Nonsense reply from Northern to Delay Repay claim

[TUC]

I had a Northern mobile app ticket for the 1733 London KX to Halifax last Saturday. I submitted a Delay Repay claim as the Northern strike effectivrly meant I was delayed by over two hours on the Leeds-Halifax leg. I received the following response:

'Thank you for your correspondence in respect to the Northern service on 02
February 2019 with our reference xxxx

I am sorry to learn that your journey between London Kings Cross and Halifax
was disrupted, and that you were caused a delay as a result. Please be
assured that we are committed to operating a punctual train service on all of
our routes, continually reviewing and monitoring the cause of all delays to
our trains, to ensure that appropriate measures are put in place to reduce
their recurrence wherever this is possible.

We’ve rejected your claim because you haven’t used your ticket to travel.
This means you’re entitled to a full refund from the original retailer.

If you purchased the ticket via our mobile app or website and have a mobile
ticket then call 0800 200 60 60 and select option 5 for refunds.

If you purchased the ticket via the website and have physical ticket then
this needs returning to Northern Railway, Refund Department, PO BOX 23972,
Edinburgh, EH3 5DA.

Tickets purchased from a Northern ticket office should be returned to the
station for a refund. If the ticket was purchased from a Northern ticket
machine then you can send the ticket to Freepost Northernrailway, FAO
Refunds.


Any tickets purchased from other train operators or 3rd party retailer such
as Trainline need to be refunded directly by the retailer.

Kind regards,
Northern


Journey Date:
02 February 2019

Your planned route (scheduled times):
Departing 2200 from London Kings Cross to Leeds arriving 0048.
Transfer via replacement bus'

There are several problems with this:
1. Given they apologise for my delay, how can they then say I did not use my ticket to travel?
2. Then say 'if you purchased the ticket via our mobile app'. In my original claim I said I did purchase it via this route and included a screenshot.
3. Given I activated my ticket how will I get a refund for not travelling?
4. The journey they quote at the foot of their email is a totally different one to what I stated in my original claim.

Their response makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Deafdoggie]

It is either complete incompetence, or a deliberate ploy to try and get out of paying. I am not sure which is worse! But they did this to me, the only difference I had purchased my ticket from Virgin, so they forced me to get a refund from them, rather than pay out on their delay. It seemed odd to me, as I had made most of the journey, but they made claim a refund for not making the journey. Of course, Virgin said I had made the journey so couldn't get a refund, and I was simply delayed. And so we went back and forth.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

There are several problems with this:

Where to start...!

1. Given they apologise for my delay, how can they then say I did not use my ticket to travel?

Well, exactly. It's contradicting itself.

2. Then say 'if you purchased the ticket via our mobile app'. In my original claim I said I did purchase it via this route and included a screenshot.

Probably because it's a template email.

3. Given I activated my ticket how will I get a refund for not travelling?

You won't, and you're not eligible for one.

4. The journey they quote at the foot of their email is a totally different one to what I stated in my original claim.

Not surprising, they seem to have a mind of their own when it comes to producing the itineraries that they think you took.

Their response makes no sense whatsoever.

I agree.

Respond to them (either online or directly to the email, depending on if its a no-reply email address), asking them to take another look at their email and get back to you when they are ready to pay the compensation they owe.

 

[bb21]

Did you travel? I am a bit confused from your account.

 

[TUC]

Did you travel? I am a bit confused from your account.

Yes I did, London to Leeds. There was no Northern service for the Leeds-Halifax leg due to the strike.

 

[sheff1]

They clearly state "This means you’re entitled to a full refund from the original retailer".

As they were the original retailer, I trust you will contact them and claim the refund.

 

[yorkie]

Yes this is what Northern do. They reject valid claims and refuse to even accept the original itinerary is a valid one. You just have to keep pestering them.

I can't see them changing their ways anytime soon, they've been incompetent for months and this looks set to continue.

Let us know how you get on.

 

[mallard]

Can we stop giving TOCs the "benefit of the doubt" and calling it "incompetence" when there's a clear, long standing pattern of abuse?

The odd occasion might be incompetence, a sustained pattern is malice. Hanlon's razor must be balanced against Occam's.

 

[Camden]

I also know someone whose claim was wrongly rejected, subsequently paid.

Given their obligations, if a claim is straightforward and you're sure of the facts, and are certain that it should be a matter of basic competence (duty of care) on the TOC to simply pay up, I wonder whether a more formal approach might work.

