SWR decide that in fact, no, you do not get compensation on split tickets.

[superalbs]

Hello,

I have had a large number of previous claims with SWR in which they have easily paid up for delay repay on combinations of tickets, including some rather complex ones with lots of different tickets and ticket types, all of which were paid out correctly the first time, or at least paid partially and then later corrected.

So imagine my shock and surprise when they come back to me on a claim from Inverness to Pinhoe with only the Pinhoe to London ticket reimbursed. Chasing this up, I receive the following email:

I have escalated your case with my supervisor regarding your claim, and he advises that because you have split tickets and not a single ticket for the whole journey, you are entitled to compensation from South Western Railway for the ticket you purchased to cover our services.

I hope this helps.

This was particularly confusing to me, as I seemed to recall SWR's passenger charter stating that they would pay compensation correctly for combinations of tickets. And it turns out that it still says this:

If you have a combination of tickets for your journey, we will compensate you for your whole journey.

So why on earth are they now pretending that me having multiple tickets makes any difference whatsoever?

Is it incompetence? Surely not, as the past has shown, and this is a supervisor anyway...

Is it because they're running out of money? Or maybe they just don't care?

Bizarre. Any ideas where to go next with this one?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Hello,

I have had a large number of previous claims with SWR in which they have easily paid up for delay repay on combinations of tickets, including some rather complex ones with lots of different tickets and ticket types, all of which were paid out correctly the first time, or at least paid partially and then later corrected.

So imagine my shock and surprise when they come back to me on a claim from Inverness to Pinhoe with only the Pinhoe to London ticket reimbursed. Chasing this up, I receive the following email:This was particularly confusing to me, as I seemed to recall SWR's passenger charter stating that they would pay compensation correctly for combinations of tickets. And it turns out that it still says thiso why on earth are they now pretending that me having multiple tickets makes any difference whatsoever?

Is it incompetence? Surely not, as the past has shown, and this is a supervisor anyway...

Is it because they're running out of money? Or maybe they just don't care?

Bizarre. Any ideas where to go next with this one?

I suspect incompetence more than anything else. It's sadly common that they even recognise that it's one journey but yet somehow think that only "their part" of the journey qualifies for compensation, despite the NRCoT and their Charter referring to the "journey" (as a whole) being delayed. Not to mention the explicit provision in their Charter that they will pay out on combinations!

Ask to have the matter escalated sufficiently to receive a Letter of Deadlock. You can then go to the Rail Ombudsman with this (or you can go there if it's been 40 working days since you first contacted them - whichever comes first).

If you point out the provision in their Charter I can see no way that a competent member of staff could continue to reject your claim. Of course, expecting a competent member of staff is unrealistic in the customer services department of TOCs...

It's rather funny, really - if the passenger had the same lax attitude to paying their contractual debt, namely the price of the ticket, they would be threatened will all manner of penalties, civil and criminal. If the train company does the same, they get to string it out over months and pay only what was originally due.

 

[najaB]

Bizarre. Any ideas where to go next with this one?

Was the journey 'valid' - especially wrt the cross-London timing?

 

[island]

But you must hold the tickets for your entire journey if you want to exercise your right to combine them into a single journey.

If you hold a ticket from Southampton to Winchester and a ticket from Clapham Junction to Waterloo, you can’t get compensation on your Clapham Junction to Waterloo ticket if you’re delayed between Southampton and Southampton Airport Parkway, even if you say you intended to buy a ticket from Winchester to Clapham Junction later.

The same must apply if the “hole in the middle” is between two London terminals. An intent to buy a ticket later, such as by Oyster or contactless, is not a ticket.

A passenger wishing to be eligible for compensation on a through journey needs to buy a through ticket or a combination of tickets covering the entire journey. Not just bits and pieces.

 

[yorkie]

SWR's own charter makes it clear they do pay for the whole journey when using a combination of tickets.

Sorry I can't provide a link and quote now but will edit my post this evening of no-one else beats me to it.

So, quote their charter in your reply.

If still no luck, PM me your reference number and I'll ask a contact to look into it.

