Compensation for needing to catch earlier service

[800Travel]

Hi,

Recently a train I'd intended to get, and subsequent trains, were quite delayed.

This meant that in order to get to my destination in time for an event, I had to catch a train 40 minutes earlier. This was inconvenient for me, as it was very last minute so I had to drop everything and rush for the train.

I know this wouldn't be a delay repay claim, as I was early to my destination.

The TOC has responded saying no compensation is due.

However, do TOCs sometimes/should TOCs offer compensation to recognise the inconvenience caused upon request please?

Thank you

 

[methecooldude]

I'm not sure what you are expecting here, yes you had to rush, but so do other people every day.

You were in fact early, how would you like them to compensate you?

 

[800Travel]

I'm not sure what you are expecting here, yes you had to rush, but so do other people every day.

You were in fact early, how would you like them to compensate you?

I often rush to get trains, but that is normally when I finish earlier than normal so could make an earlier service. In this case, I couldn't have got a later service due to the delays so had to rush to get this train so I would've been to my destination in time to make the event, and then travel back after.

As I see it, I had planned to travel on a certain scheduled service which was then quite delayed. I avoided a delay by going to the station much earlier than normal. I'm not really even looking for much - just enough to acknowledge the issue. Probably just the same amount I would've got if I was 40 minutes late. Effectively, I lost 40 minutes of time at the origin end as opposed to losing 40 minutes of time at the destination end. I know this isn't (necessarily) a policy or anything, I'm just saying it would've been good if they offered it to acknowledge the inconvenience, and would've left a better impression.

As such, I'm trying to gauge if this is something anyone has been offered by a TOC before so I know whether it is worth pursuing or not.

 

[sheff1]

I'm not sure what you are expecting here, yes you had to rush, but so do other people every day.

You were in fact early, how would you like them to compensate you?

I can't answer the OP's question as to whether it is worth pursuing in this case, but the National Rail Conditions of Travel contains the following in the Claiming Compensation section

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 provides consumers with various rights, e.g., rights where a service is not performed with reasonable care and skill (see section 49 of the Act). For information regarding your rights when you are travelling as a consumer, including under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, see, www.gov.uk/consumer-protection-rights

so clearly there are circumstances where a TOC should offer compensation.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Customer Service isn't the railways strong point. If you'd lost 40 minutes at your destination due to delay they would, begrudgingly, and after initially saying no, give you some delay repay. As you lost 40 minutes at your origin instead they will totally wash their hands of it. They won't see it as their fault at all-indeed, they'll blame you as you chose to do it!

 

[Watershed]

It would certainly be reasonable for the TOC to pay you compensation equivalent to the Delay Repay you would have been able to claim if you'd arrived an equivalent amount late. There's potentially an argument for a price reduction commensurate with that amount under the Consumer Rights Act.

 

[800Travel]

Thanks everyone for your help. I travel often, and have been caught up in so much disruption unfortunately. TOCs washing their hands of it on this occasion is rather annoying, so I'll get back in touch with them and see what they say when I mention NRCoT and CRA.

 

[island]

Unlike delays there is no default entitlement to compensation where you choose to book the last train that will get you to an event on time and then need to make a late notice change of plans when there is a delay. The train company has already declined your request for discretionary compensation so the question is can you show an entitlement to claim under the Consumer Rights Act. You can certainly try, but the burden of proof is on yourself to show that the service was not performed with due care and skill, as opposed to for example being adversely affected by factors outside the railway's control such as bad weather. Without knowing the specifics of the situation I can't say how easy or hard that would be.

 

[800Travel]

Unlike delays there is no default entitlement to compensation where you choose to book the last train that will get you to an event on time and then need to make a late notice change of plans when there is a delay. The train company has already declined your request for discretionary compensation so the question is can you show an entitlement to claim under the Consumer Rights Act. You can certainly try, but the burden of proof is on yourself to show that the service was not performed with due care and skill, as opposed to for example being adversely affected by factors outside the railway's control such as bad weather. Without knowing the specifics of the situation I can't say how easy or hard that would be.

I didn’t book the last train that would get me there in time. I planned it with 2 back up trains after too in case this was cancelled. Unfortunately they were also delayed.

