"Due to a short-notice change to the timetable"

[fraser158]

According to the LNER website various trains which extend to / original from North of Edinburgh are altered "... due to a short-notice change to the timetable."

What does this mean? Why has the timetable suddenly been changed?

*Edit*

Looking further, it seems to affect more LNER services that I first thought, not just the North of Edinburgh services.

 

[Failed Unit]

Either they have not got crew or trains. I must admit LNER seem to also be catching the bug of the last minute cancellations. The North of Edinburgh services are often getting turned at Edinburgh. But today seems as bad I have seen on LNER (on a non-disrupted day for infrastructure issues) for a long time.

 

[nr758123]

What does this mean? Why has the timetable suddenly been changed?

This appears to be the new standard non-excuse, and not just for LNER. I heard it used for Avanti, Northern and TPE in the space of half an hour whilst changing trains at Lancaster today.

 

[Horizon22]

If there’s a planning error this can sometimes be used. Or the implementation of an emergency timetable that hadn’t been fed through the previous day for whatever reason.

 

[800001]

This appears to be the new standard non-excuse, and not just for LNER. I heard it used for Avanti, Northern and TPE in the space of half an hour whilst changing trains at Lancaster today.

DFT instruction for TOcs to use this new reason when they have no crew to work a certain portion of the diagram.

 

[Horizon22]

DFT instruction for TOcs to use this new reason when they have no crew to work a certain portion of the diagram.

That’s quite disingenuous and certainly new usage of the cancellation / delay reason. I suppose it to remove the “shortage of train crew” reason which sometimes causes debate.

 

[306024]

It’s a simply awful phrase that is a statement, not an explanation.

Might as well just say your train is cancelled because it is.

 

[Pinus contorta]

Sweeping under the carpet comes to mind when I hear this.

 

[Failed Unit]

Bad again today, I guess LNER are in a no win situation.

If they are short of trains it will put a spotlight on the whole contract for the IEP and how it hasn't delivered.
If they are short of staff people will be doing comparisons with Avanti.

Either way the DfT don't look good. I heard Michael Green was going to be the new transport minister yesterday - I was a little slow on that one

 

[800001]

Bad again today, I guess LNER are in a no win situation.

If they are short of trains it will put a spotlight on the whole contract for the IEP and how it hasn't delivered.
If they are short of staff people will be doing comparisons with Avanti.

Either way the DfT don't look good. I heard Michael Green was going to be the new transport minister yesterday - I was a little slow on that one

They are not short of trains.

 

[XAM2175]

That’s quite disingenuous and certainly new usage of the cancellation / delay reason. I suppose it to remove the “shortage of train crew” reason which sometimes causes debate.

It’s a simply awful phrase that is a statement, not an explanation.

Might as well just say your train is cancelled because it is.

Exactly, it immediately begs the question: "what was the reason for the change?"

 

[Watershed]

Exactly, it immediately begs the question: "what was the reason for the change?"

The response to this FoI request may illuminate... (but it's not due for another month, and may in any event be refused or otherwise obstructed)

 

[XAM2175]

The response to this FoI request may illuminate... (but it's not due for another month, and may in any event be refused or otherwise obstructed)

Yeah I look forward to it being deemed commercial-in-confidence, hah.

 

[DelW]

Would this affect the right to delay repay (when appropriate)?

In other words, "cancellation" = our fault there's no train, so you can claim for delay

But "short notice change to the timetable" = your fault for not checking every 10 minutes up to time of departure, so sod off

May be too cynical? - but "blame the passengers whenever you can" seems to be the current policy.

 

[Watershed]

Would this affect the right to delay repay (when appropriate)?

In other words, "cancellation" = our fault there's no train, so you can claim for delay

But "short notice change to the timetable" = your fault for not checking every 10 minutes up to time of departure, so sod off

May be too cynical? - but "blame the passengers whenever you can" seems to be the current policy.

The TOCs claim, in the NRCoT and various Passenger's Charters, that they can change the timetable with effectively zero notice (at 10pm the night before) and base calculations of Delay Repay on this. This is often referred to as the Timetable of the Day (i.e. "whatever we feel like running today"!).

