GTR delay repay and general tardiness

[bakerstreet]

Am I being unreasonable with the following observations

1. Since the new Thameslink timetable (not the chaos timetable or the panic response timetable but the pause while we sort things out timetable), a notice has now appeared on delay repay saying that it is now this new timetable we can claim against (25% of trains removed from the daytime pattern compared with this time last year for me) and not the full, original, pre crisis timetable.

During the chaos it was the improved timetable they were judged against even when it fell apart.

2. Given that they have redrawn the timetable from scratch, reduced the number of trains running and perhaps learned some timetabling lessons, how is it still the case that almost every train I catch is delayed by 2-5 minutes, even if it leaves terminal on time, even if it’s shown as on time as I leave my home 5 mins walk from station and there are still cancellations.
Is the whole Thameslink project too complex and unworkable?
(Or as Reggie Perrrin would say if all the trains are late make that the timetable then they’d be on time!)

3. With three trains an hour down from four, a gap of up to 30 mins between services each hour, almost guaranteed late running even if by just a few minutes, to guarantee arrival times or connections I’m having to leave up to 45 mins early. ie catch one train before the one I need.
Is the GTR problem now ‘fixed’ so far as the industry is concerned?

 

[island]

DelayRepay is not a contractual entitlement so it is for the train company to decide what timetables it will base its response to DelayRepay claims on. The contractual entitlement to compensation in the event of delays is as set out in NRCoT 33.3, namely 50% refund for single or relevant part of a return fare for delays above 60 minutes. Claims based on the contractual entitlement can be lodged based on the timetable in place when the contract was formed.

The above is without prejudice to a passenger’s right to sue for a price reduction for a service that they paid for which was not carried out with reasonable care and skill (section 56 Consumer Rights Act), nor to take a court case to establish that the DelayRepay policy was something he/she took into account when deciding whether to buy the train ticket and is therefore an implied term of the contract (section 50 Consumer Rights Act).

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

DelayRepay is not a contractual entitlement so it is for the train company to decide what timetables it will base its response to DelayRepay claims on. The contractual entitlement to compensation in the event of delays is as set out in NRCoT 33.3, namely 50% refund for single or relevant part of a return fare for delays above 60 minutes. Claims based on the contractual entitlement can be lodged based on the timetable in place when the contract was formed.

The above is without prejudice to a passenger’s right to sue for a price reduction for a service that they paid for which was not carried out with reasonable care and skill (section 56 Consumer Rights Act), nor to take a court case to establish that the DelayRepay policy was something he/she took into account when deciding whether to buy the train ticket and is therefore an implied term of the contract (section 50 Consumer Rights Act).

NRCoT Condition 33 tells passengers to look at each train company's Passenger Charter for the exact details of their delay compensation arrangements (and, for example, whether they make use of the exemption for delays entirely outside the rail industry's control).

I would have thought that you could argue that, even in the absence of a case for Delay Repay/compensation being an implied term under S50 CRA, this itself binds the train company to comply with whatever they say in their Passenger Charter.

But I would have thought that you would only need to raise the above argument if the circumstances meant that relying on S50 CRA would be difficult.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Personally have I needed to be anywhere at a particular time I have always caught the train at least the one before I need irrespective of the rail company I am travelling with. For my daily commute on GTR I travel on the train which gets me to work on time, occasionally I am late, sometimes spectacularly so, but I am fortunate that train delays are frequent for people working in London, and time can be made up.

GTR have not only been paying delay repay based on a timetable that for whatever reason was unworkable, but have also offered compensation. It appears entirely possible that those who are entitled to the maximum compensation and also claimed all the delay repay allowable could potentially have been refunded more than they paid.

At some point reality has to return to the proceedings and delay repay needs to be based on a timetable that can actually be achieved.