 

[skyhigh]

What was the journey and what date did it take place?

With more information it would be easier to give advice as to if any claims could be made under the Consumer Rights Act etc.

 

[johnny_t]

I often rush to get trains, but that is normally when I finish earlier than normal so could make an earlier service. In this case, I couldn't have got a later service due to the delays so had to rush to get this train so I would've been to my destination in time to make the event, and then travel back after.

As I see it, I had planned to travel on a certain scheduled service which was then quite delayed. I avoided a delay by going to the station much earlier than normal. I'm not really even looking for much - just enough to acknowledge the issue. Probably just the same amount I would've got if I was 40 minutes late. Effectively, I lost 40 minutes of time at the origin end as opposed to losing 40 minutes of time at the destination end. I know this isn't (necessarily) a policy or anything, I'm just saying it would've been good if they offered it to acknowledge the inconvenience, and would've left a better impression.

As such, I'm trying to gauge if this is something anyone has been offered by a TOC before so I know whether it is worth pursuing or not.

My gut reaction on opening this was something on the lines of 'No chance' and 'What a cheek' but, actually, this is a pretty good point.

 

[800Travel]

My gut reaction on opening this was something on the lines of 'No chance' and 'What a cheek' but, actually, this is a pretty good point.

Haha, I reckon the TOC thought the same after my first email. Hopefully, after spelling out that bit you’ve put in bold in my last email to them, they’ll agree it is a good point!

 

[800Travel]

It would certainly be reasonable for the TOC to pay you compensation equivalent to the Delay Repay you would have been able to claim if you'd arrived an equivalent amount late.

They've refused to do this so far, despite it not being much and being a reasonable request.

There's potentially an argument for a price reduction commensurate with that amount under the Consumer Rights Act.

I've made that argument, and they turned it down. I'm re-iterating it again as a standalone argument, and saying that the service wasn't provided with due care and skill. Is this the part of the CRA you would use in this situation too please?

It seems like this may go nowhere, but it's more a matter of principle now - I don't like how they are claiming they aren't at fault and there was no breach of contract because I got to my destination (even though I had to use a different service). They also told me I hadn't planned accordingly, which I didn't appreciate because I planned sufficiently and then checked on the morning several times to see how the trains were running and then changed my plans based on that.

 

[Watershed]

They've refused to do this so far, despite it not being much and being a reasonable request.

Sadly I can't say I'm surprised at this. Most train companies lay little to no value on providing good customer service. It's not really a metric that materially affects their financial performance under the current arrangements, so they have no incentive to care.

I've made that argument, and they turned it down.

Could you share a screenshot or quote of what they've said?

I'm re-iterating it again as a standalone argument, and saying that the service wasn't provided with due care and skill. Is this the part of the CRA you would use in this situation too please?

That's one section of the CRA you could rely on, although it does depend on the delays being attributable to some fault on the part of the train company. If the delays were entirely outside their control the 'reasonable care and skill' argument falls away.

In either event you could also rely on section 50 of the CRA; in essence, your purchasing decision will undoubtedly have been influenced by the times stated when booking and therefore this became a term of the contract. By requiring you to leave earlier to arrive at the contracted arrival time they are in breach of contract.

Section 54 of the CRA sets out the possible remedies for this, which are essentially the same as those that would apply in the case of a breach of section 49 (failure to use reasonable care and skill) - a price reduction, i.e. (partial or full) refund.

It seems like this may go nowhere, but it's more a matter of principle now - I don't like how they are claiming they aren't at fault and there was no breach of contract because I got to my destination (even though I had to use a different service).

I completely understand your motivation. Unfortunately TOCs' customer services often make up nonsense like this. The staff are generally insufficiently trained on the relevant rules and principles, and they work (and are trained) in an environment where treating customers with contempt is regarded as normal and acceptable. That rubs off onto the way that people behave and from personal experience, it's very much a sort of 'hive mind'.

They also told me I hadn't planned accordingly, which I didn't appreciate because I planned sufficiently and then checked on the morning several times to see how the trains were running and then changed my plans based on that.

Again such preposterous allegations are commonplace to make against customers. It's unacceptable but there is no mechanism to properly hold TOCs accountable for it. The best you can do is to obtain the financial recompense you're entitled to and leave it at that.

