Delay Repay when departure time brought forward

[Par]

Just a theoretical scenario this and posting simply out of interest.

My daughter travelled today from Manchester Piccadilly to Bristol Temple Meads. Matters were complicated by two issues, firstly no through trains on this route at the moment and secondly the Northern DOO strike.

She wanted flexibility so bought an Off-Peak return (Any Permitted) to give options on either Cross Country or Arriva Trains Wales. In the end she decided to opt for the latter with a change at Newport (rather than New St). When we looked online at the times last week, A 10.30 departure was advertised, however upon arrival at Piccadilly this morning this train (1V39) was now showing as departing at 10.22 with additional calls (presumably in view of the strike) at Alderley Edge, Holmes Chapel and Sandbach, so this was definitely a relatively late variance to the normal service.

She boarded in time and made her connection, so no problems there, but two questions arising from this:-

1) What would the Delay Repay situation be if the train was missed due to the early departure if holding an Advance ticket (or even the Off-Peak ticket she held), presumably ATW stumping up 100% refund for a 60 minute delay?

2) Who would demand / sanction the earlier departure in this instance, a demand that was highly likely to result in Arriva having to settle Delay Repay claims, when in reality they were actually offering a public service to those passengers using those three Cheshire stations. Seems very harsh on the company in that case?

 

[najaB]

What would the Delay Repay situation be if the train was missed due to the early departure if holding an Advance ticket (or even the Off-Peak ticket she held), presumably ATW stumping up 100% refund for a 60 minute delay?

If she held an itinerary or printout of the timetable in force when she bought the ticket showing the original scheduled departure time then a Delay Repay claim would be watertight. Absent that, many TOCs would argue that their advice to check times due to the proposed strike would invalidate a claim.

 

[bb21]

If she missed the train because she turned up in good time for the train she expected, she would be entitled to delay compensation. If she did not purchase the ticket with an itinerary, there would be some grey area in the event of amended timetable published in advance of travel, although I strongly believe that the timetable in force at the time of purchase prevails, itinerary or not.

In your second case, the liability remains with the TOC in a public-facing capacity. There will be an internal process to settle any TOC/NR-on-TOC claim, if applicable.

 

[yorkie]

1) What would the Delay Repay situation be if the train was missed due to the early departure if holding an Advance ticket (or even the Off-Peak ticket she held), presumably ATW stumping up 100% refund for a 60 minute delay?

If the train is cancelled/re-timed/delayed, then you may either:

• travel earlier (in this case 1022 instead of 1030); or
  
• travel on the next available departure (consult staff and/or journey planners for details of the next journey opportunity, if no timely through train is shown).

If the final arrival time is more than 60 minutes late compared to the original booked itinerary, then yes 100% compensation is due.

2) Who would demand / sanction the earlier departure in this instance, a demand that was highly likely to result in Arriva having to settle Delay Repay claims, when in reality they were actually offering a public service to those passengers using those three Cheshire stations. Seems very harsh on the company in that case?

This is of no concern to the customer, but it could be stipulated by the Department for Transport, or it could be by direct agreement between the companies.

 

[mallard]

If the TOC can find any semi-plausible reason to refuse a claim they absolutely will.

In this case, since it's not an Advance ticket and the change in timetabling was almost certainly made and publically available more than 24 before the time of travel, they'll almost certainly refuse it on the grounds that the passenger should have checked. If the ticket was bought after the timetable change was made, then there's even an argument that the TOC would be right to refuse.

"Delay Repay" exists to encourage more people to buy train tickets and (in theory) incentivise TOCs to run trains on time. Since many TOCs keep their schemes more-or-less secret and/or make it nigh-on impossible to claim (e.g. when season ticket holders are technically eligible for compensation, but the TOC requires the original ticket be sent to them within a week of the incident, or by having ticket barriers swallow tickets without warning), the schemes are clearly not there for the benefit of the customer.

 

[najaB]

Since many TOCs keep their schemes more-or-less secret and/or make it nigh-on impossible to claim...

I know it's bad form to let facts get in the way of a rant but I don't recognise this statement. There has been a lot of publicity around Delay Repay, in my experience guards regularly mention it when trains are delayed and TOCs such as VTWC even now make payments automatically for Advance tickets bought through their sales channels.

 

[mallard]

I know it's bad form to let facts get in the way of a rant but I don't recognise this statement. There has been a lot of publicity around Delay Repay, in my experience guards regularly mention it when trains are delayed and TOCs such as VTWC even now make payments automatically for Advance tickets bought through their sales channels.