By the way if you use an accredited split ticketing site, you could forward the booking confirmation email to SWR; this is good evidence of the contract being for one journey. This is by no means essential and doesn't grant extra rights, it can just make the contractual position clearer.

I agree with others that it's incompetence. This is rife within some TOC customer service departments.

 

[superalbs]

Was the journey 'valid' - especially wrt the cross-London timing?

Intended arrival into London Kings Cross was 1549, and intended departure was the 1820. Ample time!

And was there a continuous set of tickets across London? It is debatable as to whether Oyster or contactless counts.

I had considered using contactless, but I just bought a single ticket instead.

 

[Silverdale]

It's not up for debate at all. The NRCoT explicitly says that Oyster or contactless counts as a ticket (p. 32).

Explicitly, it says that:

“Ticket” means any physical or electronic document or record which entitles a passenger to make a journey on the National Rail Network between the stations or within the zones indicated by one or more of the Train Companies.

A ticket, whether paper, Oyster or contactless for a journey off the National Network and/or by an operator other than one of the Train Companies, would not qualify by that definition.

 

[Silverdale]

I had considered using contactless, but I just bought a single ticket instead.

Then it could be argued (by SWR) that you actually had tickets for three separate journeys. Two on the National Rail Network and one on LU.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Then it could be argued (by SWR) that you actually had tickets for three separate journeys. Two on the National Rail Network and one on LU.

Not really, as they have already accepted and admitted that the travels together constituted one journey.

They would be very silly to later come around and say that it doesn't count as one journey.

The NRCoT don't explicitly define "a journey" - they merely give some examples of what can constitute a journey (e.g. a combination of National Rail tickets). Therefore, it would be very, very silly to try and argue that something like what the OP did doesn't constitute a journey in the ordinary meaning of the term.

 

[superalbs]

Just to clarify, the delayed leg was London Waterloo to Pinhoe, so after the cross-london section.

 

[Silverdale]

Not really, as they have already accepted and admitted that the travels together constituted one journey.

They would be very silly to later come around and say that it doesn't count as one journey.

Perhaps, on reflection, they have realised their mistake?

The NRCoT don't explicitly define "a journey" - they merely give some examples of what can constitute a journey (e.g. a combination of National Rail tickets). Therefore, it would be very, very silly to try and argue that something like what the OP did doesn't constitute a journey in the ordinary meaning of the term.

NRCoT only applies to journeys made on the National Rail Network and by one or more of the Train Companies. If the OP's itinerary from Inverness to Pinhoe had included a flight from Aberdeen to Luton, would a combination of National Rail tickets from Inverness to Aberdeen and Luton to Pinhoe define a single journey with respect to a delay repay claim?

 

[najaB]

Intended arrival into London Kings Cross was 1549, and intended departure was the 1820. Ample time!

I had considered using contactless, but I just bought a single ticket instead.

Sorry if I've missed it - what was the exact combination of tickets you were using?

 

[superalbs]

Sorry if I've missed it - what was the exact combination of tickets you were using?

The ticket details are as follows:

Advance Single
Inverness to London Kings Cross

Anytime Day Single
St Pancras to Waterloo East

Off-Peak Period Return
Pinhoe to London Terminals

 

[najaB]

The ticket details are as follows:

Advance Single
Inverness to London Kings Cross

Anytime Day Single
St Pancras to Waterloo East

Off-Peak Period Return
Pinhoe to London Terminals

Was the St. Pancras to Waterloo a National Rail ticket (routed 'Not Underground') or a LU ticket?

 

[superalbs]

Was the St. Pancras to Waterloo a National Rail ticket (routed 'Not Underground') or a LU ticket?

It was indeed the NOT UNDERGROUND one.

Purchased on-board the LNER train down from Scotland.

 

[najaB]

It was indeed the NOT UNDERGROUND one.

Then SWR are, with respect, talking bollocks!

 

[superalbs]

Then SWR are, with respect, talking bollocks!

Thought so.

I mean the absolute most they could probably argue is that I hold no ticket between Kings Cross and St Pancras. But that's quite a weak argument, because it's a walk.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was indeed the NOT UNDERGROUND one.