 

[Skymonster]

This happened to me a while back: booked/reserved train cancelled as well as the following one (hourly service), so I had to depart an hour earlier than I planned as the alternative was to be delayed by two hours. I claimed delay repay based on my booked service, which was paid quickly without question - even though I travelled on an earlier service. I only made the claim because I had a paper ticket that had not been marked with the train descriptor, and I wouldn’t recommend doing it with an e-ticket that had been scanned at a gate line or on-train because the timestamp could be “incriminating”. No doubt some sanctimonious soul will be along shortly to tell me the claim was fraudulent, but as a result of the railway faffing me about and losing me time I felt it morally justifiable if not truly legitimate. I would have no qualms about doing the same again if faced with similar circumstances.

 

[Watershed]

This happened to me a while back: booked/reserved train cancelled as well as the following one (hourly service), so I had to depart an hour earlier than I planned as the alternative was to be delayed by two hours. I claimed delay repay based on my booked service, which was paid quickly without question - even though I travelled on an earlier service. I only made the claim because I had a paper ticket that had not been marked with the train descriptor, and I wouldn’t recommend doing it with an e-ticket that had been scanned at a gate line or on-train because the timestamp could be “incriminating”. No doubt some sanctimonious soul will be along shortly to tell me the claim was fraudulent, but as a result of the railway faffing me about and losing me time I felt it morally justifiable if not truly legitimate. I would have no qualms about doing the same again if faced with similar circumstances.

As you say, technically fraudulent but I wouldn't be losing sleep over it; the railway has a habit of stiffing customers when it comes to Delay Repay - whether due to unreasonable policies such as these or simply the unacceptably high level of errors made in processing claims (often conveniently seeming to favour the railway).

 

[800Travel]

Sadly I can't say I'm surprised at this. Most train companies lay little to no value on providing good customer service. It's not really a metric that materially affects their financial performance under the current arrangements, so they have no incentive to care.

May be a case for the Rail Ombudsman, but not sure if it'd be upheld seeing as the general consensus on here seems to be that they often don't get the right outcome for cases either.

Could you share a screenshot or quote of what they've said?

They've said that:

• The earlier service wasn't delayed so no compensation for taking this - I never said the service I caught was delayed, rather explained I had to go earlier than planned due to the planned service being delayed
• They completed the contract regarding the ticket purchase as they got me from my origin to my destination and the alternate service wasn't delayed and I completed my journey so under NRCoT 32.1 no compensation was due as the journey was completed within a reasonable time frame.
• Something about no compensation for my type of request as it is considered 'consequential of intended service disruption' - found this odd
• If the delay would have resulted in me missing or being late to my commitment, they would consider that I hadn't planned accordingly for any potential delays or cancellations that can occur - quite offensive really, laying the blame at my door when in the end it's only because I'd planned so well and was aware of other options that I didn't miss my commitment
• I chose to travel on the earlier service which ran on time so no GOGW for time I had to wait on arriving at my destination - I've also made it clear that I was also asking with regard to the inconvenience around needing to race to the station to catch that earlier service. My 'choice' was only made due to them not running to schedule, and the trains after the intended service were also delayed so felt likely the delays could increase leaving me stranded.
• They don't have a facility to issue compensation other than delay repay for my scenario and I'm ineligibe
• They won't offer a GOGW as I arrived at my destination without additional delays and they don't offer compensation for additional time having to wait around on arrival

That's one section of the CRA you could rely on, although it does depend on the delays being attributable to some fault on the part of the train company. If the delays were entirely outside their control the 'reasonable care and skill' argument falls away.

In either event you could also rely on section 50 of the CRA; in essence, your purchasing decision will undoubtedly have been influenced by the times stated when booking and therefore this became a term of the contract. By requiring you to leave earlier to arrive at the contracted arrival time they are in breach of contract.

Section 54 of the CRA sets out the possible remedies for this, which are essentially the same as those that would apply in the case of a breach of section 49 (failure to use reasonable care and skill) - a price reduction, i.e. (partial or full) refund.

For the Consumer Rights Act in this instance, would I need to claim from the retailer or the TOC please?

