Delay Repay Claim for Physically Impossible Journey on Brigg Line

[mocko]

In relation to my adventure trying to use a Day Return ticket from a station that only sees one train a day, I submit this for the forum's attention: the inevitable Delay Repay claim to TPE for truncating my physically impossible journey. It's tongue-in-cheek of course and I don't plan to labour the point with them. The underlying craziness isn't TPE's fault and for their part, they behaved reasonably.

Still, before TPE respond I'd be fascinated to hear the experts opinions on how Delay Repay for impossible journeys on imaginary trains might be calculated.

 

[Wallsendmag]

How would Delay Repay come into it? You weren't delayed.

 

[mocko]

How would Delay Repay come into it? You weren't delayed.

I think I was. The TPE service would have got me to Barnetby at 22:28. If there'd been a Northern-supplied taxi waiting I'd have been at Brigg station in under ten minutes. IIRC I got there around 11 and TPE's minimum Delay Repay bracket is 15 minutes, so the claim ought to be valid.

Of course the problem with that is ad-hoc mincabs very much aren't a timetabled service. But given there's no other way I could possibly have made the journey, it's hard to see what else could have been done.

Really it comes down to what the concept of "delay" means when there was never a train!

 

[greatkingrat]

I don't agree that there is any responsibility to get you to Brigg if there was never any train scheduled. It's no different to buying a ticket on a Sunday to a station that has no Sunday service, or buying a day return in the late evening, when the last return train will have already left before you complete the outward leg.

 

[mocko]

The NRCoT wouldn't seem to agree with that. It says when an operator sells you a ticket a binding contract is formed. Surely, if Northern sells a Day Return to somewhere it's committed to offer at least one means of getting you there and back within a day. Notably the ticket explicitly says it's only valid on that day, so "wait overnight" would not be a legitimate option.

They also say:

Please note that neither a Train Company’s staff, nor a Licensed Retailer’s staff has the
authority to waive or change the Conditions unless they are specifically allowed to do so
within the Conditions

...so even if Northern published some kind of disclaimer, the conditions still take precedence.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So what the OP did is bought a Day Return in the direction you can't do a day trip?

Tickets are sold using the timetable as a basis, so I don't think Northern has any obligation to convey you, so getting a taxi out of them was quite good, maybe just to make you go away

That return ticket should be removed, and may well be at the next fares change. However I don't believe it requires them to provide you a return trip, because one was never in the timetable, they could simply refund it and issue a single instead for the journey undertaken.

The NRCoT wouldn't seem to agree with that. It says when an operator sells you a ticket a binding contract is formed.

You're missing that that binding contract is on the basis of the timetable.

Let's say I bought a day return on the last train of the day from A to B, there is no return from B to A before 0429. I can use the outward but the return is a bit useless. However there's no obligation on the railway to give me a free taxi back; the contract is to convey me at the times on the timetable, not some other arbitrary times.

It is silly to sell the ticket (and indeed a journey planner based sales outlet wouldn't), but it doesn't entitle you to alternative transport because the timetable never offered the journey. In effect the contract was frustrated (because there was no way to make the journey) and so you'd be due a refund and not a taxi.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

It's not really any different to selling you a day return ticket between Rainford and Wigan on a Sunday, when there is no Sunday service. You're allowed to buy it, but you would be buying it on the basis that it can only be used against the published timetable, which could in limited situations mean the fare you have paid is worthless and you have a souvenir ticket!

However, the key metric here is going to be defining reasonable care and skill under the consumer rights legislation. If the TOC gave a positive and reasonable expectation of a service being available, made it difficult to find what services existed or would run etc - you might well have a case, albeit not for delay repay. I do think it would be an enhancement to those rights for Northern to remove the fare, making it even clearer, but I don't think it's a critical problem, assuming all other sources of information reflect the timetable situation correctly.

Buying a return ticket knowing full well there is no return service available, or if it otherwise ought to have been clear to a normal passenger that there was no return service available would leave you with no recourse or entitlement to anything. You have a legal duty to do your own reasonable due diligence and mitigate your potential losses.