Purchased on-board the LNER train down from Scotland.

In that case you absolutely do have a contiguous set of tickets and SWR should cough up.

 

[najaB]

I mean the absolute most they could probably argue is that I hold no ticket between Kings Cross and St Pancras. But that's quite a weak argument, because it's a walk.

I'm 99% sure that they're basically considered to be one station for ticketing purposes - one minute fixed link by walking: http://www.brtimes.com/#!board?stn=STP&show=info&date=20190226

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Perhaps, on reflection, they have realised their mistake?

This is now irrelevant due to the OP's choice of tickets, but if they've freely admitted it counts as one journey - as they have - they would look very silly if it went to Court and they did a U-turn. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say that they wouldn't have a chance of being believed in their new position.

 

[Hadders]

I don’t know if First Group outsource all their customer relations to the same outsourcing company but perhaps whoever dealt with it thought they were dealing with a Hull Trains claim, as they notoriously refuse to pay out on combinations of tickets.

 

[AlterEgo]

In agreement with other posters here - this is probably incompetence on SWR's part. Indisputably a through journey and their own charter says they will pay out, so pay out they must. Let us know how you get on.

 

[FenMan]

Perhaps, on reflection, they have realised their mistake?



NRCoT only applies to journeys made on the National Rail Network and by one or more of the Train Companies. If the OP's itinerary from Inverness to Pinhoe had included a flight from Aberdeen to Luton, would a combination of National Rail tickets from Inverness to Aberdeen and Luton to Pinhoe define a single journey with respect to a delay repay claim?

Erm, bearing in mind this part of the forum is meant to provide helpful advice, please guide me to the part of this post that is helpful, rather than bringing in inappropriate parameters of no relevance to the OP.

 

[najaB]

Erm, bearing in mind this part of the forum is meant to provide helpful advice, please guide me to the part of this post that is helpful, rather than bringing in inappropriate parameters of no relevance to the OP.

To give @Silverdale the benefit of the doubt, I think that at the time they posted that many thought that the cross-London journey had been covered by a Tube journey on a TfL fare. Thus the reductio ad absurdum seemed appropriate.

 

[superalbs]

Just received another email from SWR:

I have escalated your case with another supervisor and they confirmed that you are correct. I have raised a cheque in the sum of £65.45. This should be with you within 20 working days.

Please accept my apologies for the inconvenience caused.

Glad that was resolved quickly, but I am still left wondering how on earth this happened.

Thanks for everyone's input.

 

[yorkie]

Glad to hear it.

I do hope those who post incorrect information about cross London transfers (not relevant to this case, but relevant in other cases) can revise their position. Comparing flights to a cross London transfer demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of a cross London transfer. If the customers itinerary is a valid one, and the combination of fares paid is valid, there is no question the claim is valid and I don't expect to see any deliberate misinformation on this matter in future threads by those who made a mistake in this one.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Glad to hear it.

I do hope those who post incorrect information about cross London transfers (not relevant to this case, but relevant in other cases) can revise their position. Comparing flights to a cross London transfer demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of a cross London transfer. If the customers itinerary is a valid one, and the combination of fares paid is valid, there is no question the claim is valid and I don't expect to see any deliberate misinformation on this matter in future threads by those who made a mistake in this one.

Indeed, with it being a cross-London transfer with so much time between the scheduled arrival and departure, what is to say that the OP didn't propose simply to walk the distance! After all, "transfer" (make your own way) can be a valid method of cross-London transfer according to the journey planner data, depending on the time you leave!

 

[maniacmartin]

'Transfer' (make your own way) is only valid at certain times of the day when the tube isn't expected to always be running

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

'Transfer' (make your own way) is only valid at certain times of the day when the tube isn't expected to always be running

That's just what the (non-public) data says! Who is to say you're obliged to use the Tube between London Terminals, rather than walking, taking a taxi, a bus, borrowing a Boris Bike... and so on!

 

[najaB]

Who is to say you're obliged to use the Tube between London Terminals, rather than walking, taking a taxi, a bus, borrowing a Boris Bike... and so on!

You aren't. Who says that you are?