Northern Strike Days Delay Repay

[Deafdoggie]

Back on Saturday 1st September, I purchased two returns from Crewe to Morecambe. I’d looked up train times that morning on the Virgin Trains website, but didn’t buy them through there.
I purchased the tickets at the machine in Crewe entrance foyer on the car park-not the main entrance. So there’s no manned ticket office. Or any staff at all.
There was no mention of a Northern Strike, but plenty of notices about Euston being closed. I wasn’t going to London, didn’t want to go to London, but I was aware it was shut!
The ticket machine happily sold me tickets to Morecambe.
Only on arrival in Lancaster did it become apparent there was neither trains to Morecambe nor any other replacement service.
Without getting into the rights or wrongs of this situation, we were in effect delayed at Lancaster (or stranded if you prefer) so I applied for Delay Repay.
Northern have not only rejected this-no reason given-but, indeed, even went further by saying the claim was potentially fraudulent. Although they provide no suggestion as to why or how.
What are people’s thiughts on this?
As a fare-paying punter I think it’s appalling customer service, not only that no provision was made, but that I was allowed to purchase a non-existent journey. And then be told I’m basically lieing about it!
Is there a less customer friendly company than Arriva?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Back on Saturday 1st September, I purchased two returns from Crewe to Morecambe. I’d looked up train times that morning on the Virgin Trains website, but didn’t buy them through there.
I purchased the tickets at the machine in Crewe entrance foyer on the car park-not the main entrance. So there’s no manned ticket office. Or any staff at all.
There was no mention of a Northern Strike, but plenty of notices about Euston being closed. I wasn’t going to London, didn’t want to go to London, but I was aware it was shut!
The ticket machine happily sold me tickets to Morecambe.
Only on arrival in Lancaster did it become apparent there was neither trains to Morecambe nor any other replacement service.
Without getting into the rights or wrongs of this situation, we were in effect delayed at Lancaster (or stranded if you prefer) so I applied for Delay Repay.
Northern have not only rejected this-no reason given-but, indeed, even went further by saying the claim was potentially fraudulent. Although they provide no suggestion as to why or how.
What are people’s thiughts on this?
As a fare-paying punter I think it’s appalling customer service, not only that no provision was made, but that I was allowed to purchase a non-existent journey. And then be told I’m basically lieing about it!
Is there a less customer friendly company than Arriva?

Did you get to Morecambe at all? If so, did you occur any costs in doing so?

I think it is clear that the machine selling you a ticket to Morecambe implies that there is actually a service to Morecambe which you can take. People may say that machines are not clever enough to work out what routes have a service and which don't, but ultimately that is an issue for the TOCs and not for the beleaguered passenger to work out when they're half way through their journey and then realise they can't get to their destination.

Did you abandon your journey at Lancaster and turn back? If so I would argue you can quite justifiably claim for a refund on your ticket - under NRCoT 30.1. If Northern refused even that, they would be in murky legal waters. EDIT: it would be from Northern if you'd used their TVM. If you used the VTWC TVM then you need to get the refund from them.

In any case it is indisputable that they have shown poor customer service here, as is commonplace with Northern.

 

[northwichcat]

Was it a Virgin or Northern TVM that the ticket was purchased from? If it was a Virgin one then you should have applied to Virgin for a refund. I'm surprised their website showed train times for Lancaster to Morecambe given they use the same Trainline booking engine as Northern.

I think it's grey area is because you did most of your journey. Someone could, in theory, want to travel from London to Lancaster, but buys a London to Morecambe ticket in the knowledge that there's no trains to Morecambe in an attempt to travel for free.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Was it a Virgin or Northern TVM that the ticket was purchased from? If it was a Virgin one then you should have applied to Virgin for a refund. I'm surprised their website showed train times for Lancaster to Morecambe given they use the same Trainline booking engine as Northern.

I think it's grey area is because you did most of your journey. Someone could, in theory, want to travel from London to Lancaster, but buys a London to Morecambe ticket in the knowledge that there's no trains to Morecambe in an attempt to travel for free.

