Requesting a refund when train is a mess

[thenorthern]

This evening I caught the 22:00 London St Pancras to Nottingham, which on the inbound journey was full of football fans as Crystal Palace had been playing Leicester. The train itself was a mess with beer cans, bottles and other bits of trash all over the train. The guard apologised on the tannoy about the state of the train. The trash cans were full so it wasn't possible to dispose of the trash left by the previous passengers.

As I was travelling in First Class (with a first class ticket of course) I was disappointed as I was essentially paying a premium to sit in a rubbish dump. After moaning at East Midlands Trains on Twitter they told me to send a photograph of my ticket to their customer service email address.

I was wondering what is likely to happen next after I have sent it off.

 

[robbeech]

They’ll send you a stock apology in a few days.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

They'll probably tell you they're really sorry but they "can't" offer compensation for what happened. That, of course, is utter B.S., as they not only can, they may be legally obliged to!

Section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 implies a term into every consumer contract for services (e.g. a train journey) that the service will be provided with reasonable care and skill. If the train company is selling you a first class ticket and you are starting at the train's origin, where there ought to be plenty of time to clean it, then in my view it is very reasonable to expect them to clean it properly.

I would even go so far as to suggest that failing to clean it could constitute a breach of the above obligation, as I think it demonstrates a lack of reasonable care and skill. The situation would, I would have thought, be different if you were boarding at an intermediate station after the revellers had left, with EMT not having had an opportunity to clean their mess up.

A breach of the duty of reasonable care and skill leads to either repeat performance, or a refund (partial or full) being your remedies. Obviously, repeat performance is not possible in the context of a train journey, so refund it is to be. The extent of the refund will depend on the extent to which the service was delivered in breach of the above duty. I would have said that a breach of the kind you have described might lead to, say, 25% of the ticket being repayable.

I rather suspect that, despite the NRCoT having been changed a few years ago to recognise the validity of such claims as I've discussed, they will nevertheless continue denying any liability, as if you needed further evidence that they don't understand customer service. It may be necessary, therefore, to escalate the matter further internally, to obtain a letter of deadlock, and to escalate the matter to the Rail Ombudsman thereafter. There is even the possibility of Court if you remain unsatisfied by the Ombudsman's ruling.

Of course, I'd like to hope that they will take one look at your email and send you an appropriate amount of compensation, but that hasn't been my experience with such matters as concerns either EMT or other TOCs.

 

[Clip]

To be fair to EMT though - the train to form this service was 24 late into st pancakes and that left it a 10 min turn around to get pax off and the OP on which given how many people were obviously on it meant it left 3 down anyway. Thats not a lot of time for anyone to do any cleaning at all unless they stayed on it.

One has to be realistic in these circumstances so a letter letting them know about it could wield a good will gesture but I wouldnt expect much else really.

 

[najaB]

If the train company is selling you a first class ticket and you are starting at the train's origin, where there ought to be plenty of time to clean it, then in my view it is very reasonable to expect them to clean it properly.

First class or not, from what's been posted the OP arrived safely, and on time. Where in the contract does it say or imply that the train will be litter free?

 

[najaB]

I was wondering what is likely to happen next after I have sent it off.

I suspect they'll send you the difference between the standard and first class fare.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Isn't the state of the train the responsibility of those who caused the mess and shouldn't they be held accountable ?

 

[Clip]

Isn't the state of the train the responsibility of those who caused the mess and shouldn't they be held accountable ?

Well yes but if the bins were full what do you expect them to do? And who is going to stand there and make sure that they remove their rubbish?

 

[R G NOW.]

In an instance like this, shouldn't the person who was selling food and drink on this train, go through the train with a bin bag at frequent intervals. I have only the experience of cross country when they come through the train with a trolley, they usually pick up other litter on the way, and ask passengers if they have finished with cups and so on..

 

[najaB]

In an instance like this, shouldn't the person who was selling food and drink on this train, go through the train with a bin bag at frequent intervals. I have only the experience of cross country when they come through the train with a trolley, they usually pick up other litter on the way, and ask passengers if they have finished with cups and so on..

If it was an unofficial football special, that may not have been possible (or even a good idea).

 

[R G NOW.]

I seem to remember at one time a football special train was dispatched from Paddington, but was all standard class, and was only available to football fans as they had to show their tickets for entry into the stadium. It was on the platform screen showing as a charter train. All other ran as normal.

 

[R G NOW.]

If it was an unofficial football special, that may not have been possible (or even a good idea).

If this train was rammed, then I suspect was not possible.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

First class or not, from what's been posted the OP arrived safely, and on time. Where in the contract does it say or imply that the train will be litter free?

When you are paying for First Class travel, there is clearly an implication that travel will be provided in a reasonable modicum of luxury and comfort. If the train truly was filthy, which would not surprise me given the circumstances, as I've said, that could constitute a breach of that implied warranty, and obligation.