I have severe doubts as to the enforceability of this purported exclusion given the context of a consumer contract, the lack of notice and notice period etc.

What is unaffected is your right to (a reduced level of) compensation under the Passenger Rights and Obligations Regulation, for delays of an hour or more. This specifically states that conditions of carriage cannot reduce or infringe rights under the Regulation, and accordingly the NRCoT etc. "exclusions" are of no relevance to a claim under the Regulation.

Unfortunately this is symbolic of the short-termism afflicting the DfT and the wider government. They don't seem to grasp that mistreating passengers is hardly going to help improve the public image of the railways. Penny wise, pound foolish as always...

 

[Kite159]

The TOCs claim, in the NRCoT and various Passenger's Charters, that they can change the timetable with effectively zero notice (at 10pm the night before) and base calculations of Delay Repay on this. This is often referred to as the Timetable of the Day (i.e. "whatever we feel like running today"!).

I have severe doubts as to the enforceability of this purported exclusion given the context of a consumer contract, the lack of notice and notice period etc.

What is unaffected is your right to (a reduced level of) compensation under the Passenger Rights and Obligations Regulation, for delays of an hour or more. This specifically states that conditions of carriage cannot reduce or infringe rights under the Regulation, and accordingly the NRCoT etc. "exclusions" are of no relevance to a claim under the Regulation.

Unfortunately this is symbolic of the short-termism afflicting the DfT and the wider government. They don't seem to grasp that mistreating passengers is hardly going to help improve the public image of the railways. Penny wise, pound foolish as always...

And chances are before anything gets tested in court, the TOC will pay up to make the problem go away if someone starts threatening legal action under the Passenger Rights and Obligations regulations.

Agreed, it's not going the public image of the railways any good, especially when they rock up to a station to see the train they had booked tickets on showing as cancelled on the board meaning a delay for it to be thrown back saying "that train was cancelled before 10pm the night before, it's your fault for not checking the timetable, now go away")

 

[Watershed]

And chances are before anything gets tested in court, the TOC will pay up to make the problem go away if someone starts threatening legal action under the Passenger Rights and Obligations regulations.

Agreed, it's not going the public image of the railways any good, especially when they rock up to a station to see the train they had booked tickets on showing as cancelled on the board meaning a delay for it to be thrown back saying "that train was cancelled before 10pm the night before, it's your fault for not checking the timetable, now go away")

Precisely. Of course if you find yourself in that situation, it's going to be difficult to insist on going to Court (and even if you did, you wouldn't set a binding precedent until it reached the Court of Appeal).

 

[Bikeman78]

The TOCs claim, in the NRCoT and various Passenger's Charters, that they can change the timetable with effectively zero notice (at 10pm the night before) and base calculations of Delay Repay on this. This is often referred to as the Timetable of the Day (i.e. "whatever we feel like running today"!).

I don't think that would work if the passenger has an advance ticket. Unless the TOC contacts all the passengers in question and books them on to another train.

 

[Kite159]

Precisely. Of course if you find yourself in that situation, it's going to be difficult to insist on going to Court (and even if you did, you wouldn't set a binding precedent until it reached the Court of Appeal).

If anything it will be the small claims court, but even that won't set any precedent.

Unless an organisation like Which gets involved with a super complaint.

 

[XAM2175]

I don't think that would work if the passenger has an advance ticket. Unless the TOC contacts all the passengers in question and books them on to another train.

No, the NRCoT continues to automatically give those passengers the right to travel on a subsequent service that complies with the operator and route restrictions on their original ticket/s. What changed in the Feb 2022 update is that DR entitlement is now calculated based on the public timetable at 2200 the night before even if tickets were purchased before that time.

 

[800001]

No, the NRCoT continues to automatically give those passengers the right to travel on a subsequent service that complies with the operator and route restrictions on their original ticket/s. What changed in the Feb 2022 update is that DR entitlement is now calculated based on the public timetable at 2200 the night before even if tickets were purchased before that time.

To note, the trains are still shown on passenger information screens, as such customers are still entitled to delay repay.

 

[XAM2175]

To note, the trains are still shown on passenger information screens, as sick customers are still entitled to delay repay.