Regarding the cause of delay - they've stated it was due to my service being delayed by another late running service (which seems to have been operated by the same TOC). As such, I can't determine whether it was in their control or not.

I'll use 50 and 54 as well - thank you. The only 'problem' is they didn't require (tell me to) leave earlier than planned, but I suppose by running the service late they did require it if that makes sense?

I completely understand your motivation. Unfortunately TOCs' customer services often make up nonsense like this. The staff are generally insufficiently trained on the relevant rules and principles, and they work (and are trained) in an environment where treating customers with contempt is regarded as normal and acceptable. That rubs off onto the way that people behave and from personal experience, it's very much a sort of 'hive mind'.

Is there any way to get around this kind of problem? I guess resolver is an option, along with the rail ombudsman and emailing an MD - though I'm very surprised it's coming to this. The 'price reduction' in line with the delay repay calculation is less than £3.

Again such preposterous allegations are commonplace to make against customers. It's unacceptable but there is no mechanism to properly hold TOCs accountable for it. The best you can do is to obtain the financial recompense you're entitled to and leave it at that.

Yeah, to be honest this is one of the main reasons I'm pursuing it. I understand things don't always go to plan, and would've hoped the TOC would've acknowledged and recognised the problem swiftly and fairly. However by failing to do this, and effectively saying I'm to blame, they've kind of made it personal really - I pride myself on being on time and well-organised, so I don't take kindly to their allegation.

 

[ComUtoR]

How early do I have to be to claim compensation. ?

Every minute I get somewhere early is an inconvenience for me. If I decided to get an earlier train and was 5 minutes early. How much am I entitled to ?

If I get to my venue an hour early and get a seat in the pub and a meal beforehand (this actually happened last week). Am I still inconvenienced ?l

I live on a Metro route with 3 routes into town. Each route has its own benefits but I tend to take the one that I meet people on the way. If I am forced to take a different route and therefore inconvenienced, am I also entitled to compensation ?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Just to clarify, is there any contractual entitlement (for a passenger who is obligated to travel earlier than planned, this after their later booked train service has been cancelled) to receive any amount in compensation, or would they only ever be hoping for some goodwill payment from the TOC deemed to be "at fault"?

 

[AdamWW]

I completely understand your motivation. Unfortunately TOCs' customer services often make up nonsense like this. The staff are generally insufficiently trained on the relevant rules and principles, and they work (and are trained) in an environment where treating customers with contempt is regarded as normal and acceptable. That rubs off onto the way that people behave and from personal experience, it's very much a sort of 'hive mind'.

Interesting to hear that because it's certainly how it often feels.

 

[Watershed]

May be a case for the Rail Ombudsman, but not sure if it'd be upheld seeing as the general consensus on here seems to be that they often don't get the right outcome for cases either.

Yes, I wouldn't hold out great hopes for the Ombudsman assisting.

The earlier service wasn't delayed so no compensation for taking this - I never said the service I caught was delayed, rather explained I had to go earlier than planned due to the planned service being delayed

They seem to have missed the point here!

They completed the contract regarding the ticket purchase as they got me from my origin to my destination

That's a very narrow-minded (and incorrect) interpretation of what the contract requires them to do. There are many implied terms, notably from the Consumer Rights Act, and there is absolutely no mileage in their claim they weren't in breach of contract.

I completed my journey so under NRCoT 32.1 no compensation was due as the journey was completed within a reasonable time frame.

NRCoT 32.1.2 is clear that you may rely on your statutory rights (e.g. under the Consumer Rights Act) instead of claiming Delay Repay. An incredibly selective reading of the NRCoT by them, I'd suggest.

Something about no compensation for my type of request as it is considered 'consequential of intended service disruption' - found this odd

This makes absolutely no sense as you say. What is "intended service disruption" and why does it have any relevance to your claim?

If the delay would have resulted in me missing or being late to my commitment, they would consider that I hadn't planned accordingly for any potential delays or cancellations that can occur - quite offensive really, laying the blame at my door when in the end it's only because I'd planned so well and was aware of other options that I didn't miss my commitment

I agree; they don't seem to understand that people rely on the railway and whilst you might allow a little bit of leeway - say 5 or 10 minutes - for the minor delays that occur on a day-to-day basis, it's unreasonable to suggest you should allow half an hour or an hour, for example.