 

[Benjwri]

Are you able to state the section in the NRCOT where it states that they need to get you to your destination? As far as I know that is only in disruption, and in terms of the NRCoT you only get an entitlement to use a TOCs services by buying a ticket.

 

[mocko]

You're missing that that binding contract is on the basis of the timetable.

@Bletchleyite I understand what you're saying but I can't see any wording to that effect in the NRCoT. The closest is the part that says you must travel at the stated time of an Advance ticket, which makes sense, but wouldn't apply to a Day Return. Surely if someone sells you a Day Return there would have to be at least one way, however inconvenient, to go there and back in a day?

@Tazi Hupefi raises a similar point but adds that there are other instances of tickets for impossible journeys. That came as news to me, and if it's the case I'd have expected more explicit provision to be made for the situation.

the contract is to convey me at the times on the timetable, not some other arbitrary times.

I think it's reasonable that if you missed the last train home it's your own problem. But if there was never any possible way to get home, yet the railway agreed to provide one when it sold the ticket, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for that. (And probably then, just as you say, it would make sure this couldn't happen again)


@Benjwri I would say this part means the TOC has a binding contract to perform the service stated on the ticket:

When you buy a Ticket to travel on scheduled train services on the National Rail Network you
enter into a binding contract with each of the Train Companies whose trains your Ticket
allows you to use.

and

4.1. Your Ticket is evidence of your entitlement to travel on the National Rail Network

So, surely, armed with the ticket you're very much entitled to travel.

The present version of the NRCoT also says:

2.2 The ‘National Rail Guide to Tickets’ leaflet, available from www.nationalrail.co.uk/guide-
to-tickets, provides information on the range of Tickets that can be purchased and is
available from all staffed railway stations. The National Rail Enquiries website at
www.nationalrail.co.uk/tickets provides comprehensive information on the range of
Tickets available for your journey.

That might contain further information but both of the links are broken, so if there are any applicable rules in them I don't see how anyone could be expected to comply.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Are we essentially saying that all TVM's / online ticket sellers must now go through a journey checking process to ensure that a journey / return journey between two given stations is actually possible before selling you the ticket(s)?

 

[ainsworth74]

Why did the industry supply taxis on demand between Newhaven Harbour and Marine if there was no requirement for them to convey passengers with suitable tickets? Or indeed provide a rail replacement bus service for Barlaston? And in what way is Brigg different?

 

[greatkingrat]

Why did the industry supply taxis on demand between Newhaven Harbour and Marine if there was no requirement for them to convey passengers with suitable tickets? Or indeed provide a rail replacement bus service for Barlaston? And in what way is Brigg different?

That is different, that was to avoid going through the formal closure process. In this case Brigg is still being served by trains, just not in the right direction for the journey the OP wants to make.

 

[Haywain]

Are we essentially saying that all TVM's / online ticket sellers must now go through a journey checking process to ensure that a journey / return journey between two given stations is actually possible before selling you the ticket(s)?

It would appear that the OP would prefer to prevent return tickets from Brigg being sold, so that anyone who might want to travel from Brigg but only return to Gainsborough or Barnetby would have to buy two singles.

 

[Wallsendmag]

It would appear that the OP would prefer to prevent return tickets from Brigg being sold, so that anyone who might want to travel from Brigg but only return to Gainsborough or Barnetby would have to buy two singles.

It's the way forward.

 

[mocko]

Are we essentially saying that all TVM's / online ticket sellers must now go through a journey checking process to ensure that a journey / return journey between two given stations is actually possible before selling you the ticket(s)?

There are degrees but I think in the basic case of the system listing return tickets for a return journey that cannot possibly be made by train, on any day of the week for the foreseeable future, I'd say that if the railway is selling them it must intend for you to be able to make the journey or didn't exercise due care when publishing them for sale.

