Delay Repay shouldn't cover extreme weather

[bramling]

How’s it going so far then, any trees on lines?

Noticed XC saying they aren’t doing delay repay for cancelled trains on Sunday.

I applaud that.

Why should the industry fork out for an act of nature? It’s like when festivals and the like get cancelled due to severe weather - why should event organisers bear all the costs (which in a lot of cases will have already been heavily paid up and thus written off), or for that matter us all pay through insurance for a situation which although unlucky is also reasonably foreseeably possible?

 

[yorkie]

I applaud that.

Why should the industry fork out for an act of nature? It’s like when festivals and the like get cancelled due to severe weather - why should event organisers bear all the costs (which in a lot of cases will have already been heavily paid up and thus written off), or for that matter us all pay through insurance for a situation which although unlucky is also reasonably foreseeable possible?

I wouldn't expect you to like it, however - like it or not - Delay Repay applies regardless of the reason for the delay.

Delay Repay is measured against the contracted booked arrival time at the destination; if anyone is delayed accordingly on Sunday on an XC service due to the weather, they have a valid claim, regardless of what XC may say.

You and XC will just have to lump it.

 

[bramling]

I wouldn't expect you to like it, however - like it or not - Delay Repay applies regardless of the reason for the delay.

Delay Repay is measured against the contracted booked arrival time at the destination; if anyone is delayed accordingly on Sunday on an XC service due to the weather, they have a valid claim, regardless of what XC may say.

You and XC will just have to lump it.

Is it not the case though that any delay repay would be based on the emergency timetable?

Having said that, a cursory look at GN suggests the emergency timings are the same as normal sectional running times, in other words up to 100 mph. Clearly with trains restricted to half that they are going to lose time.

May have to lump it, but that doesn’t in my book make it right. In my view it isn’t for the taxpayer and farepayer to subsidise compo payments for an act of nature for which we can’t reasonably expect the railway to fully prepare against.

 

[yorkie]

Is it not the case though that any delay repay would be based on the emergency timetable?

It's basic contract law! The contracted arrival time is determined at the time the ticket is purchased; if a passenger obtains an itinerary with an arrival time of, say, 11:00 and they actually end up arriving at 12:00 then, regardless of the cause, they are delayed by 60 minutes.

May have to lump it, but that doesn’t in my book make it right. In my view it isn’t for the taxpayer and farepayer to subsidise compo payments for an act of nature for which we can’t reasonably expect the railway to fully prepare against.

OK, you can disagree all you want, but I can't see this changing anytime soon.

https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/customer-service/contact-us/delay-repay

If your CrossCountry train has been delayed by 30 minutes or more to the destination detailed on your ticket, you will be entitled to compensation. You can rest assured that your journey is covered whatever happens.

 

[edwin_m]

Maybe it's acceptable if the TOC offers the alternative of a full refund or travel previous/next day (including peak time if that is what the passenger needs, for example to get to a morning appointment when they intended to travel the night before). It would help encourage people not to travel on days like today when major disruption is foreseen and the fewer the passenger the easier everyone's job to deal with it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem with Delay Repay having "get-outs" is that they are overused - look at airlines. It's easier, therefore, for it to be no-fault.

 

[yorkie]

Maybe it's acceptable if the TOC offers the alternative of a full refund or travel previous/next day (including peak time if that is what the passenger needs, for example to get to a morning appointment when they intended to travel the night before). It would help encourage people not to travel on days like today when major disruption is foreseen and the fewer the passenger the easier everyone's job to deal with it.

Those options already do exist.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Those options already do exist.

They don't always, the option to travel the next day is usually "around the same time" which is almost never actually useful.

For instance, in my case (presently being stuck at Lancaster, though I've now decided to revert to my previous plan of staying here for a couple of days anyway rather than prat about), if I was an office worker I would want to be on the first train of the day tomorrow, not one at about noon, as that's the only way I'd avoid loss of a day's pay. But my Off Peak Return is not valid for that.

Therefore I would say that if this is declared, the ticket should become an Anytime Single (by TOC/route per the ticket) for the extra period of validity granted.

 

[yorkie]

They don't always, the option to travel the next day is usually "around the same time" which is almost never actually useful.