I don't really think it's a grey area in terms of the refund - ultimately you haven't received what you've paid for, which is travel to Morecambe. If you turn around then you are entitled to a refund as per NRCoT 30.1 (assuming you did not know of the cancellations). Now of course there may be people who abuse the system because it's difficult to detect, but that is probably a very small percentage of all railway fraud (most of which is far simpler).

 

[najaB]

Without getting into the rights or wrongs of this situation, we were in effect delayed at Lancaster (or stranded if you prefer) so I applied for Delay Repay.

You should have asked for a refund, rather that Delay Repay.

 

[najaB]

I think it is clear that the machine selling you a ticket to Morecambe implies that there is actually a service to Morecambe which you can take.

Depends on the ticket that was sold.

 

[northwichcat]

Depends on the ticket that was sold.

Well yes if it was an Anytime Single or Return then the journey did not have to be completed on the day the ticket was issued for but unless @Deafdoggie intended to break their journey overnight they would have hopefully bought an off-peak ticket single/return which wouldn't permit an overnight break in journey on the northbound journey.

 

[najaB]

Well yes if it was an Anytime Single or Return then the journey did not have to be completed on the day the ticket was issued for...

Or if they wanted to return on a different day then a period return would be cheaper than two singles. Without knowing what ticket was sold and what journey was being made we can't say that they were mis-sold.

 

[northwichcat]

Or if they wanted to return on a different day then a period return would be cheaper than two singles. Without knowing what ticket was sold and what journey was being made we can't say that they were mis-sold.

The off-peak return mentioned is a period return (off-peak day returns aren't available) so the only reason to buy the anytime return would be if you wanted to have an overnight break in journey.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Thanks all. We actually walked to Morecambe from Lancaster down an old rail track walkway. It wasn’t unpleasant, but it wasn’t a train! We caught the bus back. I have a free disabled bus pass, my partner paid. I can’t remember now how much, and to be honest, I’m not arguing about that (after the walk there & walking round I was glad of the sit down!)
Can’t remember what the exact tickets were, but they purchased on the day from the Virgin machine. I’d simply have selected the cheapest ‘day return’ option. I have a disabled Railcard. I think around £55 for the two of us.

 

[najaB]

I’d simply have selected the cheapest ‘day return’ option. I have a disabled Railcard.

There isn't a day return, so it's not clear what else the machine should have done - only offer the Anytime (since that would've given you five days to complete the outward journey) or not offered any ticket at all (not useful if you wanted to return on another day).

I think the mistake (if any) was claiming Delay Repay rather than a refund for an abandoned journey. That claim would only be successful if you could show that there were no posters/signs advising of the strike visible before you reached the ticket machine.

 

[Deafdoggie]

There isn't a day return, so it's not clear what else the machine should have done - only offer the Anytime (since that would've given you five days to complete the outward journey) or not offered any ticket at all (not useful if you wanted to return on another day).

I think the mistake (if any) was claiming Delay Repay rather than a refund for an abandoned journey. That claim would only be successful if you could show that there were no posters/signs advising of the strike visible before you reached the ticket machine.

That’s really hard. How do you prove that? I didn’t think to take a photo of posters that weren’t there advertising something I didn’t know about.

Surely Northern should say, that’s not a delay and fraud but a refund. I didn’t think it was a refund as I did travel the vast majority of the journey.

The point was, we wanted to get there and back on Saturday. If the ticket was valid for more than that is not the point! It’s no good saying “There were no trains Saturday, but you could travel Wednesday”. No I couldn’t! My boss wouldn’t buy into that.

 

[najaB]

Surely Northern should say, that’s not a delay and fraud but a refund. I didn’t think it was a refund as I did travel the vast majority of the journey.

They shouldn't say the claim is fraudulent, but that appears to be a form letter, based on another thread.

The (rough paraphrase of the) NRCoT says that, of your train is cancelled or delayed you may return to your starting station and claim a refund. The only question would be if you knew that trains weren't running from Lancaster to Morecambe - hence my question about posters.

 

[Deafdoggie]

No idea till arrival at Lancaster that there were no trains. We made the best of a bad job & enjoyed the day. But there was considerably less time in Morecambe. The bus taking 50 minutes for the journey! Although Walking took twice that.