In any event this claim is predicated on the fact that you had to leave early in order to arrive by the booked departure time. What you were planning on doing after that is not hugely relevant as far as the CRA side is concerned.

I chose to travel on the earlier service which ran on time so no GOGW for time I had to wait on arriving at my destination

You're not asking for a GOGW (Gesture of Goodwill?) though - you're asking for them to honour your claim under the CRA. That said, even if you didn't have a CRA claim it would clearly be reasonable in the circumstances to make a GOGW. Their refusal to do so tells you how much they care about customer service (i.e. not much!).

They don't have a facility to issue compensation other than delay repay for my scenario and I'm ineligibe

You're ineligible for Delay Repay, sure, but that is far from the only compensation you're entitled to. There is also the minimum level of delay compensation set out in the NRCoT, the compensation set out in the PRO, and a price reduction under the CRA. They simply don't appear to have addressed (or assessed) your CRA claim.

For the Consumer Rights Act in this instance, would I need to claim from the retailer or the TOC please?

That's a fair question - I would definitely have thought the TOC, since they are the 'trader' in a CRA context. The retailer acts as the TOC's agent, in essence. Refunds are dealt with by retailers but issues to do with train running are the TOC's responsibility.

Regarding the cause of delay - they've stated it was due to my service being delayed by another late running service (which seems to have been operated by the same TOC). As such, I can't determine whether it was in their control or not.

Well, since they're not making the argument that it was outside of their control, we can assume that it was within their control. It would be up to them to prove otherwise.

I'll use 50 and 54 as well - thank you. The only 'problem' is they didn't require (tell me to) leave earlier than planned, but I suppose by running the service late they did require it if that makes sense?

Clearly they were in breach of the contractual timings on the basis of which you booked. To remedy this breach you left early, but that doesn't mean they weren't in breach of contract.

Is there any way to get around this kind of problem? I guess resolver is an option, along with the rail ombudsman and emailing an MD - though I'm very surprised it's coming to this. The 'price reduction' in line with the delay repay calculation is less than £3.

Those are all options; given the amount in question, the usual alternative that I'd suggest (going to Court, or at a minimum threatening to do so - which is usually quite effective) is not really realistic.

How early do I have to be to claim compensation. ?

It's not about how early you arrive, but rather how much earlier you have to leave. The two are not necessarily the same; for example, the earlier train may be slower.

Essentially it's a question of 'what counts as an actionable breach of contract'. I would suggest the 15 minute Delay Repay threshold would generally provide a reasonable threshold. Equally, some account might need to be taken of the scheduled duration of the journey - for example, a season ticket holder who persistently encounters 5 minute delays on a 10 minute journey would (in my eyes) have a stronger case than someone regularly meeting with the same delay on a 3 hour commute.

Every minute I get somewhere early is an inconvenience for me. If I decided to get an earlier train and was 5 minutes early. How much am I entitled to ?

If I get to my venue an hour early and get a seat in the pub and a meal beforehand (this actually happened last week). Am I still inconvenienced ?l

As above, I don't think there would be any recourse in the event of having to leave 5 minutes earlier, if that is what you mean. Having to leave an hour earlier to arrive by the scheduled time, on the other hand, is much more significant and highly likely to be actionable.

I live on a Metro route with 3 routes into town. Each route has its own benefits but I tend to take the one that I meet people on the way. If I am forced to take a different route and therefore inconvenienced, am I also entitled to compensation ?

I think it would be difficult to establish any breach of contract merely through travelling via one route rather than another. The general rule in contracts is that no damages are available for disappointment; only certain contracts such as holiday package bookings have been held to be exempt from this rule. I would imagine railtours intended to cover specific lines might also fall into this category.

Just to clarify, is there any contractual entitlement (for a passenger who is obligated to travel earlier than planned, this after their later booked train service has been cancelled) to receive any amount in compensation, or would they only ever be hoping for some goodwill payment from the TOC deemed to be "at fault"?

As above, it is largely a question of the entitlement under the Consumer Rights Act, which implies certain terms into the contract. So in that sense it is contractual, but only because the law implies those terms.

