration of the Lincoln diversions, which seem to differ from week to week: on Saturday 26 Oct there were several morning cancellations caused apparently by not having crews with the right route and traction knowledge, whereas yesterday GC managed to run a couple of trains main line while LNER were already going via Lincoln!
I have a suspicion there have been some crossed wires (if you will forgive the phrase in an ECML context).

 

[yorkie]

I don't understand why TOCs like to blame third party retailers, such as Trainline, when clearly the TOCs are in control of the timetable data.

If they wish to pass the buck to Network Rail for not being able to finalise what infrastructure is available, where applicable, then that's their choice.

But blaming retailers for using the TOCs own data is just ridiculous.

Timetable history shows it as cancelled, reinstated, retimed and finally cancelled again on 30 October.

http://timetablehistory.com/times.aspx?uid=Y75511&date=20191103

With sites like this, rouge TOCs are no longer able to blame innocent parties

 

[SickyNicky]

With sites like this, rouge TOCs are no longer able to blame innocent parties

Is that the colour of their staff's faces when the truth is shown?

 

[gray1404]

Rather then incorrectly blame a third party how about they tell the truth. We are sorry but we uploaded details of your train to run but didn't take it down before you made you're booking. We overlooked this and we are really sorry.

 

[30907]

Looking at
http://timetablehistory.com/times.aspx?uid=Y75684&date=20191102 the Saturday night train was retimed from 2200 to 2102 at an early stage. I wonder if the way it was done ("departs -58") meant that the online journey planners didn't pick the change up until the schedule was actually shown as changed on 30 Oct?

If the LNER booking engine did pick up the change on 7 Oct, it is understandable that their first reaction was to point the finger at Trainline.

Ignore the above, I misunderstood how that site works, sorry.

...there seems to have been a technical or human problem that needs resolving before it happens again.

 

[Starmill]

Typical LNER to try to shift blame for their mistake.

Every one of the customers affected has a right to an apology from LNER, and a minimum of compensation equal to all of the money they that they paid for tickets - regardless of who they booked them with.

It's their responsibility to manage the changes to the timetable in accordance with engineering work, not trainline's or anyone else's.

 

[ainsworth74]

Looking at
http://timetablehistory.com/times.aspx?uid=Y75684&date=20191102 the Saturday night train was retimed from 2200 to 2102 at an early stage. I wonder if the way it was done ("departs -58") meant that the online journey planners didn't pick the change up until the schedule was actually shown as changed on 30 Oct?

Are you sure you're not confusing the "Actual" column with "Scheduled"? "Actual" shows how the service performed against the timetable and the -58 shows that it departed 58 minutes early against the timetable.

My reading is that the move to 2102 did not occur until 30/10/2019.

 

[SickyNicky]

Looking at
http://timetablehistory.com/times.aspx?uid=Y75684&date=20191102 the Saturday night train was retimed from 2200 to 2102 at an early stage. I wonder if the way it was done ("departs -58") meant that the online journey planners didn't pick the change up until the schedule was actually shown as changed on 30 Oct?

I took the decision to display the same actual times on the day against each separate timetable change. That would allow users to gauge what delay repay was payable against the timetable at the time of purchase, instead of against the timetable on the day. It's pretty sure that every booking engine will have picked up the changes within a day or so.

 

[30907]

It is their responsibility to manage the changes to the timetable in accordance with engineering work, not trainline's or anyone else's.

I am not sure of the division of responsibility between NR and TOC for uploading times, but if it is LNER's, I agree they should fess up.

Are you sure you're not confusing the "Actual" column with "Scheduled"? "Actual" shows how the service performed against the timetable and the -58 shows that it departed 58 minutes early against the timetable.

My reading is that the move to 2102 did not occur until 30/10/2019.

Apologies, you are right, post annotated. My excuse is I've only just discovered the site

 

[SickyNicky]

My excuse is I've only just discovered the site

I haven't gone out of my way to advertise it, It was designed as a tool for support personnel, but I decided to leave it open for anyone to use.

 

[ainsworth74]

Apologies, you are right, post annotated. My excuse is I've only just discovered the site

No worries, happens to the best of us