To be clear, I'm not saying that you can expect the train to be spick and span. But at least an effort should be made.

 

[Clip]

When you are paying for First Class travel, there is clearly an implication that travel will be provided in a reasonable modicum of luxury and comfort. If the train truly was filthy, which would not surprise me given the circumstances, as I've said, that could constitute a breach of that implied warranty, and obligation.

To be clear, I'm not saying that you can expect the train to be spick and span. But at least an effort should be made.

You are still simply paying for a train to convey you from A to B - albeit in better seats with more leg room but theres nothing anywhere that i know of which specifically states that the trains will always be clean so therefore it doesnt form part of the contract you make with the service provider.

 

[island]

You’ll get a stock apology and if you’re lucky a fiver in RTVs.

Any suggestion that there is an implied term in the contract that the train will be clean is fanciful at best. Any case taken for a price reduction on the ground it was not would be laughed out of court, most likely with a costs order against the claimant pursuant to CPR 27.14 (g).

 

[Bertie the bus]

When you are paying for First Class travel, there is clearly an implication that travel will be provided in a reasonable modicum of luxury and comfort. If the train truly was filthy, which would not surprise me given the circumstances, as I've said, that could constitute a breach of that implied warranty, and obligation.

There is no such implication. In fact a 1st class ticket doesn't even entitle you to a seat, never mind luxury and comfort. It entitles you to travel in the section of the train reserved for 1st class ticket holders.

As for your point about it should have been cleaned before it started its journey. As it started its journey at Nottingham and the football supporters joined at Leicester where does that leave your care and skill argument?

 

[mmh]

There is no such implication. In fact a 1st class ticket doesn't even entitle you to a seat, never mind luxury and comfort. It entitles you to travel in the section of the train reserved for 1st class ticket holders.

As for your point about it should have been cleaned before it started its journey. As it started its journey at Nottingham and the football supporters joined at Leicester where does that leave your care and skill argument?

It had already done Leicester to London, the OP was on it when it was returning to Nottingham.

But you're quite right about the 1st class nonsense. It's not relevant to anything.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

There is no such implication. In fact a 1st class ticket doesn't even entitle you to a seat, never mind luxury and comfort. It entitles you to travel in the section of the train reserved for 1st class ticket holders.

As for your point about it should have been cleaned before it started its journey. As it started its journey at Nottingham and the football supporters joined at Leicester where does that leave your care and skill argument?

A First Class ticket certainly entitles you to a seat - after all, why else would you be contractually entitled to a partial refund if you can't find a seat on a service advertised as having First Class seating (NRCoT 31.1)?!

As stated, the use of the term First Class, rather than another, more generic term, certainly implies that the travel will be more comfortable than Standard Class, and I think anyone can plainly see they're coming to ludicrous contortions of logic and common sense, if they have to say that it doesn't even entitle you to a seat!

 

[Clip]

A First Class ticket certainly entitles you to a seat - after all, why else would you be contractually entitled to a partial refund if you can't find a seat on a service advertised as having First Class seating (NRCoT 31.1)?!

As stated, the use of the term First Class, rather than another, more generic term, certainly implies that the travel will be more comfortable than Standard Class, and I think anyone can plainly see they're coming to ludicrous contortions of logic and common sense, if they have to say that it doesn't even entitle you to a seat!

Its just a ludicrous as saying they may be legally obliged to do something as you first state because if that were true then 1st class ticket holders out of most commuter stations in London would be claiming left right and centre for it every weekend and even some mornings and if they had we would know by now and im pretty certain the papers wouldve run with such a story but seeing as they dont and we havent i think that tells you everything about your apparent rights in such a situation.

 

[najaB]

When you are paying for First Class travel, there is clearly an implication that travel will be provided in a reasonable modicum of luxury and comfort.

So now the TOC is in breach of consumer law because the train wasn't salubrious enough?! Every time I think that I've heard it all...

A first class ticket entitles you to travel in accommodation reserved for holders of first class tickets. Nothing more or less.

 

[najaB]

As stated, the use of the term First Class, rather than another, more generic term, certainly implies that the travel will be more comfortable than Standard Class...

Not if you consider the history of the term - First Class simply distinguished the accommodation from Second and Third Classes. They could just as easily have been A, B and C instead of using ordinal numbers.

A First Class ticket certainly entitles you to a seat - after all, why else would you be contractually entitled to a partial refund if you can't find a seat on a service advertised as having First Class seating (NRCoT 31.1)?!

I've always seen that as compensation to their higher-spending customers, rather than indicating that the First Class ticket implied a right to a seat.

 

[GB]

A First Class ticket certainly entitles you to a seat - after all, why else would you be contractually entitled to a partial refund if you can't find a seat on a service advertised as having First Class seating (NRCoT 31.1)?!

