Northern decline delay repay and accuse me of fraud

[matthewluck]

I had a ticket booked on the Northern Rail App, Sheffield to Retford departing at 06:38 on 1st September. I had an itinerary for the journey to arrive at 7:20 AM.

This train was originally in the strike timetable but was removed and did not run. I, therefore, had to take a later train and arrived over 2 hours late.

Annoyed that Northern have declined my claim and flagged it up as potentially fraudulent. Where do I stand in this situation, am I entitled to Delay Repay as the service was cancelled (even though it was a strike day)?



Thank you for your correspondence in respect to the Northern service on 01
September 2018 with our reference X.

I am sorry to learn that your journey between Sheffield and Retford 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 have reviewed the journey that you claimed for and your claim has
initially been marked as possibly fraudulent. We have currently rejected your
claim, however, should you believe you have a valid claim and you would like
to provide more information please submit a new claim, with full details and
we will reassess as required.

Your planned route (scheduled times):
Departing 0638 from Sheffield to Retford Low Level arriving 0720.

Delay repay does not in any way limit or exclude your other legal rights to
compensation as a consumer where we are at fault, under the Consumer Rights
Act 2015 or otherwise.

Should you have any further queries or concerns then please do not hesitate
to contact us again at [email protected]

Kind regards,
Northern

 

[Gareth Marston]

What sort of ticket was it? Advance? Anytime Single etc

 

[najaB]

I had an itenary for the journey to arrive just after 7:20 AM.

Did you have an itenary provided by the retailer/TOC or did you look at the timetable and make your own?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I had a ticket booked on the Northern Rail App, Sheffield to Retford departing at 06:38 on 1st September. I had an itenary for the journey to arrive just after 7:20 AM.

This train was originally in the strike timetable but was removed and did not run. I therefore had to take a later train and arrived over 2 hours late.

Annoyed that Northern have declined my claim and flagged it up as potentially fraudulent. Where do I stand in this situation, an I entitled to Delay Repay as the service was cancelled (even though it was a strike day)?



Thank you for your correspondence in respect to the Northern service on 01
September 2018 with our reference X.

I am sorry to learn that your journey between Sheffield and Retford 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 have reviewed the journey that you claimed for and your claim has
initially been marked as possibly fraudulent. We have currently rejected your
claim, however, should you believe you have a valid claim and you would like
to provide more information please submit a new claim, with full details and
we will reassess as required.

Your planned route (scheduled times):
Departing 0638 from Sheffield to Retford Low Level arriving 0720.

As usual, Northern talking tosh in the hope of saving a few pennies. Even if your claim were invalid for whatever reason, that does not automatically make it fraudulent as Northern have suggested. In fact, if there is anything fraudulent at all about this, it is Northern knowingly incorrectly rejecting claims in the hope of fobbing off passengers with complete misinformation about their rights!

It does not matter whether a strike timetable was subsequently announced or not - it applies only to tickets bought after the revised timetable was published. You had a contract to travel on the 06:38. That train did not run. Hence you are entitled to compensation with respect to your resultant delay. Delay Repay is not fault-based and therefore compensation is payable regardless of the cause of a delay.

Write back to Northern and tell them that your claim is entirely valid and that you will not accept accusations of fraud. This really is a new level in Northern's wrongdoing; I can be quite glad I don't have to use them often!

 

[matthewluck]

Just to confirm that I had an itinerary to travel on the 06:38 this was confirmed on the Northern App where I booked my ticket.

The ticket was an Off-Peak Day Single

 

[najaB]

Just to confirm that I had an itinerary to travel on the 06:38 this was confirmed on the Northern App where I booked my ticket.

Thanks. In that case there is no possible way that this claim could be a fraudulent.

Write back to Northern asking them to review your claim, stressing that you have an itinerary (that they provided) showing your arrival time as 0720.

 

[Starmill]

Marked as fraudulent? That's mad. I'd write to them demanding an explanation and an apology, along with any compensation due. Ideally, a Letter Before Action is the appropriate response, but unfortunately this is unlikely to be practical as it would require lots of time and money on your part (that I, in your position, would be unlikely to want to part with).

 

[Haywain]

Where do I stand in this situation, an I entitled to Delay Repay as the service was cancelled (even though it was a strike day)?

It looks like this is a standard letter, so write back explaining what actually happened and request that they reconsider your claim.

