Updated National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) - Effective from 6th February 2022

[bakerstreet]

Though as has been pointed out (I don't usually defend them, but they exist), there are people who prefer to do all their spending in cash as they find that easier to manage and only use their debit card for cash withdrawals.

Will also be useful to understand the definition of available and what lengths the train operator will go to ascertain this.

I’ve had the scenario where I am going on the train to get expensive dental treatment in the same month as my card is up to capacity. I have paid cash for the train (and everything else that week!) to save my credit limit from being breached.
I have the card, but it’s not available.

I don’t think that cards being up to or near credit limit is either niche nor edge.

Or you have a card on a business account but you’re making a private journey.
I have the card but it’s not available.

Or for whatever reason I don’t wish to have a record of the journey made. This may be a niche but still fair in a free society.

Above all the passenger must remain the arbiter on what is available to them in this instance. Unless it becomes clearer that the railway is always requiring purchase in advance on website or on an app, or accepting only cash or only card.
Then we’re clear.

 

[Class800]

Limit of 2 dogs per person (24.1) - is this new?

Other animals must be in a container (24.3) - is this new? Seems a bit odd - yes you won't bring a horse on board, but a cat or something?

Which clause is the one we are discussing re timetable changes? I can't find it

 

[Bletchleyite]

Limit of 2 dogs per person (24.1) - is this new?

No.

Other animals must be in a container (24.3) - is this new? Seems a bit odd - yes you won't bring a horse on board, but a cat or something?

Also not new.

 

[Class800]

No.



Also not new.

OK. So probably rarely enforced - like a lot of older rules. Would be interesting to see exactly which clause is causing concern re timetable changes - clause 27 doesn't seem to include what we discussed.

 

[AlterEgo]

Condition 14.1 now sets out explicitly that some tickets are not valid to use on splits with no exceptions at all.

Previously it was "some tickets can't be used in splits EXCEPT where the train calls at the split point" or words to that effect.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

Mojo said:
Am I reading this thread right? That a customer can book a ticket several months in advance, but if a Toc changes the timetable as late as 22.00 the day before, the only recompense the customer will have is to not travel and submit the ticket for a full refund?

I read it as worse than that. I can't see where you get the option not to travel but collect a full refund for a retimed Advance, if the revised train is incorporated in the Published Timetable of the Day.

30.1 says you will get a fee-free refund only ..." if you decide not to travel because the train you intended to use is: cancelled, or delayed, or rescheduled from that in Published Timetable of the Day after you have purchased a Ticket or Tickets, or your reservation will not be honoured"

So that seems to mean that as long as the retimed service is shown in the Published Timetable of the Day by 2200 the night before, then you don't even have the option to get a refund.

 

[AlterEgo]

I read it as worse than that. I can't see where you get the option not to travel but collect a full refund for a retimed Advance, if the revised train is incorporated in the Published Timetable of the Day.

30.1 says you will get a fee-free refund only ..." if you decide not to travel because the train you intended to use is: cancelled, or delayed, or rescheduled from that in Published Timetable of the Day after you have purchased a Ticket or Tickets, or your reservation will not be honoured"

So that seems to mean that as long as the retimed service is shown in the Published Timetable of the Day by 2200 the night before, then you don't even have the option to get a refund.

If a train is "rescheduled" by more than a few minutes it effectively becomes a different service, no?

 

[Mojo]

I don’t read it quite like that. They should still have the option to travel at a different time on the original ticket for no further cost, but without compensation for delays incurred. If this is the case I’d say it was poor but not horrific.

I took that as a given. So it sounds like my understanding is correct, in which case, not particularly ideal, especially for connecting customers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Condition 14.1 now sets out explicitly that some tickets are not valid to use on splits with no exceptions at all.

Previously it was "some tickets can't be used in splits EXCEPT where the train calls at the split point" or words to that effect.

Oyster PAYG and Contactless fit that description for purely practical reasons. That'll be why.

The forthcoming zonal contactless systems will be the same, as you'll need to pass a gateline to touch out.

Legal precedent I believe prevents a general ban.

 

[Skymonster]

If you are claiming compensation due to a delay in your rail replacement journey, your compensation will be determined by the time difference between the actual time of arrival at your destination and the arrival time as published in the Published Timetable of the Day.

So if I have a ticket for a specific train, and they subsequently put on a RRB (say because of short notice engineering, but where the bus then appears in the timetable of the day), I can only claim for an arrival delay if the bus itself is late and I cannot claim for the difference between the expected train arrival time and the bus arrival time?