Now try travelling on a delayed EMT or XC service. No matter how long the delay there will be no mention of compensation from any staff member. No posters, nothing. If you enquire, they'll (probably) just give some vague reference to their website and refuse to confirm whether you'd be eligible based on the current delay or not.

 

[najaB]

Now try travelling on a delayed EMT or XC service. No matter how long the delay there will be no mention of compensation from any staff member. No posters, nothing. If you enquire, they'll (probably) just give some vague reference to their website and refuse to confirm whether you'd be eligible based on the current delay or not.

So two out of twenty is considered 'many'?

 

[mallard]

So two out of twenty is considered 'many'?

Plus the TOCs that have ticket-swallowing barriers, a major purpose of which is to make delay repay difficult/impossible to claim on (especially on occasions when staff insist that you use the barriers and won't let you keep the ticket). That would be "most of them".

 

[AlterEgo]

Plus the TOCs that have ticket-swallowing barriers, a major purpose of which is to make delay repay difficult/impossible to claim on (especially on occasions when staff insist that you use the barriers and won't let you keep the ticket). That would be "most of them".

That's not the purpose of ticket barriers, and I have never had a request to retain a ticket declined.

It's also not difficult to claim Delay Repay if your ticket is swallowed anyway. TOCs will accept a receipt, booking confirmation, or bank statement as proof. It's not that hard.

I don't recognise this harsh world you see, and I travel all over the network.

 

[mallard]

That's not the purpose of ticket barriers, and I have never had a request to retain a ticket declined.

Happened to me on more than one occasion. Since it's already clear that we don't regularly travel with the same TOCs, it's entirely possible that your experience is different. Also, I didn't say it was "the" purpose. Things can have more than one purpose...

It's also not difficult to claim Delay Repay if your ticket is swallowed anyway. TOCs will accept a receipt, booking confirmation, or bank statement as proof. It's not that hard.

Some TOCs might accept alternative evidence (although how a bank statement could possibly prove even what ticket you bought, let alone the date/time of travel, I don't know), but in the past I've had some insist that they'll only accept the original ticket itself. You don't always get a receipt unless you ask for it; which is ridiculous if you're going to have to produce it later as evidence.

I don't recognise this harsh world you see, and I travel all over the network.

According to your profile, you live in the South (Local Line is listed as "SW Main Line"), so it's not surprising that you don't often see the grim realities of the rest of the country.

 

[AlterEgo]

Happened to me on more than one occasion. Since it's already clear that we don't regularly travel with the same TOCs, it's entirely possible that your experience is different. Also, I didn't say it was "the" purpose. Things can have more than one purpose...

I don't think that any part of the rationale behind ticket barriers is "he he he, this will make it harder for the buggers to claim Delay Repay" on any TOC. I don't think it even crosses anyone's mind.

Delay Repay is an absolute drop in the ocean compared to a TOC's other expenses. Even if everyone claimed, it would still be negligible. Granted, the promotion/advertising of Delay Repay can be patchy depending on the TOC, but it would have almost no impact whatsoever on the bottom line of any TOC.

Some TOCs might accept alternative evidence (although how a bank statement could possibly prove even what ticket you bought, let alone the date/time of travel, I don't know), but in the past I've had some insist that they'll only accept the original ticket itself. You don't always get a receipt unless you ask for it; which is ridiculous if you're going to have to produce it later as evidence.

Many, if not most TOCs will happily settle for a bank statement. Or a picture of the ticket, come to think of it. I used to process a lot of Delay Repay and part of the job was speaking to other TOCs when a claim had been sent to us in error. I don't recall any TOC insisting that they would require the original ticket, so I doubt it is policy anywhere (unless they suspect the claimant is pulling a fast one). Over-officious employees might request the ticket, and only the ticket.

Many of the barriers put up by people saying DR is hard to claim can be resolved by technology - e-tickets, contactless cards, and so on. But surprisingly few people on this board support many of those advances.

According to your profile, you live in the South (Local Line is listed as "SW Main Line"), so it's not surprising that you don't often see the grim realities of the rest of the country.

I've covered approx. 70% of the National Rail network in the last five years, and travelled with every TOC. I've also worked for a TOC which covered nearly all of Britain, so I'd rank my appreciation of local differences pretty highly.

 

[mallard]

Delay Repay is an absolute drop in the ocean compared to a TOC's other expenses. Even if everyone claimed, it would still be negligible. Granted, the promotion/advertising of Delay Repay can be patchy depending on the TOC, but it would have almost no impact whatsoever on the bottom line of any TOC.

