Delay repay where both companies are at fault

[djjawuk]

I've not seen a similar scenario on this forum so here's what happened to me tonight.

Off peak return, on the return leg Milton Keynes to Huddersfield. Caught the 1750 MK to Manchester Piccadilly, arrived at 1950, 23 minutes late (so over the 15 minutes threshold for Avanti).

1947 TransPennine service was delayed so I could have made the connection but as I was about to get on, it was cancelled, as was the train after that (both due to crew shortages). Had to get the 2017, arrived Huddersfield 10 minutes late, at 2104.

My original scheduled arrival at Huddersfield was 2021, so do I claim from Avanti for the whole delay of over 30 minutes? Or Avanti for part and TPE for part? Both parties are at fault, not just Avanti, as the bulk of the delay was caused by TPE's continuing failure to employ enough staff to operate the timetable they signed up to.

I think it just sums up the unnecessary complexity for the passenger - surely it shouldn't be my problem which company I claim from?

 

[jtuk]

From what you've posted, your whole journey saw your arrive a quarter of an hour early?

 

[djjawuk]

From what you've posted, your whole journey saw your arrive a quarter of an hour early?

Sorry, edited now!

 

[yorkie]

It's to the company that (initially) caused the delay.

In this case I'd say TPE caused the delay as you were able to make the train had it not been cancelled.

 

[jtuk]

In that case I'd go with TPE, as it seemed to be mostly their issues that were the primary cause of delays in getting you to Huddersfield

 

[sheff1]

I would go with Avanti.

Although the booked connection (1947 TPE) was eventually cancelled due to lack of train crew, if the train crew had been available it would, presumably, have left on time i.e. before the arrival from Milton Keynes.

Either way you claim for the 43 minutes delay reaching your destination (Huddersfield).

 

[yorkie]

Although the booked connection (1947 TPE) was eventually cancelled due to lack of train crew, if the train crew had been available it would, presumably, have left on time i.e. before the arrival from Milton Keynes.

True. But you claim on what actually happened, not what could have theoretically happened.

I agree that had it left on time, the claim would have been with Avanti; equally if TPE had been running everything to time the delay would have been reduced as the following TPE service was also cancelled, and the train that was eventually caught was further delayed.

So I can't see how TPE can possibly deny they caused this delay.

 

[sheff1]

So I can't see how TPE can possibly deny they caused this delay.

I think they might give it a go .

Hopefully the OP will report back once their claim has been dealt with.

 

[Haywain]

As I see it, Avanti are responsible for the delay due to the 23 minute late arrival of their service. I find it strange that this is not being seen as the primary cause.

 

[yorkie]

As I see it, Avanti are responsible for the delay due to the 23 minute late arrival of their service. I find it strange that this is not being seen as the primary cause.

Ok so let's say the Avanti train had arrived at, say 1940, and the passenger had boarded the 1947, it would be odd to say Avanti had caused it in that case, so what's different?

If a train is cancelled it becomes impossible to catch it.

 

[Haywain]

Ok so let's say the Avanti train had arrived at, say 1940, and the passenger had boarded the 1947, it would be odd to say Avanti had caused it in that case, so what's different?

If a train is cancelled it becomes impossible to catch it.

My view is that the claim should go to Avanti. Do you believe they would reject the claim because the TPE train was cancelled? The principle of DR is that it’s the company responsible for the first delay that settles the claim. In this case that company was Avanti.

Edited to add: The specific difference is that the Avanti service arrived at 19:50, so the 19:47 was taken out of the equation and the next available train was at 20:17.

 

[djjawuk]

Thanks everybody - I'll start with TPE. I should point out that they didn't only cancel the 1947, they cancelled the one after (2008), which is why I ended up on the 2017, adding to the delay. I'll let you know how I get on!

 

[kieron]

If the 17:50 had arrived at 19:27 as it was supposed to, you would have had time to catch the delayed 19:35 to York for an arrival in Huddersfield at 20:45. Whether you would have known to catch the 19:35 is another matter, as the 19:47 would have got there sooner if it had run on time.

I'd probably have sent the claim to Avanti, as the delay to their service may have delayed your arrival in Huddersfield. I hope it all works out for you, though.

EDIT: Cross out an incorrect statement.

 

[yorkie]

If the 17:50 had arrived at 19:27 as it was supposed to, you would have had time to catch the delayed 19:35 to York for an arrival in Huddersfield at 20:45.

True but did the failure to arrive into Piccadilly cause the delay to the overall journey, given that this train wasn't a valid connection?

Whether you would have known to catch the 19:35 is another matter, as the 19:47 would have got there sooner if it had run on time.

I'd probably have sent the claim to Avanti, as the delay to their service may have delayed your arrival in Huddersfield. I hope it all works out for you, though.

In my mind, it's too 'theoretical' to say it's not TPE's delay; I thought Delay Repay was meant to be based on what actually happened and on who actually caused the delay.

Yes, if more than one company causes delay, you send it to the first company who caused it, but if the Avanti train had been on time, it's difficult to argue an invalid onward connection should have been caught.

 

[djjawuk]

Just to update: I claimed from TPE (so the second company in the chain) and they've just paid me half the return portion of the fare as the delay was 30 - 59 minutes. Thanks for the advice here!

 

[kieron]

arrival should be 20:41

True but did the failure to arrive into Piccadilly cause the delay to the overall journey, given that this train wasn't a valid connection?


In my mind, it's too 'theoretical' to say it's not TPE's delay; I thought Delay Repay was meant to be based on what actually happened and on who actually caused the delay.

Working out who is responsible for a delay when two companies' trains are delayed is theoretical by its nature. You're not just comparing what happened with what should have happened. You're also looking at what would have happened if the first train had run on time, but everything else happened as it did on the day.

It's reasonable to say that you would have waited for your booked train, especially if you had reserved a seat. It's also reasonable to say you would have caught the first train you can which is going in the right direction. In one case, Avanti caused a delay (from 24 minutes late to 43). In the other it's all due to TPE..

I don't know what you mean by "wasn't a valid connection" in this situation, since the minimum connection time at Manchester Piccadilly is 10 minutes and a passenger who arrived when the Avanti train was due in would have had 15 minutes to catch the York train.

The important thing, though, is that someone has paid out the correct amount for the delay experienced. I think we can all be pleased about that.

 

[yorkie]

Glad to hear they paid out

I don't know what you mean by "wasn't a valid connection" in this situation..

You brought the 19:35 into the discussion (I was hoping it wouldn't be!) though I see you crossed it off; in my opinion that over-complicates the discussion and it's best to keep things simple (if the Avanti was on time the 19:35 wasn't a valid connection but in practise it would have been feasible for most people to make it, but we can't go on that basis!).