Changes to the National Rail Conditions of Carriage

[crehld]

It's been mentioned in passing on a few threads now that changes to the National Rail Conditions of Carriage are in the pipeline. However information about the substance of such changes is surprisingly scant. A (rather superficial) search of this site and Google fails to shed any further light on the matter. This lack of tangible information leads to a number of questions:

Q1: Are changes definitely on the cards or are such changes just an aspiration of TOCs who feel hard done by the current version?

Q2: Have any changes actually been agreed or are they still just proposals?

Q3: What is the actual substance of these changes / proposals?

Q4: Are agreed / proposed changes likely to benefit TOCs, passengers or a balance of both?

Q5: Has / will consultation taken / take place with all relevant and interested stakeholders (passenger groups, transport focus, the government, trains companies, other industry representatives)?

Q6: If yes to Q5, what were the results of said consultation?

Q7: Assuming changes are agreed or at least going to happen, what is the timeline for implementation?

 

[yorkie]

Transport Focus must be consulted and are subject to FOI.

DfT must approve the changes and are also subject to FOI.

I have alerted some journalists. I hope they are able to do some digging and get to the bottom of the no-doubt anti-passenger changes that are proposed, and hopefully we can put the DfT off approving draconian changes.

I've heard that previous media interest has resulted in certain changes being rejected by DfT. The DfT do not appear to be particularly interested in our rights, but they do appear to be concerned about negative media attention.

 

[Mojo]

DfT must approve the changes and are also subject to FOI.

There is already an outstanding FoI request, made in early June, which the DfT responded to today, advising of a time extension.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...150702 F0012429 NRCoC Time Extension.pdf.html

 

[yorkie]

They appear to have something to hide. Make no mistake: this is a war on passengers rights. I hope the DfT again refuses to give in to the demands of the Train Companies, but I fear they will give in.

 

[crehld]

They appear to have something to hide. Make no mistake: this is a war on passengers rights. I hope the DfT again refuses to give in to the demands of the Train Companies, but I fear they will give in.

The cynic in me suspects any changes will be negative to passengers, but until some more light is shed on the actual substance of the changes I don;t think we are in a position to cast judgement, hence the reason I posed the above questions.

I guess the response that information is being held back because it is potentially commercially sensitive is to be expected given it is private railway companies which are no doubt drafting the proposed new conditions. Nevertheless there is a case that there is the wider public interest outweighs such commercial concerns (which in this case are quite minor anyway), given any proposed changes (if they do indeed exist) will be affecting 1.65 billion rail journeys a year (going by last year's figure). I believe there would be a case to appeal to the Information Commissioner's office should the request for information be denied on these grounds - but we're not at that point yet.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Having now briefly read the response to the FOI request posted above I am now satisfied we have an answer to question one. I look forward to information pertaining to the other six questions as it becomes available.

 

[bb21]

I would expect that a consultation exercise would have taken place, or will shortly be if not yet, even if just a rubber-stamping exercise.

(OK, I'm being a little harsh. To be fair I think Passenger Focus have registered their objections before on a small number of occasions, but iirc the last time they did so, the DfT overruled them. A fat lot of good that objection did.)

 

[yorkie]

The cynic in me suspects any changes will be negative to passengers, but until some more light is shed on the actual substance of the changes I don;t think we are in a position to cast judgement...

I already know the TOCs have been asking to remove and dilute our rights (such as abolishing or severely restricting Condition 19(c)), but the changes have been resisted so far. So I know for a fact that anti-passenger changes are proposed.

What we don't know is whether or not the DfT will give into these demands, and I hope they do not, but I am very concerned that they might.

 

[DJMarcy]

As it's my first post and I've been grateful for all the help and advice on these forums, I thought I'd help you out.

I found this on the National Rail website this morning:

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types.aspx#nrcoc

National Rail Conditions of Carriage
When you buy a ticket to travel on the National Rail network you enter into an agreement with the train companies whose trains you will be travelling on. This agreement is detailed in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.
Click here for the Conditions applying up to and including Saturday 18 July 2015.
Click here for the Conditions applying from Sunday 19 July 2015.
Reference is made in the the National Rail Conditions of carriage applying from 19 July 2015 to a Code of Practice for meetings arranged in connection with duplicate Season Tickets. A copy of this can be found here.

I've compared the two versions here.