In either event we are not talking about circumstances where you are reliant on a GOGW. As @800Travel has seen, such gestures are rarely forthcoming - even when it would arguably be reasonable for them to be offered.

 

[800Travel]

Thank you for your help with this, I've addressed the points below:

Yes, I wouldn't hold out great hopes for the Ombudsman assisting.

They seem to have missed the point here!

That's a very narrow-minded (and incorrect) interpretation of what the contract requires them to do. There are many implied terms, notably from the Consumer Rights Act, and there is absolutely no mileage in their claim they weren't in breach of contract.

Thanks - In my response, I'll flag to them they have provided no clause to support their claim they were not in breach of contract.

NRCoT 32.1.2 is clear that you may rely on your statutory rights (e.g. under the Consumer Rights Act) instead of claiming Delay Repay. An incredibly selective reading of the NRCoT by them, I'd suggest.

Thank you, I'll highlight under NRCoT 32.1.2 I can claim via CRA.

This makes absolutely no sense as you say. What is "intended service disruption" and why does it have any relevance to your claim?

Made no sense to me either - thought it was funny they planned to disrupt their services. I reckon they meant unintended, but would be nice if they checked emails before sending them.

I agree; they don't seem to understand that people rely on the railway and whilst you might allow a little bit of leeway - say 5 or 10 minutes - for the minor delays that occur on a day-to-day basis, it's unreasonable to suggest you should allow half an hour or an hour, for example.

I allow at least 15 minutes, which is longer than my journey. Not feasible to allow much longer, given this is wasted time every day I travel.

In any event this claim is predicated on the fact that you had to leave early in order to arrive by the booked departure time. What you were planning on doing after that is not hugely relevant as far as the CRA side is concerned.

Thank you - I'll flag that bit about needing to leave early to arrive by the booked time to them. I'd just been saying leaving early before, never mentioned about the booked arrival.

You're not asking for a GOGW (Gesture of Goodwill?) though - you're asking for them to honour your claim under the CRA. That said, even if you didn't have a CRA claim it would clearly be reasonable in the circumstances to make a GOGW. Their refusal to do so tells you how much they care about customer service (i.e. not much!).

I originally asked for a GOGW before I knew it was covered by CRA. I then tried under CRA and was turned down, so I'll try under CRA again. I found a DSAR which had their template script for a gesture of goodwill email - wonder if my advisor can't find it so is just refusing it! [To confirm, this is a joke]

You're ineligible for Delay Repay, sure, but that is far from the only compensation you're entitled to. There is also the minimum level of delay compensation set out in the NRCoT, the compensation set out in the PRO, and a price reduction under the CRA. They simply don't appear to have addressed (or assessed) your CRA claim.

That's a fair question - I would definitely have thought the TOC, since they are the 'trader' in a CRA context. The retailer acts as the TOC's agent, in essence. Refunds are dealt with by retailers but issues to do with train running are the TOC's responsibility.

Well, since they're not making the argument that it was outside of their control, we can assume that it was within their control. It would be up to them to prove otherwise.

Clearly they were in breach of the contractual timings on the basis of which you booked. To remedy this breach you left early, but that doesn't mean they weren't in breach of contract.

Those are all options; given the amount in question, the usual alternative that I'd suggest (going to Court, or at a minimum threatening to do so - which is usually quite effective) is not really realistic.

Does the forum have a template for a letter before action type thing please? I couldn't find one on here.

It's not about how early you arrive, but rather how much earlier you have to leave. The two are not necessarily the same; for example, the earlier train may be slower.

Thanks - flagging this.

Essentially it's a question of 'what counts as an actionable breach of contract'. I would suggest the 15 minute Delay Repay threshold would generally provide a reasonable threshold. Equally, some account might need to be taken of the scheduled duration of the journey - for example, a season ticket holder who persistently encounters 5 minute delays on a 10 minute journey would (in my eyes) have a stronger case than someone regularly meeting with the same delay on a 3 hour commute.

Well this may be another case then - around 25% of my journeys have qualified for delay repay. Of the ones outside of the delay repay threshold, most of them have been delayed by at least 5 minutes, and the journey is less than 15 mins. These were made using a flexi season ticket. Does this seem like another matter worth pursuing please? AFAIK from NRCoT, I cannot claim for a price reduction under the Consumer Rights Act for the journeys I've already received delay repay on, but perhaps a price reduction for the others may be in order?