For more complex cases - for example @Tazi Hupefi's example of a line with no service on Sunday but where it would be fine on weekdays - in the interests of the "principle of least surprise" that's absolutely a thing that should be considered, though if it requires modification to IT systems it's not something that could happen overnight and I doubt you'd be able to catch every case.

It would appear that the OP would prefer to prevent return tickets from Brigg being sold, so that anyone who might want to travel from Brigg but only return to Gainsborough or Barnetby would have to buy two singles.

The OP did not at any point say that. If the railway's ticketing system takes such an all-or-nothing approach to Return tickets, but it wants some places to be served so infrequently that one cannot leave and return to them within a day, it would have to overcome the limitation.

However it does raise an interesting point, echoed by @Wallsendmag. LNER is introducing single-leg pricing, which I understand (correct me if I'm wrong!) means there's no such thing as a return ticket. Were it rolled out system-wide that's another way valid-but-impossible returns could be eliminated.

 

[Wallsendmag]

There are degrees but I think in the basic case of the system listing return tickets for a return journey that cannot possibly be made by train, on any day of the week for the foreseeable future, I'd say that if the railway is selling them it must intend for you to be able to make the journey or didn't exercise due care when publishing them for sale.

For more complex cases - for example @Tazi Hupefi's example of a line with no service on Sunday but where it would be fine on weekdays - in the interests of the "principle of least surprise" that's absolutely a thing that should be considered, though if it requires modification to IT systems it's not something that could happen overnight and I doubt you'd be able to catch every case.



The OP did not at any point say that. If the railway's ticketing system takes such an all-or-nothing approach to Return tickets, but it wants some places to be served so infrequently that one cannot leave and return to them within a day, it would have to overcome the limitation.

However it does raise an interesting point, echoed by @Wallsendmag. LNER is introducing single-leg pricing, which I understand (correct me if I'm wrong!) means there's no such thing as a return ticket. Were it rolled out system-wide that's another way valid-but-impossible returns could be eliminated.

The LNER/Northern/Chiltern TVMs do this and are ridiculed as being too slow and complex. As someone famous used to say "It's make your mind up time"

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't agree that there is any responsibility to get you to Brigg if there was never any train scheduled. It's no different to buying a ticket on a Sunday to a station that has no Sunday service, or buying a day return in the late evening, when the last return train will have already left before you complete the outward leg.

Agreed. A ticket can only be sold against the published timetable.

 

[Haywain]

Agreed. A ticket can only be sold against the published timetable.

Quite. The term 'caveat emptor' springs to mind.

 

[mocko]

The LNER/Northern/Chiltern TVMs do this and are ridiculed as being too slow and complex. As someone famous used to say "It's make your mind up time"

That's a fair point. I can think of two answers.

1. The first is that when you're running any IT system you should take pains to ensure 'garbage' data doesn't get into it in the first place. Then there's less need to vet it on the way out. Let's call that 'passive' checking because nothing needs to happen at the TVM. Perhaps it even needs to be a manual process for someone at every timetable change to look at the fares for routes/destinations and ask "is this silly?".
2. Now for active checking. We'd need to ask why LNER's TVMs are slow to check the journey. I'd bet they're querying some external system (maybe the same one their website uses). What if they could be preloaded with the day's timetable and query a local database? That'd be quick and for the most part, effective.

 

[Benjwri]

I would say this part means the TOC has a binding contract to perform the service stated on the ticket:

and

Except your first line states:

When you buy a Ticket to travel on scheduled train services on the National Rail Network

You aren't buy a ticket to travel on scheduled services, as the scheduled service doesn't exist, so that line, and arguable the rest of the NRCoT doesn't apply.

So, surely, armed with the ticket you're very much entitled to travel.

Yes you're entitled to travel on the network, but it's very much implied on the scheduled services. There is no entitlement for the TOC to put on a train for you.

If this were the case, surely it follows this precedent that if I want to get home from Reading at 2am, when there are no trains to my home till well after 4:29, I can just buy a £5.30 Off Peak Single, and suddenly since my ticket is not valid on any train services GWR must provide me with a taxi home which would've cost me £80.