I'm thinking, every delay repay form being submitted with a letter setting out the facts, setting out why I believe it's a straightforward claim with no basis for rejection, and therefore if further correspondence is required (whether to them or third parties) to settle the matter it will be chargeable, setting out reasonable rates and stating that settlement will not be accepted without full payment of any such entirely avoidable costs incurred.

Then progress the claim normally with all normal haste. If delay repay paid, matter closed no costs incurred. But if erroneously rejected then progress and keep informing them of the costs.

Once liability is finally admitted for what they should have paid in the first place, sending them an invoice for the costs. No payment means a further chargeable 14 days to pay letter before small claims proceedings setting out the case.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I also know someone whose claim was wrongly rejected, subsequently paid.

Given their obligations, if a claim is straightforward and you're sure of the facts, and are certain that it should be a matter of basic competence (duty of care) on the TOC to simply pay up, I wonder whether a more formal approach might work.

I'm thinking, every delay repay form being submitted with a letter setting out the facts, setting out why I believe it's a straightforward claim with no basis for rejection, and therefore if further correspondence is required (whether to them or third parties) to settle the matter it will be chargeable, setting out reasonable rates and stating that settlement will not be accepted without full payment of any such entirely avoidable costs incurred.

Then progress the claim normally with all normal haste. If delay repay paid, matter closed no costs incurred. But if erroneously rejected then progress and keep informing them of the costs.

Once liability is finally admitted for what they should have paid in the first place, sending them an invoice for the costs. No payment means a further chargeable 14 days to pay letter before small claims proceedings setting out the case.

Unfortunately you can't always recover costs you incur, merely because another party is in breach of contract. There are a number of limitations, both in common law and in the terms of the National Rail Conditions of Travel, as to what costs are recoverable.

I suspect this is not a case where costs are recoverable - beyond the direct costs of taking the matter to Court.

 

[robbeech]

As others have pointed out this is absolutely standard. Whilst I’m happy to receive evidence to the contrary I’m fairly sure this is deliberate to avoid payment. Given that likely less than a quarter of people will claim delay repay, they can thin them out a bit further by rejecting claims. Many people will give up over a few quid but to the TOC those few quids from thousands of people add up to something worth acting on.

I have a claim outstanding which received the same stock letter. I wrote to LNER (the retailer) explaining the situation and got a non stock reply suggesting they’re aware of some issues but unfortunately as I had travelled they were unable to help. Of course this is expected and fully acceptable.

Some things to think about in conclusion.

Refunds and delay repay come from different pots even if the retailer and the toc is the same.

A minority of people claim delay repay.

A majority of those rejected will give up over a few quid.

Those that do push them will be bounced back and forth to thin out a few more.

The handful of people (likely only a few percent of the people eligible) will eventually be paid but they will have spent more time dealing with it than the claim is worth in the majority of cases so likely won’t bother again if they’re put in the same position.

 

[Camden]

Unfortunately you can't always recover costs you incur, merely because another party is in breach of contract. There are a number of limitations, both in common law and in the terms of the National Rail Conditions of Travel, as to what costs are recoverable.

I suspect this is not a case where costs are recoverable - beyond the direct costs of taking the matter to Court.

My understanding is that anyone can litigate for losses they have incurred, the only question being as to whether the court agrees.

The three requirements of 1 a duty, 2 a breach and 3 that breach being avoidable and caused only by failure to exercise reasonable care would in my opinion be met.

The matter of costs incurred as a result of trying to resolve the situation represents losses. As long as these are proven, reasonable and mitigated where possible, again I don't see any argument against.

There can be a prevailing view in these forums sometimes that the railways are special, but I don't believe there is anything limiting people's normal rights.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

My understanding is that anyone can litigate for losses they have incurred, the only question being as to whether the court agrees.

The three requirements of 1 a duty, 2 a breach and 3 that breach being avoidable and caused only by failure to exercise reasonable care would in my opinion be met.

The matter of costs incurred as a result represents losses. As long as these are proven, reasonable and mitigated where possible, again I don't see any argument against.

There is a prevailing view in these forums someone's that the railways are special, but I don't believe there is anything limiting people's normal rights.

I agree with the sentiment - and I am, if anything, a fervent supporter of the principle that the railways are, and should be treated, just as any other contracting party. But unfortunately it is far more nuanced than saying that, if you have incurred a cost in those circumstances it is always recoverable.