Note it says "accommodation" and "fully occupied" it doesn't specifically refer to seating. Other than a gesture of goodwill, would you be contractually entitled to a refund if you remained within the first class carriage albeit standing?

 

[gray1404]

They'll probably tell you they're really sorry but they "can't" offer compensation for what happened. That, of course, is utter B.S., as they not only can, they may be legally obliged to!

Section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 implies a term into every consumer contract for services (e.g. a train journey) that the service will be provided with reasonable care and skill. If the train company is selling you a first class ticket and you are starting at the train's origin, where there ought to be plenty of time to clean it, then in my view it is very reasonable to expect them to clean it properly.

I would even go so far as to suggest that failing to clean it could constitute a breach of the above obligation, as I think it demonstrates a lack of reasonable care and skill. The situation would, I would have thought, be different if you were boarding at an intermediate station after the revellers had left, with EMT not having had an opportunity to clean their mess up.

A breach of the duty of reasonable care and skill leads to either repeat performance, or a refund (partial or full) being your remedies. Obviously, repeat performance is not possible in the context of a train journey, so refund it is to be. The extent of the refund will depend on the extent to which the service was delivered in breach of the above duty. I would have said that a breach of the kind you have described might lead to, say, 25% of the ticket being repayable.

I rather suspect that, despite the NRCoT having been changed a few years ago to recognise the validity of such claims as I've discussed, they will nevertheless continue denying any liability, as if you needed further evidence that they don't understand customer service. It may be necessary, therefore, to escalate the matter further internally, to obtain a letter of deadlock, and to escalate the matter to the Rail Ombudsman thereafter. There is even the possibility of Court if you remain unsatisfied by the Ombudsman's ruling.

Of course, I'd like to hope that they will take one look at your email and send you an appropriate amount of compensation, but that hasn't been my experience with such matters as concerns either EMT or other TOCs.

@ForTheLoveOf Am I correct in saying that a claim under Section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act is against the retailer the ticket was purchased from rather then the train company operating the service? Of course, the retailer might have been EMT, but if it wasn't then does the OP have a valid complaint/claim to the retailer of their ticket?

 

[6Gman]

When you are paying for First Class travel, there is clearly an implication that travel will be provided in a reasonable modicum of luxury and comfort. If the train truly was filthy, which would not surprise me given the circumstances, as I've said, that could constitute a breach of that implied warranty, and obligation.

To be clear, I'm not saying that you can expect the train to be spick and span. But at least an effort should be made.

But there is surely a difference between "filthy" and "littered". If we are talking beer cans why not just move them to one side of the table, or to an unused table (if available).

To me "filthy" implies beer stained seats (or worse).

 

[island]

@ForTheLoveOf Am I correct in saying that a claim under Section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act is against the retailer the ticket was purchased from rather then the train company operating the service? Of course, the retailer might have been EMT, but if it wasn't then does the OP have a valid complaint/claim to the retailer of their ticket?

Any putative claim under section 49 CRA would be against the operator of the train. The ticket retailer is the agent of the TOC carrying out the actual service.

 

[thenorthern]

But there is surely a difference between "filthy" and "littered". If we are talking beer cans why not just move them to one side of the table, or to an unused table (if available).

To me "filthy" implies beer stained seats (or worse).

The floor was bad it was sticky from the beer and there were too many beer cans to fit on an unused table as the train was quite busy.

Some of the passengers were arguing with the guard about the state of the train, I didn't feel a need for arguing with the guard as it wasn't his fault.

 

[gray1404]

Any putative claim under section 49 CRA would be against the operator of the train. The ticket retailer is the agent of the TOC carrying out the actual service.

I am not sure if that is correct as the Consumer Rights Act makes reference to the retailer being liable.

 

[najaB]

I would even go so far as to suggest that failing to clean it could constitute a breach of the above obligation, as I think it demonstrates a lack of reasonable care and skill. The situation would, I would have thought, be different if you were boarding at an intermediate station after the revellers had left, with EMT not having had an opportunity to clean their mess up.

I suppose the alternative would have been better - cancelling the train so that they would have had time to clean it?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I suppose the alternative would have been better - cancelling the train so that they would have had time to clean it?

If they are aware that people who are likely to be inebriated are going to be on the train (e.g. because a football match is announced), they should allow sufficient time to clean the train and, if necessary, remove some services from the timetable to allow for this. It doesn't matter what the background of the situation is - ultimately the OP paid for a journey from London to Leicester, and therefore what arrangements the TOC makes for abiding by its contractual obligations is not the OP's concern.

 

[gray1404]

Who is actually liable under the Consumer Right's Act though (in terms of who the customer's claim is against), the TOC traveled on or the retailer who sold the ticket if different? I wonder if it is actually the retailer of the ticket?