For instance, in my case (presently being stuck at Lancaster, though I've now decided to revert to my previous plan of staying here for a couple of days anyway rather than prat about), if I was an office worker I would want to be on the first train of the day tomorrow, not one at about noon, as that's the only way I'd avoid loss of a day's pay. But my Off Peak Return is not valid for that.

Therefore I would say that if this is declared, the ticket should become an Anytime Single (by TOC/route per the ticket) for the extra period of validity granted.

Surely Avanti are allowing that? LNER have stated that they are.

On days like today it should be compulsory for all train companies to allow this.

If it isn't the case, and some aren't allowing it, this is evidence that a new code of conduct for TOCs is required.

The Approved Code of Practice-Provision of Customer Information document was a good start, but it doesn't go far enough.

Also some TOCs (notably on the ECML) are attempting to flout not only Condition 28.2 of the National Rail Conditions of Travel and also this part of the document:

During disruptive incidents customers should not be discriminated against on the basis of operator.

TOCs only agreed to adopt this policy in the first place because the ORR forced them to

https://orr.gov.uk/rail/consumers/licence-obligations-to-consumers/passenger-information

In October 2016 the industry updated its code of practice to reflect the whole customer journey. The new document is published on the RDG website and includes the table of industry actions.

We continue to monitor delivery of the actions and remind licence holders of the need to published their plan and annual statement of progress....

There have been reports of unlawful charging of customers, contrary to the above principle and contrary to contract and consumer laws today. This is unacceptable.

The ORR need to do a lot more work in this area and I'd like to see Transport Focus and/or the Rail Ombudsman do more too.

 

[Snow1964]

I applaud that.

Why should the industry fork out for an act of nature? It’s like when festivals and the like get cancelled due to severe weather - why should event organisers bear all the costs (which in a lot of cases will have already been heavily paid up and thus written off), or for that matter us all pay through insurance for a situation which although unlucky is also reasonably foreseeably possible?

I think this is wrong, it’s a bit breezy with some yellow and amber weather warnings.

If there are red weather warnings then yes. But yellow and amber are so common (multiple times per year) that can’t be called severe

Delay repay should pay out, if it is caused an external third party problem then industry should sue others more and reclaim cost. Most householders have insurance which covers third part claims.

Should be a central fund for Acts of God, there must be an average amount for last few years so just need to assume this as long term cost, fund it monthly, and use it when needed.

 

[Aictos]

Maybe it's acceptable if the TOC offers the alternative of a full refund or travel previous/next day (including peak time if that is what the passenger needs, for example to get to a morning appointment when they intended to travel the night before). It would help encourage people not to travel on days like today when major disruption is foreseen and the fewer the passenger the easier everyone's job to deal with it.

When the OHL came down in the West Hampstead area last year, East Midlands Trains as the IC operator actually advised passengers that their tickets would be valid on specific days or they could get a a full refund.

I can't remember the actual details but I'm sure they relaxed ticket restrictions because of the disruption.

As to weather not being acceptable for delay repay, I'm sorry but actually @yorkie is quite right in what he is saying because any delay no matter what the cause entitles you to delay repay.

Example, I'm travelling on a Greater Anglia service and due to a passenger being taken ill, the train is taken out of service and I have to get the next service. Now if I'm now delayed by more then 15 minutes because the next train gets in 15 minutes later then the first train I was using then I'm entitled to delay repay end of.

 

[edwin_m]

I think this is wrong, it’s a bit breezy with some yellow and amber weather warnings.

If there are red weather warnings then yes. But yellow and amber are so common (multiple times per year) that can’t be called severe

Delay repay should pay out, if it is caused an external third party problem then industry should sue others more and reclaim cost. Most householders have insurance which covers third part claims.

Should be a central fund for Acts of God, there must be an average amount for last few years so just need to assume this as long term cost, fund it monthly, and use it when needed.

There seem to be a handful of occasions per year when disruption is forecast several days ahead. In recent years these forecasts has generally proved to be accurate - meaning actual disruption from objects on the line, floods, etc - not just a self-fulfilling prophecy when service is reduced in anticipation of something that doesn't actually happen. So it seems to me perverse when the operator has to pay out to all their passengers when it's patently impossible to carry them to destination within 15 or 30min of right time, and they know there is a significant risk they will also have to pay out for alternative transport or have to rescue passengers who end up stranded. Such a regime may even encourage more people to travel in the knowledge they will probably get a full or partial refund.