As above, I don't think there would be any recourse in the event of having to leave 5 minutes earlier, if that is what you mean. Having to leave an hour earlier to arrive by the scheduled time, on the other hand, is much more significant and highly likely to be actionable.

Also, the poster mentioned 'if they chose to get a 5 mins earlier train'. In my case, I was required to in order to arrive by my booked arrival time. If it had been my own decision, free from any influence of delays etc., I agree no compensation would be due.

I think it would be difficult to establish any breach of contract merely through travelling via one route rather than another. The general rule in contracts is that no damages are available for disappointment; only certain contracts such as holiday package bookings have been held to be exempt from this rule. I would imagine railtours intended to cover specific lines might also fall into this category.

As above, it is largely a question of the entitlement under the Consumer Rights Act, which implies certain terms into the contract. So in that sense it is contractual, but only because the law implies those terms.

In either event we are not talking about circumstances where you are reliant on a GOGW. As @800Travel has seen, such gestures are rarely forthcoming - even when it would arguably be reasonable for them to be offered.

Thanks again for your help with this - I've dropped you a message, hope this is ok.

 

[clagmonster]

I think this is one I would be tempted to refer to Transport Focus rather than the ombudsman.

Morally, I agree with the argument that you should get some, though contractually I am not sure you are entitled to anything.

 

[800Travel]

I think this is one I would be tempted to refer to Transport Focus rather than the ombudsman.

Morally, I agree with the argument that you should get some, though contractually I am not sure you are entitled to anything.

Maybe - how does transport focus work please? I.e. do they legally require the operator to give their proposed resolution (like the Financial Ombudsman), or are they just kind of a powerless independent mediator? Guessing probably only the Rail Ombudsman can legally require a certain resolution.

 

[Hadders]

or are they just kind of a powerless independent mediator?

This.

 

[AdamWW]

This.

However....as with many others, I've found the Ombudsman completely useless, while Transport Focus did actually challenge a TOC on my behalf and attempt (in vain) to get a resolution.

 

[800Travel]

However....as with many others, I've found the Ombudsman completely useless, while Transport Focus did actually challenge a TOC on my behalf and attempt (in vain) to get a resolution.

Can a case be referred to both Transport Focus and the Ombudsman at once do you know please?

 

[Watershed]

I allow at least 15 minutes, which is longer than my journey. Not feasible to allow much longer, given this is wasted time every day I travel.

This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

I originally asked for a GOGW before I knew it was covered by CRA. I then tried under CRA and was turned down, so I'll try under CRA again. I found a DSAR which had their template script for a gesture of goodwill email - wonder if my advisor can't find it so is just refusing it! [To confirm, this is a joke]

It sounds like they just haven't a clue about what the CRA even means, to be honest. The training given to customer services staff is very basic and I'd be very surprised if it covers contractual matters such as these.

Does the forum have a template for a letter before action type thing please? I couldn't find one on here.

I don't think so, but I'm happy to privately share an example of a LBC I've used in the past.

Of the ones outside of the delay repay threshold, most of them have been delayed by at least 5 minutes, and the journey is less than 15 mins. These were made using a flexi season ticket. Does this seem like another matter worth pursuing please? AFAIK from NRCoT, I cannot claim for a price reduction under the Consumer Rights Act for the journeys I've already received delay repay on, but perhaps a price reduction for the others may be in order?

There's clearly a question of what level of delay is 'de minimis', i.e. not actionable. As you say, a price reduction for delays too small for Delay Repay may be in order but it would be highly situation dependent. I used to keep a log of daily delays back before Delay Repay 15 was introduced, and used this to claim what was a GOGW (it was before the CRA was applied to rail).

I think this is one I would be tempted to refer to Transport Focus rather than the ombudsman.

Morally, I agree with the argument that you should get some, though contractually I am not sure you are entitled to anything.

Agreed that Transport Focus may well result in a better outcome.

Can a case be referred to both Transport Focus and the Ombudsman at once do you know please?

I don't think so. I would just go to Transport Focus, because my experiences of the Ombudsman leave a lot to be desired (to say the least!).