 

[Class800]

What clause mentions 2200? I have searched for it and can't find

 

[Mojo]

I read it as worse than that. I can't see where you get the option not to travel but collect a full refund for a retimed Advance, if the revised train is incorporated in the Published Timetable of the Day.

Surely that right is protected in generic consumer law?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What clause mentions 2200? I have searched for it and can't find

See the definitions at the end.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If a train is "rescheduled" by more than a few minutes it effectively becomes a different service, no?

By the current way we define trains to the public, yes (even if it's one minute). If they started publishing "flight numbers" (which exist - the Retail Service ID), no.

I suspect that's a find-and-replace error, but then again so it appeared was the return half break of journey ban on 8A Savers...if not fixed, these things become gospel.

 

[island]

Surely that right is protected in generic consumer law?

I don't believe there is a law entitling to a free cancellation/refund in the event of a trivial or very minor change to journey times (what will be minor will depend on the circumstances).

I suspect that's a find-and-replace error, but then again so it appeared was the return half break of journey ban on 8A Savers...if not fixed, these things become gospel.

Somewhere in the new terms it seems to suggest that the break of journey ban on off-peak return tickets can only apply to outbound, but I cannot seem to find it again.

 

[Class800]

See the definitions at the end.

OK can see it now - it's not made very clear how it relates to the other clauses - but agree, it may not be positive

 

[Adam Williams]

That depends how you read the question. It could have been "Has anyone seen or posted a link to the new NRCoT yet?" or "Has anyone seen or posted a link to the new NRCoT yet?". The answer given was to the latter of these.

This is a poor defence of what was effectively spam, and added very little indeed to the conversation.
I am glad ainsworth74 has subsequently posted a more useful message.

 

[robbeech]

So that seems to mean that as long as the retimed service is shown in the Published Timetable of the Day by 2200 the night before, then you don't even have the option to get a refund.

I suspect many may try to push these rules that way but I don’t think it’s intended to be quite as anti customer as that.

If a train is "rescheduled" by more than a few minutes it effectively becomes a different service, no?

Not officially, only when it suits the railway. So I expect we will see examples of both yes and no here. We already see people with advances for the 1714 being sold a new full price ticket when the service becomes the 1717 (same head code same service ID) so YES it becomes a different service when the railway can make a Bob or two, but I assume we will see people refused a refund when the 1714 becomes the 1717 as the timetable has just changed. Both the yes and the no may even run concurrently with the same train for different passengers.

So if I have a ticket for a specific train, and they subsequently put on a RRB (say because of short notice engineering, but where the bus then appears in the timetable of the day), I can only claim for an arrival delay if the bus itself is late and I cannot claim for the difference between the expected train arrival time and the bus arrival time?

Correct. Thanks for using the railway.

Surely that right is protected in generic consumer law?

Yes, in theory, but the concept of consumer law applying to the railway was always a bit of a con as it’s so easy to fob off passengers.

I don't believe there is a law entitling to a free cancellation/refund in the event of a trivial or very minor change to journey times (what will be minor will depend on the circumstances).

Without a definition of how minor or major a change needs to be it would ironically fall in favour of the consumer anyway.

Somewhere in the new terms it seems to suggest that the break of journey ban on off-peak return tickets can only apply to outbound, but I cannot seem to find it again.

Information box at the top of section 16.

 

[Haywain]

Information box at the top of section 16.

Even that's rather vague. It certainly doesn't seem to be doing anything better than 'suggesting'.

 

[ABB125]

Even that's rather vague. It certainly doesn't seem to be doing anything better than 'suggesting'.

Yet I thought the purpose of this update was to clarify things?

 

[Haywain]

I read it as worse than that. I can't see where you get the option not to travel but collect a full refund for a retimed Advance, if the revised train is incorporated in the Published Timetable of the Day.

30.1 says you will get a fee-free refund only ..." if you decide not to travel because the train you intended to use is: cancelled, or delayed, or rescheduled from that in Published Timetable of the Day after you have purchased a Ticket or Tickets, or your reservation will not be honoured"

So that seems to mean that as long as the retimed service is shown in the Published Timetable of the Day by 2200 the night before, then you don't even have the option to get a refund.

The Advance ticket Terms & Conditions still contain the relevant wording and are unchanged (as yet, at least).