That's an extreme example but there are lots of examples where services finish fairly early, it's up to the passenger to check the timetable, otherwise it would be up to the TOC to get all these people home via taxi.

 

[skyhigh]

This reminds me of a certain forum member managing to purchase a ticket for travel on 25/12 and planning to make the operator provide the taxi they'd have to take instead...

 

[Haywain]

This reminds me of a certain forum member managing to purchase a ticket for travel on 25/12 and planning to make the operator provide the taxi they'd have to take instead...

We never did hear the outcome of that, did we?

 

[mocko]

Except your first line states:

You aren't buy a ticket to travel on scheduled services, as the scheduled service doesn't exist, so that line, and arguable the rest of the NRCoT doesn't apply.

Yes you're entitled to travel on the network, but it's very much implied on the scheduled services. There is no entitlement for the TOC to put on a train for you.

I interpreted that "scheduled" as meaning non-charter. It's not in the Definitions section. From your perspective that would mean the NRCoT sees it as business-as-usual to be selling tickets for services that do not exist, which is not what one would expect and would not be considered permissible in most industries.

There is no entitlement for the TOC to put on a train for you

Not train perhaps, but provide the service of taking you somewhere. Surely when somebody has offered a service, and taken money for it, they are now contracted to do it.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

The LNER/Northern/Chiltern TVMs do this and are ridiculed as being too slow and complex.

That is, to be fair, because they suck.

It would be entirely plausible to build a TVM with an intuitive user interface which could check journey possibilities, but the Chiltern etc. design isn't that.

 

[Benjwri]

I interpreted that "scheduled" as meaning non-charter. It's not in the Definitions section. From your perspective that would mean the NRCoT sees it as business-as-usual to be selling tickets for services that do not exist, which is not what one would expect and would not be considered permissible in most industries

My interpretation is based on the definition of the word and I presume what a court would go with were it to end up like that, having not been specifically defined. It sells tickets because it assumes it is the customers job to check there is a train, something almost anyone would do.

Not train perhaps, but provide the service of taking you somewhere. Surely when somebody has offered a service, and taken money for it, they are now contracted to do it.

It’s far more likely they’d just refund your ticket. You’re knowingly exploiting the contract and imposing a somewhat unreasonable expectation.

As a side note it’s not great exploit tickets like this. It might exist because other stations nearby don’t have day returns, and it is against policy for the pricing manager to add them, or it was just overlooked. But it’s fairly likely someone uses this fare from another station. The TOC probably doesn’t mind that too much because it doesn’t really under cut fares as it’s more restrictive. But if you start charging them taxis from all over the place that fare will disappear pretty quickly.

 

[ThameslinkUser]

We never did hear the outcome of that, did we?

As someone else who bought a 25/12 ticket for collector purposes, I can confirm that even after collection from a TVM, GTR (without neither prompt, nor notification) refunded the ticket, presumably to absolve themselves of any such issues such as those proposed by forum members.

 

[mocko]

As a side note it’s not great exploit tickets like this

That's fair, and I should add that I'm not planning to do the journey again. Once was grueling enough.

 

[wilbers]

As someone else who bought a 25/12 ticket for collector purposes, I can confirm that even after collection from a TVM, GTR (without neither prompt, nor notification) refunded the ticket, presumably to absolve themselves of any such issues such as those proposed by forum members.

Although that journey you could still do by a short walk, 15 minutes according to Google.

 

[MrJeeves]

What if they could be preloaded with the day's timetable and query a local database? That'd be quick and for the most part, effective.

It would also need to update live to match any cancellations or disruption, too, plus be preloaded with other days' timetables to facilitate buying in advance...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why did the industry supply taxis on demand between Newhaven Harbour and Marine if there was no requirement for them to convey passengers with suitable tickets? Or indeed provide a rail replacement bus service for Barlaston? And in what way is Brigg different?

Because there needs to be a service if you're not going through the closure process. And there is one in this case, just not a useful one for the OP. Tickets are nothing to do with it.