Hence my view that, rather like "void days" on season tickets, TOCs should be able to suspend Delay Repay for specified times and journey groups, provided they offer the choice of full refund or alternative travel at no extra cost on previous or following days. Potential passengers should be aware ahead of time that disruption is expected, and can make an informed decision on whether to take the risk, knowing the TOC will do what it can to get them there but it's unreasonable to expect the original schedule to be met.

 

[Belperpete]

The problem with a severe weather get-out would be who would decide what was severe-enough, and on what basis. And what companies and lines would be covered, as most warnings are far more localised than today's. There would then be innumerable complaints from people who were denied compensation when the weather in their area turned out not to be as severe as predicted. And arguments about how resilient the railway should be designed to be. The current system is at least simple and easy to understand.

 

[edwin_m]

The problem with a severe weather get-out would be who would decide what was severe-enough, and on what basis. And what companies and lines would be covered, as most warnings are far more localised than today's. There would then be innumerable complaints from people who were denied compensation when the weather in their area turned out not to be as severe as predicted. And arguments about how resilient the railway should be designed to be. The current system is at least simple and easy to understand.

The TOCs could decide as they do with season ticket void days. It wouldn't be a cost-free decision for them because they would have to accommodate passengers on other days including letting them use off-peak or advance tickets on peak days. It could even be combined into the void day regime so they have to offer an extra day on all season tickets. The need to make it specific to certain journeys is no worse than it is when they do this today.

 

[Belperpete]

TOCs should be able to suspend Delay Repay for specified times and journey groups, provided they offer the choice of full refund or alternative travel at no extra cost on previous or following days.

And provided that they are prepared to arrange and pay the cost of accommodation and meals for those forced to delay their return, in a similar manner to airlines.

Not all passengers may be aware of the potential disruption, or have much opportunity to change their date of return even if they are, e.g. those returning from holidays or work trips. Hotels will keep their rooms for their next bookings, so they will not be available for people forced to delay their return.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And provided that they are prepared to arrange and pay the cost of accommodation and meals for those forced to delay their return, in a similar manner to airlines.

Had a thought on this:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/should-the-railway-offer-travel-insurance.200048/

 

[edwin_m]

And provided that they are prepared to arrange and pay the cost of accommodation and meals for those forced to delay their return, in a similar manner to airlines.

Not all passengers may be aware of the potential disruption, or have much opportunity to change their date of return even if they are, e.g. those returning from holidays or work trips. Hotels will keep their rooms for their next bookings, so they will not be available for people forced to delay their return.

What I propose is motivated by sharing the pain between the passenger and the operator, and encouraging those people who don't have to travel on the day to change their arrangements. But I think offering free accommodation is taking it too far - people might start taking advantage when they could otherwise have stayed with relatives etc. On days and journeys when Delay Repay was suspended, the existing arrangement could remain for people who choose to travel when it appeared they had a prospect of getting to destination that day, but this turned out to be impossible.

 

[Belperpete]

The TOCs could decide as they do with season ticket void days. It wouldn't be a cost-free decision for them because they would have to accommodate passengers on other days including letting them use off-peak or advance tickets on peak days.

If what you mean is that the TOC would be required to run extra trains on the following days in order to accommodate all the extra passengers, then this might be acceptable. If it just meant that the passengers would all be forced into cramming into already over-crowded trains because there isn't the resources to run extra trains, then this would not be acceptable.

There is a big difference between commuting, and long-distance travel. In the case of a commuter, travelling on a season ticket, if he/she can't travel, the journey isn't made. In the case of long-distance travel, e.g. someone returning from holiday, or travelling to or from university, the journey still has to be made.

 

[Belperpete]

What I propose is motivated by sharing the pain between the passenger and the operator, and encouraging those people who don't have to travel on the day to change their arrangements. But I think offering free accommodation is taking it too far - people might start taking advantage when they could otherwise have stayed with relatives etc. On days and journeys when Delay Repay was suspended, the existing arrangement could remain for people who choose to travel when it appeared they had a prospect of getting to destination that day, but this turned out to be impossible.