 

[thejuggler]

I've only looked at the comparison table, but if 'advance' is a specific ticket type and defined term, as per the link in the document, it really should be 'Advance' throughout.

If not any ticket bought in advance is an advance ticket.

 

[SargeNpton]

If a train is "rescheduled" by more than a few minutes it effectively becomes a different service, no?

Some trains can be re-timed by up to an hour along part of their journey if a diversionary route is required for engineering works. Whether that is an hour earlier or an hour later depends on the circumstances. It is however still the same train.

 

[AlterEgo]

Some trains can be re-timed by up to an hour along part of their journey if a diversionary route is required for engineering works. Whether that is an hour earlier or an hour later depends on the circumstances. It is however still the same train.

How is it the same train if the passenger does not get a train number or unique train identifier? If we were booking using headcodes or Retail Service IDs I might agree with you.

If the 1000 departs now at 1022, whether it uses the same stock and crew is irrelevant to the passenger; it cannot be said this is the same train under the Conditions.

 

[Haywain]

If the 1000 departs now at 1022, whether it uses the same stock and crew is irrelevant to the passenger; it cannot be said this is the same train under the Conditions.

It can equally be argued that if it is the one train a day that runs between the two points, it doesn't matter if the start time is changed by 25 minutes either way, it is still the same train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some trains can be re-timed by up to an hour along part of their journey if a diversionary route is required for engineering works. Whether that is an hour earlier or an hour later depends on the circumstances. It is however still the same train.

You could validly argue that it could be the same train in one direction but not the other, as so far as passengers go in the UK the primary key of a train in the UK is the triple of (departure time from their boarding station, destination, TOC).

(Usually only two of those, but there have been cases of two services to Edinburgh departing from New St at the same time via different routes - thinking on, they might even both have been VTs...)

It can equally be argued that if it is the one train a day that runs between the two points, it doesn't matter if the start time is changed by 25 minutes either way, it is still the same train.

One of the many reasons why the Retail Service ID should be public and should be on all tickets, displays etc as the identification of the train, just like easyJet 2062 (which I once used a lot) is easyJet 2062, regardless of if it departed at 1800 or 1830.

Like, you know, pretty much every other country does. (We're good at exceptionalism here! If you're the only country doing a specific thing, there is a very, very high chance it's you that's wrong).

 

[AlterEgo]

It can equally be argued that if it is the one train a day that runs between the two points, it doesn't matter if the start time is changed by 25 minutes either way, it is still the same train.

That's not how the identity of trains is communicated to passengers.

If you were booking the 1H70 service leaving at 1000 and it becomes the 1H70 now departing at 1032, no issue. Sorry, if the rail industry wants to do this, use train numbers or names like most European railways.

 

[robbeech]

Yet I thought the purpose of this update was to clarify things?

No, it is marketed that way but the PURPOSE is to reduce the true value of your ticket and to remove or reduce the rights of the passenger for the price paid to travel.

If the 1000 departs now at 1022, whether it uses the same stock and crew is irrelevant to the passenger; it cannot be said this is the same train under the Conditions.

It can equally be argued that if it is the one train a day that runs between the two points, it doesn't matter if the start time is changed by 25 minutes either way, it is still the same train.

And as I said above the railway will argue this point whichever way suits them.

I would not be in the least bit surprised if an operator (with their retailer hat on) refused to refund tickets for the 1000 because it is now the 1022 and that is the published timetable on the day but then, come 1022 the guard from the same operator (with their operator hat on) refused travel on the same 1022 that was the 1000 because the 1022 is not the 1000 and you have a ticket for the 1000.

 

[Haywain]

That's not how the identity of trains is communicated to passengers.

But it is how passengers see things. If they have booked on the 1200 Kings Cross to Inverness, and it's retimed to depart at 12:20 they still see it as 'the Inverness train'.

And as I said above the railway will argue this point whichever way suits them.

It's a personal view based on my experience working for the railway. The point being that train identity isn't as black and white as had been suggested.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But it is how passengers see things. If they have booked on the 1200 Kings Cross to Inverness, and it's retimed to depart at 12:20 they still see it as 'the Inverness train'.

For one-a-day services like the Chieftain, the Cally, the Riviera etc, yes. But not the 1220 from Euston to Manchester.

But previously you could claim a refund and not travel if a delay or cancellation meant the train was not as it was when you booked it. It wouldn't matter how small the delay was. Which does make sense, as some journeys are time critical.