 

[Haywain]

I think it is fair to assume that the letter sent out is a standard letter. Therefore the correct approach would be to respond and clarify the issue as to what happened. As it will be difficult to show an actual delay in the circumstances, I would be inclined to request that they consider a gesture of goodwill due to the misinformation or lack of information causing your plans to be changed - having less time in Morecambe being part of that.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I think it is fair to assume that the letter sent out is a standard letter. Therefore the correct approach would be to respond and clarify the issue as to what happened. As it will be difficult to show an actual delay in the circumstances, I would be inclined to request that they consider a gesture of goodwill due to the misinformation or lack of information causing your plans to be changed - having less time in Morecambe being part of that.

I think the fact that it is a standard letter is the worst part. If it were a genuine error on the part of the member of staff that is one thing - but we are seeing numerous threads where people who booked onto a train before the timetable was revised who are then having their "fraudulent" claims rejected. That is not good enough, and I think treating it in the same way as one of the normal accidental rejections wholly understates the seriousness of their allegations.

 

[najaB]

I think the fact that it is a standard letter is the worst part. If it were a genuine error on the part of the member of staff...

I don't understand why the two are mutually exclusive. It could simply a question of the staff member pressing "send letter A" instead of "send letter B".

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I don't understand why the two are mutually exclusive. It could simply a question of the staff member pressing "send letter A" instead of "send letter B".

Accidentally accusing someone of fraud is not an excusable error in any way, shape or form. It's a very serious allegation that should be made only when there is very clear evidence of fraud.

But I think it ought to be clear that this is not an accident, as several posters have reported receiving this letter in response to a claim for a train removed from the timetable. Northern ought to know full well when this occurs; accusing people of fraud is just about as far removed from the correct response as is possible.

 

[Gareth Marston]

During a XC strike when they were running 1 tph between Birmingham and Cheltenham instead 3 tph we had someone buy a return to CNM from us and a few weeks later we were contacted by ATW Customer Services. The person had written to them complaining that they had not been advised of this and had turned around at Birmingham abandoning there journey. ATW sent it to us as point of sale.

However the customer in question had been in the office whilst two different sets of customers in front of them had spent quite some time going through options for journeys on XC that day with us. After a protracted amount of time when she went outside and made a mobile call she then rocks up and asks for a return to CNM, she had been listening to what the previous customer was saying and what we said to them. Clearly it involved her journey so she listened. Two of us saw her do it. We assumed she had absorbed all the factsband I am convinced she did. Yet she still complained she hadn't been informed to a third party not the organisation selling the ticket.

She gambled it would be ok and then got fazed out at New St, yet it had to be someone's fault and she had to be compensated. Spurious claims do happen.

 

[najaB]

Accidentally accusing someone of fraud is not an excusable error in any way, shape or form. It's a very serious allegation that should be made only when there is very clear evidence of fraud.

The letter that I've seen posted doesn't accuse anyone of fraud. It says 'possibly fraudulent' - big difference.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

During a XC strike when they were running 1 tph between Birmingham and Cheltenham instead 3 tph we had someone buy a return to CNM from us and a few weeks later we were contacted by ATW Customer Services. The person had written to them complaining that they had not been advised of this and had turned around at Birmingham abandoning there journey. ATW sent it to us as point of sale.

However the customer in question had been in the office whilst two different sets of customers in front of them had spent quite some time going through options for journeys on XC that day with us. After a protracted amount of time when she went outside and made a mobile call she then rocks up and asks for a return to CNM, she had been listening to what the previous customer was saying and what we said to them. Clearly it involved her journey so she listened. Two of us saw her do it. We assumed she had absorbed all the factsband I am convinced she did. Yet she still complained she hadn't been informed to a third party not the organisation selling the ticket.

She gambled it would be ok and then got fazed out at New St, yet it had to be someone's fault and she had to be compensated. Spurious claims do happen.

Spurious claims do happen - but then evidence thereof should be gathered before assuming foul play, or accusing honest people of fraud. It is always better to err on the side of caution, and indeed I would not be accusing Northern of fraud here were it not for the several posters who have received identical "fraud" rejections in the same scenario.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The letter that I've seen posted doesn't accuse anyone of fraud. It says 'possibly fraudulent' - big difference.