 

[Bertie the bus]

There is a 1L01 06:02 Doncaster – Lincoln, departing Sheffield at 06:38, in the WTT. This was cancelled on 1 Sep. On 1 Sep there was a 2L01 06:38 Sheffield – Lincoln STP, running 1 Sep only. It was activated but cancelled. It was the only Northern STP service from Sheffield between 06:00 and 10:00 which didn’t run.

So it is obvious they did intend to run a 06:38 Sheffield – Lincoln and then at some point between creating the strike timetable and the date itself changed their minds.

Personally I would write back and say I believe their rejection of the claim is possibly fraudulent and threaten going to the press unless I get the refund due. I find those sorts of threats work quite well with incompetent organisations with a poor public image such as Arriva Rail North. Though I stress that is what I would do and isn’t advice.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Marked as fraudulent? That's mad. I'd write to them demanding an explanation and an apology, along with any compensation due. Ideally, a Letter Before Action is the appropriate response, but unfortunately this is unlikely to be practical as it would require lots of time and money on your part (that I, in your position, would be unlikely to want to part with).

Sending a Letter Before Action costs nothing more than printing the letter and posting it - or nothing, if you email it. And if you use a template it can be done in approximately the same time it would take to write a normal response. It is only escalating it beyond that - to County Court - that takes longer and costs more. But if Northern are defiant that they will not pay, despite escalating the matter internally, it is your only real option.

 

[Gareth Marston]

They are, of course, speaking the truth as they see it. It never hurts to seek clarification.

Indeed depending on the answers to the questions we asked the advice could be very different.

Neither do we have details of the correspondence/ evidence the OP sent to Northern depending on the content it could have legitimately elicited the response he got.

There's far to many people jumping in and giving "advice" based on their own predujuices and are not paying attention to the need to have as much evidence as possible before rushing to conclusions.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Neither do we have details of the correspondence/ evidence the OP sent to Northern depending on the content it could have legitimately elicited the response he got.

Considering Delay Repay forms are standard we have a pretty good idea of what the OP sent to Northern.

Assuming the OP has copied the entire reply from Northern I think you should be far more concerned about a company accusing its customers of potentially committing fraud without providing any evidence or explanation and doing so without first contacting them to try to gather additional information.

 

[30907]

Does the information sent to Northern include the date and time of purchase?

Assuming the OP has copied the entire reply from Northern I think you should be far more concerned about a company accusing its customers of potentially committing fraud without providing any evidence or explanation and doing so without first contacting them to try to gather additional information.

I thought that was the point of Northern's mail?

 

[Starmill]

I thought that was the point of Northern's mail?

I don't think so. If you're after more information, you don't suggest that the person you want the information from is a criminal.

 

[matthewluck]

Does the information sent to Northern include the date and time of purchase?



I thought that was the point of Northern's mail?

It was booked the day before travel. They don't ask for this information as part of the delay repay claim process. But as it was booked via their app they should be able to see when it was booked.

Thanks everyone. I have replied with the following :

This claim was previously declined as 'potentially fraudulent.' I booked on the Northern app and was provided with an itinerary for the 06:38 train arriving at Retford at 07:20.

As there was no other services around that time, I arrived at my destination over 2 hours later than planned.

I'm disgusted that you have labelled my claim as fraudulent and would like to receive the compensation I am entitled to. I will make a claim via the small claims court should you not reimburse me and apologise for the slander against my good name.

 

[sheff1]

It looks like this is a standard letter ...

No reputable company would have a standard letter which tells someone that they have been flagged as possibly fraudulent when their only 'crime' is claiming compensation due to the cancellation of something by the company.

The key word, of course, is "reputable". Northern obviously think it is perfectly acceptable to suggest someone might be a criminal with absolutely no justification.

 

[najaB]

No reputable company would have a standard letter which tells someone that they have been flagged as possibly fraudulent...

On the contrary - this is exactly the type of letter that will have been reviewed and approved by their legal department, to be sent without modification or deviation precisely to ensure that no unfounded accusations are made.

The mistake would appear to be that is being sent in reply to claims that it should not be being used for.

 

[matthewluck]

When I spoke to someone at their Customer Experience Centre earlier I was told that it was just a standard email. When I said that it was wrong to accuse people of fraud without evidence they said that it is a different department that deals with delay repay so he could not advise why this is happening.

 

[sheff1]

On the contrary - this is exactly the type of letter that will have been reviewed and approved by their legal department, to be sent without modification or deviation precisely to ensure that no unfounded accusations are made.

The mistake would appear to be that is being sent in reply to claims that it should not be being used for.