If the NRCoT did not address the matter (they do), and you had legitimately incurred costs, e.g. having to go to a far-away ticket office as you might have had to do in the olden days, then perhaps you would be able to recover these.

But costs for "your time"? Highly unlikely to be allowed, unless there is evidence of a substantial breach of the Civil Procedure Rules, e.g. totally ignoring correspondence throughout.

 

[Camden]

Costs for letters, correspondence, calls etc, I have recovered these before elsewhere, so really not detecting any obvious difference.

"Unlikely" is fine, as far as trying the route and cost effective small claims court goes

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Costs for letters, correspondence, calls etc, I have recovered these before elsewhere, so really not detecting any obvious difference.

"Unlikely" is fine, as far as trying the route and cost effective small claims court goes

It's up to you - but I am one for taking things to Court and even I wouldn't suggest a claim on that basis!

 

[_toommm_]

Ticket one: Denby Dale to Sheffield
Ticket two: Sheffield to Strines

Train from Sheffield was cancelled and it was obvious what route I took.

Northern subsequently deny my claim saying I went Denby Dale to Huddersfield to Manchester to Strines.

Cant make it up...

 

[robbeech]

Cant make it up...

Yet they do, every single day.

 

[TUC]

I’ve now had an unsatisfactory reply from Northern and, after going back to them further, the issue is still unresolved. Essentially, they are saying that, as it was a strike day and they had issued an amended timetable, Delay Repay is calculated on that timetable and, as there was no evening Leeds-Halifax leg of my journey from London operating, too bad. They say ‘ Unfortunately the only option if the amended timetable does not suit you personally, is to return your tickets to your point of purchase before the travel date‘. The problem with that approach is that it would leave the passenger without a ticket for the part of the journey is operating!

I went back to Northern to point out that I was sold a ticket with an itinerary that showed the journey as operating. They responded that amended timetables can be introduced anytime up to 10 pm before the day of travel. So on that basis, someone could set off a long distance journey, and only find out when already far from home that their return journey was not operating, and be left without the ability of Delsy Repay or a refund from Northern.

 

[yorkie]

I’ve now had an unsatisfactory reply from Northern and, after going back to them further, the issue is still unresolved. Essentially, they are saying that, as it was a strike day and they had issued an amended timetable, Delay Repay is calculated on that timetable and, as there was no evening Leeds-Halifax leg of my journey from London operating, too bad. They say ‘ Unfortunately the only option if the amended timetable does not suit you personally, is to return your tickets to your point of purchase before the travel date‘. The problem with that approach is that it would leave the passenger without a ticket for the part of the journey is operating!

I went back to Northern to point out that I was sold a ticket with an itinerary that showed the journey as operating. They responded that amended timetables can be introduced anytime up to 10 pm before the day of travel. So on that basis, someone could set off a long distance journey, and only find out when already far from home that their return journey was not operating, and be left without the ability of Delsy Repay or a refund from Northern.

They told me that too.

So I reminded them of the terms of the contract.

After about three emails, they relented, just before I was about to write a letter before action.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I’ve now had an unsatisfactory reply from Northern and, after going back to them further, the issue is still unresolved. Essentially, they are saying that, as it was a strike day and they had issued an amended timetable, Delay Repay is calculated on that timetable and, as there was no evening Leeds-Halifax leg of my journey from London operating, too bad. They say ‘ Unfortunately the only option if the amended timetable does not suit you personally, is to return your tickets to your point of purchase before the travel date‘. The problem with that approach is that it would leave the passenger without a ticket for the part of the journey is operating!

I went back to Northern to point out that I was sold a ticket with an itinerary that showed the journey as operating. They responded that amended timetables can be introduced anytime up to 10 pm before the day of travel. So on that basis, someone could set off a long distance journey, and only find out when already far from home that their return journey was not operating, and be left without the ability of Delsy Repay or a refund from Northern.

It's a completely ludicrous approach that defies even the common sense principles of contract law - that if you make a contract then, shock horror, you are bound by it! Sadly it seems no-one responding to these emails has even an ounce of common sense otherwise they would see they are spouting total drivel.

I presume it is now more than 40 working days since you first raised the matter. This being the case, you can take it straight to the Rail Ombudsman. The decision of the Rail Ombudsman is binding on Northern but not on you, so if you disagree with their decision you can still take it to Court.