East Coast Delay Repay Problems

[leyscjd]

I regularly split tickets on East Coast using 2 or more advance tickets for my journey.

I now have 6 outstanding delay repay cases in which they have only compensated me for the part of the split affected by the delay rather than the entire journey.

It has been debated regularly on this forum but EC's traditional policy has been to base compensation on the total cost of the journey rather than just the part of the split affected by the delay.

But their policy appears to have changed. I have appealed each case-several times in some instances-but feel I have hit a brick wall as they are not even responding to my appeals.

Most cases involve fairly trivial amounts (£5-£10) but it is the principle of moving the goalposts that I object to.

In one case, I had split tickets using the same train throughout and was told that as I had not allowed minimum connection time at York (where I had split), my claim was invalid.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to what I can do next? I don't regard Passenger Focus as an option as when I raised a similar dispute I had experienced with FCC, they decided in favour of the TOC.

 

[bb21]

Passenger Focus are totally powerless and clueless in this case unfortunately.

I was assured that it had been agreed at a senior level that it would be sensible to implement Delay Repay on the basis of the cost of a journey. However it has been very poorly implemented.

 

[34D]

In one case, I had split tickets using the same train throughout and was told that as I had not allowed minimum connection time at York (where I had split), my claim was invalid.[/url]

This would be an interesting point to debate. My personal view is you're not making a 'connection'.

 

[yorkie]

Take the matter to Passenger Focus again, and PM me the reference numbers of any failed claims (including with FCC) and I'll see if I can get someone to look into it.

Remind them that EC's delay repay terms refer to "journey" and remind them of NRCoC Condition 19, that you may combine two or more tickets for "one journey".

Also, I suggest you write to ATOC...

 

[leyscjd]

If bb21 is correct in saying that it has been agreed at senior level to base the claim on the total cost if the journey, should I be focussing my efforts there rather than the clueless admin staff in Plymouth, many of whom don't appear to have the slightest knowledge of the geography of the ECML?

 

[yorkie]

Try all possible avenues. You have a PM.

EC are trying it on, presumably in order to make the business seem more profitable before it's re-privatised. If they are not successful, they'll go back to the correct way of calculating Delay Repay.

 

[bb21]

I think the best course of action is do what yorkie suggested for now.

While it is true that this had been agreed higher up, as I said, it has been badly implemented and AFAIK there is no document that specifically sets out what happens in the case of split tickets.

 

[leyscjd]

This paragraph in one of EC's replies to my appeal appears to sum up their current attitude:

"Whilst two tickets can class as one journey, we are only able to compensate for one ticket of your journey. Typically this is the ticket most affected by the delay. I would advise for future reference that for ease of journey you can purchase one ticket for your entire journey"

With ignorant people like that crafting nonsensical replies, what chance do we have?

 

[yorkie]

Don't forget EC are subject to FOI, and you can submit requests by letter, email or through https://www.whatdotheyknow.com

I am more than happy to proof read a draft FOI request - just send me a PM!

 

[michael769]

As DOR operates on the behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport it may be possible to get the matter referred to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. To do this you will need to raise the matter with your MP, who in any event may be able to help you get it resolved.

I have had some experience in Scotland of doing this with my MSP (in Scotland) where I have had issues, and always find them pretty helpful in getting matters resolved.

 

[maniacmartin]

"Whilst two tickets can class as one journey, we are only able to compensate for one ticket of your journey. Typically this is the ticket most affected by the delay."

An interesting quote indeed. The ticket that is most affected may not necessarily be the one that the initial delay occurred on, if a delay caused you to miss a train and suffer a much longer delay on a later ticket in the journey

 

[bb21]

... and how is most affected determined. If EMT are anything to go by you can bet your bottom dollars that it will be the cheapest one.

 

[Flamingo]

I know all the arguments that a journey is a journey regardless of how many tickets, but as a general point if the passenger is holding several Advance tickets (i.e. TOC only) as technically splitting the journey into several shorter point to point trips is cheaper, why should TOC A, who provided an on-time service, pay back revenue they got when thy kept their part of the contract? The follow on from this is why should TOC B, who potentially only had a small amount of revenue, pay back on a ticket that is nothing to do with them?

Rail compensation is limited to the ticket cost only, not consequential loss. The other Advance tickets could be viewed as a consequential loss, in the same way missed ferries or flights are.

 

[maniacmartin]

Because, according to the contract, aka NRCoC, the TOCs collectively sell interavailable tickets and sell each others tickets as each others' agents. The NRCoC also specifically details using multiple tickets for one journey. The same is not true for ferries or flights.

I suppose the real question would be, is each ticket a separate contract under the NRCoC, or do all tickets combined become one contract? I believe that the mention of using multiple tickets for one journey, and things like section 19c, imply that a mutli-ticket contract is formed.

 

[yorkie]

I know all the arguments that a journey is a journey regardless of how many tickets, but as a general point if the passenger is holding several Advance tickets (i.e. TOC only) as technically splitting the journey into several shorter point to point trips is cheaper, why should TOC A, who provided an on-time service, pay back revenue they got when thy kept their part of the contract? The follow on from this is why should TOC B, who potentially only had a small amount of revenue, pay back on a ticket that is nothing to do with them?

Rail compensation is limited to the ticket cost only, not consequential loss. The other Advance tickets could be viewed as a consequential loss, in the same way missed ferries or flights are.

In your first proposal, it's not applicable because the relevant TOC(s) still keeps the revenue (it's not the same as a refund).

But we'll examine the second proposal.

It's the cost of the journey (with reference to NRCoC Condition 19), the rail journey is not consequential, but let's say we take your argument that the TOC who caused the delay should only be liable for the portion of the journey that the delay occured on, then "splitting" tickets would be irrelevant.

For example, a Cattal to London ticket, with a 10 minute delay into York onto a fast London service, with an overall delay into London of, say, 32 minutes. Let's say the ticket cost £97 (SSR), which is roughly £1 per mile. If Northern were to only pay the part of the journey that was applicable to them, that would be £10.

It would not make sense to say "well, Northern are liable for the whole journey, including the part that is nothing to do with them, if a passenger does not rely on using Condition 19 of the NRCoC, but as soon as the passenger replies on Condition 19 of the NRCoC, Northern are no longer liable for the part of the journey that is nothing to do with them" and that isn't the case.

I am aware some people don't like NRCoC Condition 19, and would prefer it didn't exist (or was worded differently to say it wasn't one journey, or whatever) but it is what it is, the TOCs (in particular EMT!) did try to get it changed, and the DfT, for once, did something pro-customer and rejected it.

 

[Flamingo]

I was referring more to toc-specific tickets, especially if there is a large price difference. I wasn't aware that an attempt had been made to change it.

 

[leyscjd]

After a pathetically long wait (7 weeks since I appealed), I received a reply to one of the NINE outstanding delay repay cases I have with East Coast.

All involved split tickets and EC only based compensation only on the part of the split where the delay occurred, not on the journey as claimed in their passenger charter.

In this case I held a Newcastle-York & York-London ticket and the delay occurred between York & London. EC are refusing to base compensation on the total cost of the journey.

"When we process a Delay Repay claim, we take the price of the ticket (individual leg or through ticket) and calculate compensation due. We cannot combine two separate tickets for compensation".

They advised I contact Passenger Focus, which I did in July for this and the other EIGHT claims - although I don't hold out much hope as they proved useless in a previous dispute I had with FCC.