Depending on your point of view, the good/bad news is that there are very few changes. The only ones I can see are:

1) Condition 34 - Lost, Stolen or Mislaid Tickets

If you subsequently lose or mislay your duplicate Season Ticket or it is stolen, then
further duplicate Season Tickets will be issued on the same basis as your first duplicate
Season Ticket. However, you may be asked to attend a meeting with the Train Company
concerned to explain the circumstances in which your duplicate Season Ticket(s) was lost.
Train Companies have agreed a Code of Practice for such meetings, a copy of which can
be found on the National Rail nationalrail.co.uk/tickets and Train Company websites.

If the loss of your duplicate Season Ticket is a result of a theft, robbery, fire, or other
exceptional circumstances which have been reported to the police, the fire service or
another appropriate organisation, you should be able to provide confirmation of the
circumstances from the relevant authority on request, e.g. a crime number from the police.

Train companies reserve the right to refuse to issue a duplicate Season Ticket if they have
reasonable grounds to believe that such requests are being made fraudulently.

2) Condition 36 - Season Ticket Refunds

Applications for a refund on a duplicate ticket that has been issued to replace a lost or
stolen Season Ticket will be made:

(i) where the original Season Ticket is returned to the Train Company which issued
the duplicate ticket within one month of it being notified of the relevant loss; or
(ii) where the original and replacement tickets were Electronic Tickets and it was
possible to cancel the original ticket; or
(iii) in circumstances such as the redundancy, resignation, retirement, change of
employment or address, pregnancy or prolonged illness of the holder, provided
supporting evidence is supplied which is satisfactory to the Train Company asked
to make the refund.

Refunds on a duplicate ticket can be made in other circumstances, although you
may be asked to attend a meeting with the Train Company concerned to confirm the
circumstances of your application. Train Companies have agreed a Code of Practice for
such meetings, a copy of which can be found on the National Rail nationalrail.co.uk/tickets
and Train Company websites.

3) Condition 42 - Compensation for Delays

The amount of compensation offered by each Train Company in its Passenger’s
Charter varies from Train Company to Train Company. However, as a minimum,
if you arrive more than 60 minutes late at your destination station you will be
entitled to compensation in accordance with the table below:

Ticket held Amount Payable
Single ticket, or Return ticket with delay on both the outward and return journey - 50% of the price paid
Return ticket with delay on outward or return journey - 50% of the price paid for the relevant portion of the journey
Season Ticket - The discount or compensation arrangements in the relevant Train Company’s Passenger’s Charter apply

(d) Compensation will be paid in rail travel vouchers or, at your request, in money.
This will be by means of a refund to the debit or credit card used to pay for your
ticket or, at the Train Company’s discretion, in notes and coins, a cheque or a bank
transfer payment (usually referred to as a BACS payment).
Rail travel vouchers may be exchanged or used in part payment for tickets for any
rail journey on the services of the Train Companies.

4) Condition 50 - A Train Company's Liabilities

A Train Company will only be liable for any loss or damage to luggage, articles, animals
or cycles in its trains or on its premises if the loss or damage was caused by the fault of
a Train Company or a Rail Service Company staff or agents. A Train Company’s liability in
respect of any item will not exceed,£1500 or the item’s value, whichever is lower.

Finally, a change to the names of the Train Operating Companies, to bring them in line with the current state of play.

No changes to Condition 19.

 

[Mojo]

As it's my first post and I've been grateful for all the help and advice on these forums, I thought I'd help you out.

<snip>

Depending on your point of view, the good/bad news is that there are very few changes. The only ones I can see are:

I feel your optimism is misplaced and I doubt these are the changes to which this thread refers.

 

[First class]

Interesting version....

 

[DJMarcy]

I feel your optimism is misplaced and I doubt these are the changes to which this thread refers.

Is that right? Previous discussion suggested that the introduction of cash payouts for Delay Repay was masking anti-passenger changes. This version includes the reference to cash payouts, so are you suggesting that a further change to the Conditions of Carriage will follow shortly after this?

 

[First class]

A few more EU Regulation 1371 have to be implemented.

More significant changes are being reviewed regularly by TOCs and stakeholders, and I believe that the way forward is more along the lines of consistent TOC "policies" and "publications" rather than wholescale NRCoC changes. Those additional documents clarifying particular aspects of customer responsibilities and what they can expect.