There is little point in quoting only part of my sentence, thus losing the point I was making entirely, and then arguing that what I (had not) said is contrary to the actuality.

 

[bb21]

You simply cannot accuse a customer of being fraudulent without at least some strong evidence to suggest so. If Customer Relations were not sure, they should have consulted those with relevant knowledge. Northern's Train Planning and Performance teams would both have been able to highlight the possibility that the schedule might have existed while the ticket was booked. I won't comment on where this might have gone wrong (although I have my own theories), but that sounds to me a really poor show.

 

[Camden]

The OP says they refused to pay the delay repay for the original claim, requiring the OP to claim twice in order to get what they were entitled.

The OP says this was because they identified the claim as possibly fraudulent.

To my mind either a claim is or isn't fraudulent and while they might be able to take longer while they look into something, I doubt they have the legal power to summarily reject a claim based on little.

We need to see the text of their obligations/entitlements, and compare their behaviour versus that.

If it's enforceable, I wonder if it might be possible to add a note along with future delay repays setting out reasonable charges that will be levied for future correspondence relating to the matter. On receiving such a note in return, rather than a cheque, then until such point as you decide to issue proceedings to recover what's owed you might be able to at least be able to nullify that element of the offensiveness of it all.

 

[najaB]

Personally, I think people are getting way too het up about the word fraudulent - if they were truly accusing the OP of anything illegal then I doubt they would invite them to resubmit their claim. @Gareth Marston has it right: it's merely language intended to scare off the chancers.

You simply cannot accuse a customer of being fraudulent without at least some strong evidence to suggest so.

Their reply indicates, to me at least, that they've sent the wrong letter - either through mistake or malice - as they correctly state the OP's itinerary.

 

[30907]

It was booked the day before travel. They don't ask for this information as part of the delay repay claim process. But as it was booked via their app they should be able to see when it was booked.

Thanks everyone. I have replied with the following :

This claim was previously declined as 'potentially fraudulent.' I booked on the Northern app and was provided with an itinerary for the 06:38 train arriving at Retford at 07:20.

As there was no other services around that time, I arrived at my destination over 2 hours later than planned.

I'm disgusted that you have labelled my claim as fraudulent and would like to receive the compensation I am entitled to. I will make a claim via the small claims court should you not reimburse me and apologise for the slander against my good name.

In which case I can see no reason for their flag-up. Which BTW is very carefully worded "initially marked" "potentially" so neither slander nor libel.

 

[Silverdale]

Whatever the wording, it was a private letter. Unless it's published or made in public a false accusation of fraud is neither libel nor slander.

The careful wording is obviously intended to frighten the person whose claim is being declined, that if they pursue the matter further there could be nasty consequences for them. It shouldn't deter anyone who (like the OP) is sure of their facts and the basis on which Northern should be operating their delay repay scheme. I hope the OP gets the payment they are due, plus an apology from Northern for suggesting the claim could be in any way fraudulent.

 

[AlterEgo]

Stupid and unacceptable letter from Northern. You shouldn’t accuse people of fraud, or even hint at it, unless you have a compelling case to do so.

 

[bnm]

If you are going to use threatening language to scare off chancers then you don't do so in the body of the reply. That makes it look like a direct accusation toward the person addressed.

A general statement about fraudulent claims should be included as a footnote.

 

[Muttley]

Their reply indicates, to me at least, that they've sent the wrong letter - either through mistake or malice - as they correctly state the OP's itinerary.

Let's not have double standards then, if they've made an error they should immediately send Matt £30 similar to a Penalty Fare, and then they can sort out the correct Delay Repay compensation.
i believe that's how Northern would like errors in the railway ticketing system to be sorted.

 

[najaB]

If you are going to use threatening language to scare off chancers then you don't do so in the body of the reply. That makes it look like a direct accusation toward the person addressed.

A general statement about fraudulent claims should be included as a footnote.

That makes sense.

 

[Haywain]

If you are going to use threatening language to scare off chancers then you don't do so in the body of the reply. That makes it look like a direct accusation toward the person addressed.

A general statement about fraudulent claims should be included as a footnote.

I'm inclined to agree with this. In my experience (of dealing with refund claims) a simple letter asking for further information usually deters the 'dodgy' claimant from continuing.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I helped a friend do a delay repay for XC for a 59 late train recently got a "we want further info" letter (well e mail) back. Responded straight away with little different to original and she got voucher in a couple of days. Friend said it was 59 late so did RTT and i didn't try it onto get the 60 late compensation.