So you would allow a TOC to claim a void day whenever they felt fit, and the people who need to travel, e.g. to get home from holiday, would be required to travel on a subsequent day, rammed into seriously over-crowded trains, and with no compensation whatsoever. I don't see what you are proposing as sharing the pain, just shifting it all onto the passenger.

 

[43096]

I wouldn't expect you to like it, however - like it or not - Delay Repay applies regardless of the reason for the delay.

Delay Repay is measured against the contracted booked arrival time at the destination; if anyone is delayed accordingly on Sunday on an XC service due to the weather, they have a valid claim, regardless of what XC may say.

You and XC will just have to lump it.

So, if you turn up at the station today and buy a ticket, then any Delay Repay is/should be measured against the emergency timetable, but if you bought a ticket a month ago Delay Repay should be against the planned timetable?

 

[yorkie]

So, if you turn up at the station today and buy a ticket, then any Delay Repay is/should be measured against the emergency timetable, but if you bought a ticket a month ago Delay Repay should be against the planned timetable?

Exactly that

 

[Bletchleyite]

So, if you turn up at the station today and buy a ticket, then any Delay Repay is/should be measured against the emergency timetable, but if you bought a ticket a month ago Delay Repay should be against the planned timetable?

Yes, and provided TOCs are behaving that is precisely how it does work.

 

[Snow1964]

So, if you turn up at the station today and buy a ticket, then any Delay Repay is/should be measured against the emergency timetable, but if you bought a ticket a month ago Delay Repay should be against the planned timetable?

Yes, against the advertised timetable at time of ticket sale

Quite simply shouldn’t sell advances for specific trains then choose not to operate them, if you need to subsequently cancel it, need to let people choose an alternative that suits them, not dictate can’t use some

 

[HSTEd]

Why should the industry fork out for an act of nature? It’s like when festivals and the like get cancelled due to severe weather - why should event organisers bear all the costs (which in a lot of cases will have already been heavily paid up and thus written off), or for that matter us all pay through insurance for a situation which although unlucky is also reasonably foreseeably possible?

Because the railway promised to get the passenger to the destination at the specified time, and is responsible for ensuring that outcome or paying the relevant penalty.
It's not the passenger's fault the railway is insufficiently well engineered to withstand reasonably foreseable weather.

And if you give the industry an inch, they will start blaming all cancellations or delays they possibly can on "weather".
"Oh it was too rainy for us to send the workmen to fix it promptly"

 

[Ianno87]

I applaud that.

Why should the industry fork out for an act of nature? It’s like when festivals and the like get cancelled due to severe weather - why should event organisers bear all the costs (which in a lot of cases will have already been heavily paid up and thus written off), or for that matter us all pay through insurance for a situation which although unlucky is also reasonably foreseeably possible?

Because the railway promised to get the passenger to the destination at the specified time, and is responsible for ensuring that outcome or paying the relevant penalty.
It's not the passenger's fault the railway is insufficiently well engineered to withstand reasonably foreseable weather.

And if you give the industry an inch, they will start blaming all cancellations or delays they possibly can on "weather".
"Oh it was too rainy for us to send the workmen to fix it promptly"

The railway industry does have to, within reason, make its network "weather proof". There is no question that this is, of course, exceedingly difficult (and probably impossible) for the most extreme conditions.

You are quite right that what defines "extreme" is incredibly subjective and up for debate. A random isolated gust of wind blowing the wires or a tree down...is that extreme weather or infrastructure that should be stronger?

I agree the right approach is probably to limit DR claims to only those tickets purchase before Do Not Travel warnings were issued.

 

[randyrippley]

Stuck

They don't always, the option to travel the next day is usually "around the same time" which is almost never actually useful.

For instance, in my case (presently being stuck at Lancaster, though I've now decided to revert to my previous plan of staying here for a couple of days anyway rather than prat about), if I was an office worker I would want to be on the first train of the day tomorrow, not one at about noon, as that's the only way I'd avoid loss of a day's pay. But my Off Peak Return is not valid for that.