As for changes to compensation arrangements - the "impact" of these will not be contractual. AP fares may increase, tiers may be removed or restricted etc.

 

[maniacmartin]

Of course they didn't choose to put this information at http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/nrcoc!

 

[bnm]

So a new NRCoC comes into effect on 19th July, but there are further changes in the air?

Where, other than speculation on this forum, is it said that another version is shortly to be written?

 

[bb21]

Interesting. If this indeed were the final version to be released then I am reasonably pleased that there are no major anti-passenger changes being implemented (not that I was expecting any in the first place having not seen anything so far).

None of Conditions 10/13/16/19 seems to have been changed. Condition 19 is a funny one, since rumour has it that the DfT blocked the proposed changes once a few years back, so either they did it again or perhaps no changes were proposed this time.

That FoI response could be an interesting read.

 

[Hadders]

We will need to be very vigilant on this, particularly when it comes to:

Split ticketing
Break of journey
Starting/finishing short

Perhaps a campaign of engaging with journalists and MP's will be required. Perhaps some template letters could be made available via this forum, should the need arise.

 

[bnm]

Interesting. If this indeed were the final version to be released then I am reasonably

You'd think it would be. Not only has NRE published the .pdf but they've also updated the web page linking to it, pointing out that a new version shortly comes into effect.

It would be a major cock-up if both those things were a mistake.

I'm optimistic that this is the correct new version and there will be no further changes for the foreseeable future.

The conspiracy theorists will of course keep theorising.

 

[First class]

This is the correct "update" to the NRCoC.

That is not to say that another NRCoC update is not being discussed industry wide.

 

[crehld]

This is the correct "update" to the NRCoC.

That is not to say that another NRCoC update is not being discussed industry wide.

Thanks for the clarification collector. You're obviously in the know, so is there a time line for the other update or is it still in the vague discussion phase?

 

[gray1404]

3) Condition 42 - Compensation for Delays

Quote:
The amount of compensation OFFERED by each Train Company in its Passenger’s
Charter varies from Train Company to Train Company. However, as a minimum,
if you arrive more than 60 minutes late at your destination station you will be
entitled to compensation in accordance with the table below:

Ticket held Amount Payable
Single ticket, or Return ticket with delay on both the outward and return journey - 50% of the price paid Return ticket with delay on outward or return journey - 50% of the price paid for the relevant portion of the journey Season Ticket - The discount or compensation arrangements in the relevant Train Company’s Passenger’s Charter APPLY
Quote:
(d) Compensation will be paid in rail travel VOUCHERS or, at your request, in money. This will be by means of a refund to the debit or CREDIT CARD used to pay for your ticket or, at the Train Company’s discretion, in notes and coins, a cheque or a bank transfer PAYMENT (usually referred to as a BACS payment).
Rail travel VOUCHERS may be exchanged or used in part payment for tickets for any rail journey on the services of the Train Companies.

I am glad to see that they have increased the minimum amount payable for delays when using TOCs that do not operate under Delay Repay. If I have read this right then if you are delayed 60 minutes on a single ticket you are entitled to a refund of 50% if it is a single ticket or 25% of the cost of a return ticket.

From the wording there, it looks like money refunds will not be the default (rail travel vouchers will be) UNLESS you request such. In which case you can only insist on having money placed back onto you credit or debit card if you paid for the ticket that way. Otherwise it is at the decision of the railway company if you want say a BACs transfer.

I do, of course, understand that each TOC will update their passenger charter/delay repay policy to reflect these changes and may adapt these chances to be more favourable to the customer in reality (e.g. some TOCs may ask for your details for a BACs payment when you make a claim).

 

[First class]

Thanks for the clarification collector. You're obviously in the know, so is there a time line for the other update or is it still in the vague discussion phase?

There's always debate and suggestions amongst TOCs.

We are currently dealing with other more pressing issues, the replacement of the fares system is currently taking place, which is a major RSP project, which is currently keeping us all very busy.

 

[gray1404]

I am glad to see that they have not touched:

break of journey
split tickets
starting and finishing short.

I do agree we MUST be on guard for this.

Does anyone else think Virgin West Coast will become more strict (and less generous) on the compensation they pay out once the changes come into effect?

 

[First class]

I am glad to see that they have not touched:

break of journey
split tickets
starting and finishing short.

I do agree we MUST be on guard for this.

