Caledonian Sleeper delay repay

[Starmill]

The company is most definitely permitted to ask if the customer can accept the longer journey time, a revised arrival or departure time, or an amended origin or destination. But unless that's agreed upon (and of course there's proper consideration), then that's just a request and does not change the original contract.

In this case it's not even clear that the customer actually was asked, however. It sounds like the company just decided to make the changes itself.

 

[185143]

It is expressed in the published timetable which describes a feature of the service being contracted for, is taken into account by the consumer and, as such, is incorporated as a term of the contract by virtue of the Consumer Rights Act or even at common law.

Even if it is not incorporated into the contract it may potentially be actionable as a misrepresentation or a misstatement instead (depending on the exact circumstances).



If the parties agree, yes.

However, the TOC cannot impose such a variation or rescission of the contract unilaterally and any attempt so to do is highly likely to constitute unfair behaviour which is subject to separate legal restrictions on the trader.

If the passenger doesn’t agree to the change then the TOC is still subject to the binding legal obligations into which it freely entered and which it was paid to perform.


No, that is not sufficient. The TOC cannot rescind the contract unilaterally if the customer is not in breach and since he is not travelling for another ten weeks it is rather difficult to imagine what manner of repudiatory breach he could have committed.

Caledonian Sleeper did exactly that to me last year. I had a booking for the seated coach from Crewe to Inverness, after the date given for the seated coach to be reopened. The closure got extended and they emailed to say my booking was cancelled as the seated carriage now wouldn't be open, but we've attached a 50% off code for you to rebook a room. I looked at the rooms and it was the height of summer so the cheapest room was nearly double what I'd paid for the seat. I didn't find that acceptable in the slightest so told them to stuff it and didn't travel at all.

 

[williamn]

Just for context this was the message I received regarding the second journey. Delay repay isn’t mentioned whereas it explicitly was the first time.

Dear Guest, due to increased absences of safety critical staff scheduled to operate our train service?s we have had to make amendments to our timetables from Sunday 5th to Friday 10th September 2021. To keep as many of our guests moving as possible in these challenging times, we have taken the decision to join our Glasgow and Edinburgh services with a joint termination at Edinburgh Waverley only and not Glasgow Central as booked originally. For further information, please visit our Service Alterations Page<https://www.sleeper.scot/service-alterations/>

 

[35B]

It is expressed in the published timetable which describes a feature of the service being contracted for, is taken into account by the consumer and, as such, is incorporated as a term of the contract by virtue of the Consumer Rights Act or even at common law.

Even if it is not incorporated into the contract it may potentially be actionable as a misrepresentation or a misstatement instead (depending on the exact circumstances).



If the parties agree, yes.

However, the TOC cannot impose such a variation or rescission of the contract unilaterally and any attempt so to do is highly likely to constitute unfair behaviour which is subject to separate legal restrictions on the trader.

If the passenger doesn’t agree to the change then the TOC is still subject to the binding legal obligations into which it freely entered and which it was paid to perform.


No, that is not sufficient. The TOC cannot rescind the contract unilaterally if the customer is not in breach and since he is not travelling for another ten weeks it is rather difficult to imagine what manner of repudiatory breach he could have committed.

Thank you for those points. If I were travelling by air, the airline would have the ability to vary my schedule considerably to my detriment notwithstanding CRA and unfair terms provisions; what are the features that deny a rail operator the ability to do likewise? An airline may decide that it no longer wishes to serve Anytown, and may cancel the flights; how is a TOC prohibited from doing likewise?

 

[Starmill]

what are the features that deny a rail operator the ability to do likewise?

Not having chosen to write it into your contract?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2021 ==

An airline may decide that it no longer wishes to serve Anytown, and may cancel the

There's no suggestion of it being prohibited. They're at liberty to do so. However, that choice triggers contract renegotiation with any current parties. If no renegotiation is successful then the rail provider needs to offer alternative transport.

 

[island]

If no renegotiation is successful then the rail provider needs to offer alternative transport.

…or, at its option, damages for breach of contract, if the customer indeed suffers damage from the breach. The customer will of course be obliged to mitigate their losses.

 

[Cantab26]

Thank you for those points. If I were travelling by air, the airline would have the ability to vary my schedule considerably to my detriment notwithstanding CRA and unfair terms provisions; what are the features that deny a rail operator the ability to do likewise? An airline may decide that it no longer wishes to serve Anytown, and may cancel the flights; how is a TOC prohibited from doing likewise?

Without going into the details, aviation is subject to different regulation and legal requirements.

 

[Watershed]

If I were travelling by air, the airline would have the ability to vary my schedule considerably to my detriment notwithstanding CRA and unfair terms provisions; what are the features that deny a rail operator the ability to do likewise?

Airline conditions of carriage invariably state that departure and arrival times may be varied. Usually they will also state that a variation of less than X hours is not to be deemed a material variation of contract.

Obviously some carriers may take the Michael with such clauses, but so long as X is sufficiently low, such clauses will generally be held enforceable.

The NRCoT contain no equivalent clause and therefore TOCs have no right to effect a change to the contracted timings after booking.

Nevertheless, some TOCs purport to exclude compensation if they change their timetable before the day of travel - although, at the very least, the NRCoT minima would prevail.