Therefore I would say that if this is declared, the ticket should become an Anytime Single (by TOC/route per the ticket) for the extra period of validity granted.

Stuck in Lancaster!!??! No storm near here. Been sunny all weekend

 

[Bletchleyite]

Stuck in Lancaster!!??! No storm near here. Been sunny all weekend

No trains at Lancaster other than sporadic Barrow services for almost all day. RRBs much later on but by that time I'd booked into the Travelodge and given up, as the rest of the WCML was knackered too.

 

[randyrippley]

No trains at Lancaster other than sporadic Barrow services for almost all day. RRBs much later on but by that time I'd booked into the Travelodge and given up, as the rest of the WCML was knackered too.

Strange how local weather can be, virtually no sign of a storm in Morecambe
You were probably just as well avoiding the RRBs, apparently M6 was blocked at J33 and J31 with all traffic trying to use the A6 and Preston J29, would have been a very very slow journey

 

[The Ham]

There seem to be a handful of occasions per year when disruption is forecast several days ahead. In recent years these forecasts has generally proved to be accurate - meaning actual disruption from objects on the line, floods, etc - not just a self-fulfilling prophecy when service is reduced in anticipation of something that doesn't actually happen. So it seems to me perverse when the operator has to pay out to all their passengers when it's patently impossible to carry them to destination within 15 or 30min of right time, and they know there is a significant risk they will also have to pay out for alternative transport or have to rescue passengers who end up stranded. Such a regime may even encourage more people to travel in the knowledge they will probably get a full or partial refund.

Hence my view that, rather like "void days" on season tickets, TOCs should be able to suspend Delay Repay for specified times and journey groups, provided they offer the choice of full refund or alternative travel at no extra cost on previous or following days. Potential passengers should be aware ahead of time that disruption is expected, and can make an informed decision on whether to take the risk, knowing the TOC will do what it can to get them there but it's unreasonable to expect the original schedule to be met.

When there's expected travel problems due to storms it should be the case that TOC's do the following:
- advise passengers to contact them to arrange suitable other travel options with the TOC being required to accept any reasonable request, this would include those booked on services in the day either side of the weather event (the latter so that the TOC can create space for extra passengers)
- put a pause on selling of advanced tickets for the day either side of the weather event as well as the day(s) with a note to that effect on the booking engines as well as a warning that sure to adverse weather conditions that would be preferable to consider if their travel is required, so that people booking onto those services are aware that they could be subject to emergency timetables and could expect a busier than normal train.

Generally I think that the current setup is reasonable and fair.

The issue with the thought process on why should the taxpayer be funding these repayments is that in the greater scheme of things it would make little difference. In fact for any franchises which were already up and running it would likely just result in extra profits for the company.

The other thing to bear in mind is that some people will opt to use the train over flying for the very reason that they get a refund or partial refund for a fairly small delay. As such there's likely to be a cost implication of this was to be changed (i.e. fewer passengers overall). This could mean that the cost savings to the tax payer may not be as big as they first seam.

Especially given that at least 80% (and often over 90%) of rail subsidy is needed because of the enhancements being undertaken to the existing rail network. As such the impact on the overall subsidy in making such a change is going to be tiny.

Let's for argument's sake that it cuts the day to day spending subsidy from £300 million to £150 million (50% drop), that's only going to cut the overall subsidy from £5bn to £4.85bn (3% drop).

(2017/18 day to day subsidy was circa £170 million 2018/19 it was circa £500 million with other recent years typically falling within or close to this range, so £300 million is a fairly reasonable amount to use as an example).

 

[bramling]

It's basic contract law! The contracted arrival time is determined at the time the ticket is purchased; if a passenger obtains an itinerary with an arrival time of, say, 11:00 and they actually end up arriving at 12:00 then, regardless of the cause, they are delayed by 60 minutes.

OK, you can disagree all you want, but I can't see this changing anytime soon.

https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/customer-service/contact-us/delay-repay

I love the quote about "rest assured you're covered no matter what". Why on earth would I "rest assured" that I'm going to get some of my money back? Personally I'm more interested in getting to the destination on time, not seeing what soft of freeby I can extract out of someone else.