If that's true, then DR clearly isn't fit for purpose. It should absolutely make a difference to the TOCs bottom line when they fail to run an acceptable service. If having a train run late doesn't make said train unprofitable, then why would they bother making an effort to run on time?

Many of the barriers put up by people saying DR is hard to claim can be resolved by technology - e-tickets, contactless cards, and so on. But surprisingly few people on this board support many of those advances.

Surprisingly enough, few people want to use a ticket that requires a battery (leading to the situation where when the train's seriously delayed you can't even phone anyone to let them know because you're afraid the battery will run out and leave you ticketless and liable to be prosecuted), nor do they want to switch to a smartcard which at best has no passenger benefit and in many cases means you're paying the same price for worse service (smartcards are usually TOC-specific, paper tickets generally are not).

No TOC actually uses said technology to improve the DR experience anyway, so the point is moot. Not to mention that there's no real reason why the same could not be done with a paper ticket; just print a unique barcode on each ticket and have it scanned by the ticket inspector, recording the train it was scanned on. If the train's late, automatic compensation if you paid by card, present the ticket at any (yes, delay compensation should be available at any ticket office; it's ridiculous that it's only available by post/web) station for instant compensation.

Once you've got such unique codes and have them scanned on the train, you can also use the system to eliminate ORCATS (if you know which trains were used, you can allocate revenue exactly) and encourage some modicum of genuine competition on the rail network...

I've covered approx. 70% of the National Rail network in the last five years, and travelled with every TOC. I've also worked for a TOC which covered nearly all of Britain, so I'd rank my appreciation of local differences pretty highly.

I covered at least as much of the network back when I was young enough to be eligible for a railcard. I also commute daily by train. Nothing much has changed as far as I can tell... The London-based network has always been far nicer than the "regional" network and there is huge variation in levels of "customer service" even within the same TOC.

 

[AlterEgo]

If that's true, then DR clearly isn't fit for purpose. It should absolutely make a difference to the TOCs bottom line when they fail to run an acceptable service. If having a train run late doesn't make said train unprofitable, then why would they bother making an effort to run on time?

The reason it doesn't affect their bottom line is because, in the scheme of things, not that many journeys actually qualify for Delay Repay. I commute daily and have been late by 30+ minutes exactly twice in the last year.

What does affect the bottom line are industry payments/fines where TOCs cause delay minutes. (I want to say it's Schedule 4, but cannot remember.)

Surprisingly enough, few people want to use a ticket that requires a battery (leading to the situation where when the train's seriously delayed you can't even phone anyone to let them know because you're afraid the battery will run out and leave you ticketless and liable to be prosecuted), nor do they want to switch to a smartcard which at best has no passenger benefit and in many cases means you're paying the same price for worse service (smartcards are usually TOC-specific, paper tickets generally are not).

No TOC actually uses said technology to improve the DR experience anyway, so the point is moot. Not to mention that there's no real reason why the same could not be done with a paper ticket; just print a unique barcode on each ticket and have it scanned by the ticket inspector, recording the train it was scanned on. If the train's late, automatic compensation if you paid by card, present the ticket at any (yes, delay compensation should be available at any ticket office; it's ridiculous that it's only available by post/web) station for instant compensation.

Once you've got such unique codes and have them scanned on the train, you can also use the system to eliminate ORCATS (if you know which trains were used, you can allocate revenue exactly) and encourage some modicum of genuine competition on the rail network...

That would all be great, but there are a number of practical limitations with some of what you suggest. As this isn't a thread about ticketing I won't address them here, but it could be fodder for a new thread.

I covered at least as much of the network back when I was young enough to be eligible for a railcard. I also commute daily by train. Nothing much has changed as far as I can tell... The London-based network has always been far nicer than the "regional" network and there is huge variation in levels of "customer service" even within the same TOC.

Can't disagree with that.

 

[najaB]

If that's true, then DR clearly isn't fit for purpose. It should absolutely make a difference to the TOCs bottom line when they fail to run an acceptable service. If having a train run late doesn't make said train unprofitable, then why would they bother making an effort to run on time?

Because payments to other TOC's (which kick in at one minute, rather than thirty) and DfT penalties for not hitting PPM far outweigh potential delay repay claims.

 

[Haywain]

If the TOC can find any semi-plausible reason to refuse a claim they absolutely will.

I think the fact that there was no delay would be a very plausible reason to refuse the claim that isn't actually being made.