No difference at all to the man on the Clapham omnibus. You're nitpicking - just admit it, Northern are very much in the wrong here.

 

[najaB]

Just admit it, Northern are very much in the wrong here.

Could I suggest that you read the thread again, they are not in the wrong - you can't claim Delay Repay against a journey the couldn't be completed when the contract was formed. Such a claim *would* be fraudulent.

If you're so convinced that they're in the wrong, by how many minutes was the OP's journey to Morcambe delayed? What was the delay to their return trip to Crewe?

Where Northern are wrong (as opposed to in the wrong) is that they didn't treat the OPs request as a refund for an abandoned journey.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Spurious claims do happen - but then evidence thereof should be gathered before assuming foul play, or accusing honest people of fraud. It is always better to err on the side of caution, and indeed I would not be accusing Northern of fraud here were it not for the several posters who have received identical "fraud" rejections in the same scenario.

I would suggest the wording is designed to deter the tryers on, its maybe frustrating for genuine claimants but the volume of low level fraudsters causes problems. I've heard all sorts of crap in attempts to get money it makes you despair at humanity sometimes.

 

[Deafdoggie]

I can’t believe even Northern are so incompetent that they can’t say “it’s not Delay replay it’s a refund” rather than “it’s not Delay repay it’s fraud” How hopeless and hapless are they? They are totally useless. The trouble is, the handful of decent staff they have are now tarred with the same total incompetence brush by me. This company are completely totally and utterly useless. I can’t see how they could have handled it worse

 

[Starmill]

What I don't get is why Northern would bring fraud into it? If they genuinely think compensation isn't due, then reject the claim, fine. Rightly or wrongly so. But mentioning fraud is mad. At best, the company incites anger in their customer at being both denied their honest compensation and also accused of breaking the law. At worst there is a slander claim. How does Northern bringing it up gain them anything?

If there genuinely were a fraudulent claim being made, it would suit Northern's interest not to let on that they've been gathering evidence of this illegal activity.

If you are going to accuse someoe of crime then do it properly. Have the neccesary evidence and say so clearly. Saying that a claim is 'potentially fraudulent' is just gutless.

If I said that I thought that they were committing fraud, I would be eviscerated by the same forum members who here are trying to deflect and defend this nonsensical choice of words.

 

[najaB]

If I said that I thought that they were committing fraud, I would be eviscerated by the same forum members who here are trying to deflect and defend this nonsensical choice of words.

I don't think anyone is defending the letter as it's pretty clear that they've sent the wrong one. Either they misunderstood the OPs claim or understood it but sent the wrong reply.

 

[northwichcat]

Based on what's been posted in a new thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-decline-delay-repay-and-accuse-me-of-fraud.169845/ it seems if they reject a Delay Repay application the generic response used mentions the claim being potentially fraudulent.

 

[bnm]

. But mentioning fraud is mad. At best, the company incites anger in their customer at being both denied their honest compensation and also accused of breaking the law. At worst there is a slander claim.

Northern should not be using the word 'fraudulent' in the body of their replies to delay repay or refund claims. Regardless of any qualifying words such as 'potential'.Unless they are making an accusation backed up with evidence. Even then it should not be coming from a customer service bod, but the prosecutions team.

A couple of times now in response to this issue I've seen the suggestion that what Northern are writing in their responses is slander. What Northern have written is not slander. It can't be - it's written. Slander is defamatory speech about a person to one or more other people. Oh, and its not libel either. It's not been published.

Lets stop the incorrect claims of slander/libel.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Northern should not be using the word 'fraudulent' in the body of their replies to delay repay or refund claims. Regardless of any qualifying words such as 'potential'.Unless they are making an accusation backed up with evidence. Even then it should not be coming from a customer service bod, but the prosecutions team.

A couple of times now in response to this issue I've seen the suggestion that what Northern are writing in their responses is slander. What Northern have written is not slander. It can't be - it's written. Slander is defamatory speech about a person to one or more other people. Oh, and its not libel either. It's not been published.

Lets stop the incorrect claims of slander/libel.

So they can say what they like about people in an email? I guess that’s why they do it then. They’re lawyers will have said it’s ok.