Does anyone else think Virgin West Coast will become more strict (and less generous) on the compensation they pay out once the changes come into effect?

The problem is that the government elected wants to reduce the taxpayer subsidies further- and at the same time, introduce enhancements.

Whilst you may want the conditions to remain the same, that's fine, as long as you can accept the sharp unregulated product price increases and tier removals.

TOCs are not going to let their bottom line be affected by government proposals.

 

[Be3G]

Where are everybody's manners! We should be welcoming DJMarcy and thanking him for pointing us to and comparing the new NRCoC whilst we all just chased our tails.

 

[Jonfun]

I think folk need to bear in mind that yes, the Conditions of Carriage prevents Train Companies from taking passengers for a ride, but it does work the other way as well. Rules which are in place to give a genuine benefit are more likely to be eroded if people are abusing them to gain savings which aren't in the spirit of the conditions.

In addition, many conditions add an unnecessary layer of complexity. For example, the wibble about "tickets issued on behalf of a PTE" not being eligible for splits etc means absolutely nothing to the average passenger, and the interpretation can be debated for hours on here. Simpler wording such as "except where the published terms and conditions of the ticket prohibit it" would allow for additional restrictions to be placed on products where there is a valid need to do so.

A slimming down of the conditions to the bare bones would leave less of a grey area for Train Companies - and indeed passengers - to wriggle out of compliance through. I don't see any reason why the grey areas can't be removed without removing rights which currently legitimately (are intended to) exist.

 

[Hadders]

Simpler wording such as "except where the published terms and conditions of the ticket prohibit it" would allow for additional restrictions to be placed on products where there is a valid need to do so.

I disagree about this. Just imagine the additional onerous conditions that TOC's would impose on tickets.

 

[Jonfun]

The intention wouldn't be to remove rights as in the conditions of carriage, simply to make the rights and responsibilities more transparent. It would indeed increase the protection for the passenger as it would be black and white - there would be no grey area for the Train Company to argue about validity in.

Why do you think train operators and PTEs shouldn't impose conditions on the cheaper tickets they sell? If you want a ticket with no restrictions, then you buy the Anytime fare.

 

[CyrusWuff]

I am glad to see that they have increased the minimum amount payable for delays when using TOCs that do not operate under Delay Repay. If I have read this right then if you are delayed 60 minutes on a single ticket you are entitled to a refund of 50% if it is a single ticket or 25% of the cost of a return ticket.

It's worth noting that Chiltern already offer more generous compensation than that, namely 50% of the affected leg for a delay of 30 minutes and a full refund of the affected leg for a delay of an hour.

FGW appear to offer similar levels for the London and Thames Valley (i.e. ex-Thames Trains) routes, though it's dependent on journey length, with a trigger of 30 minutes for journeys under an hour, and 60 minutes for longer journeys.

London Overground and TfL Rail offer a 100% refund of the Single Fare for a delay of 30 minutes or more...but only for circumstances within their control. Security alerts, "customer incidents" and adverse weather are all explicitly excluded.

 

[Hadders]

The intention wouldn't be to remove rights as in the conditions of carriage, simply to make the rights and responsibilities more transparent. It would indeed increase the protection for the passenger as it would be black and white - there would be no grey area for the Train Company to argue about validity in.

Why do you think train operators and PTEs shouldn't impose conditions on the cheaper tickets they sell? If you want a ticket with no restrictions, then you buy the Anytime fare.

It's a nice thought but the reality is you'd end up with some TOC's making things up as they went along, a lack of transparency and general confusion all round.

Just look at GTR's promotional super off-peak tickets as an example of what we'd end up with. Their published restrictions say the ticket is valid on trains arriving into London after approximately 1130. Do you really want more of this sort of clarity?

 

[yorkie]

This is the correct "update" to the NRCoC.

That is not to say that another NRCoC update is not being discussed industry wide.

Maybe the DfT have refused to give in to the demands of you and others of similar views?

If so, I'm absolutely delighted by this result!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's a nice thought but the reality is you'd end up with some TOC's making things up as they went along,...

I agree, though some people seem to be of the view that each TOC or PTE should be allowed to have it's own definition of "journey" (Saveaway partly used in peak hours)

There's a lot of confusing, anti-passenger nonsense that should be stamped out once and for all by making the NRCoC more passenger-friendly, and absolutely not - as some TOCs want - less so.