1. They won't show on the boards if they've been completely pulled from the the timetable, as is entirely possible and quite common.
2. Even if they do remain on the boards, as both Watershed and I have already said, the February 2022 NRCoT ostensibly changed the grounds for DR claims to the more restrictive "(32.1 and 33.1) Compensation is based on the delay in your arrival time at the destination station, as compared to the arrival time stated in the Published Timetable of the Day", with "Published Timetable of the Day" defined as "... the schedule of services, including rail replacement services, applicable on the day you travel or plan to travel (different to May or December timetable). These changes will be published no later than 22:00 the day before travel and available at www.nationalrail.co.uk".

 

[800001]

1. They won't show on the boards if they've been completely pulled from the the timetable, as is entirely possible and quite common.
2. Even if they do remain on the boards, as both Watershed and I have already said, the February 2022 NRCoT ostensibly changed the grounds for DR claims to the more restrictive "(32.1 and 33.1) Compensation is based on the delay in your arrival time at the destination station, as compared to the arrival time stated in the Published Timetable of the Day", with "Published Timetable of the Day" defined as "... the schedule of services, including rail replacement services, applicable on the day you travel or plan to travel (different to May or December timetable). These changes will be published no later than 22:00 the day before travel and available at www.nationalrail.co.uk".

1N33 Yesterday was a TSDB alteration prior to 10pm the night before.

LNER then did not publish that information until during the night, usually starting to send messages out at 1am. (01:12 LNER cancelled 1N33).

Therefore anyone currently checking LNER services after 10pm night before will still be seeing the normal full LNER timetable, until the alterations are then actioned over night.

LNER also advising customers when replying to tweets that they can claim delay repay.

 

[XAM2175]

1N33 Yesterday was a TSDB alteration prior to 10pm the night before. LNER then did not publish that information until during the night, usually starting to send messages out at 1am. (01:12 LNER cancelled 1N33). Therefore anyone currently checking LNER services after 10pm night before will still be seeing the normal full LNER timetable, until the alterations are then actioned over night. LNER also advising customers when replying to tweets that they can claim delay repay.

Well yes, they should be allowing it, because the cancellation wasn't part of the Published Timetable of the Day if it wasn't actually published until after 2200!

 

[800001]

Well yes, they should be allowing it, because the cancellation wasn't part of the Published Timetable of the Day if it wasn't actually published until after 2200!

Someone posted earlier that timetable is amended at short notice night before at 10pm, and that is the timetable that TOcs use for the following day!

LNER for example publish the timetable to the DFT Prior to 10pm, utisiling TSDB alteration process. Based on what you and others are saying that is what TOcs should be basing the delay repay to customer on.

All I was doing was pointing out that LNER, and maybe other tocs are not actually publishing that information until during the night.

The main reason for doing so, is not to get out of paying delay repay, it’s to remove the cancelled trains from the performance figures.

 

[XAM2175]

All I was doing was pointing out that LNER, and maybe other tocs are not actually publishing that information until during the night.

The main reason for doing so, is not to get out of paying delay repay, it’s to remove the cancelled trains from the performance figures.

Okay, that's fair, but if the changes are published to NRE before 2200 it also has (whether intended or not, or legal or not) the effect of getting them out of paying DR.

 

[Purple Train]

A cancellation basically is a short-notice change to the timetable, so saying that a train is cancelled because of a short-notice change to the timetable is not just deliberately avoiding the issue, it's also something of a tautology.
Are the DfT still wondering why people still aren't being enticed to return to rail?

 

[Bikeman78]

No, the NRCoT continues to automatically give those passengers the right to travel on a subsequent service that complies with the operator and route restrictions on their original ticket/s. What changed in the Feb 2022 update is that DR entitlement is now calculated based on the public timetable at 2200 the night before even if tickets were purchased before that time.

I don't see how that works. If someone has a walk up ticket then I suppose the TOC could claim that the 10:00 King's Cross to Edinburgh doesn't exist. With an advance, the passenger will have the departure and arrival time on their phone or on a print out. Not sure how the TOC can claim there is no delay in that situation. If the following train is busy, the displaced passenger might have to stand too.

 

[XAM2175]

I don't see how that works. If someone has a walk up ticket then I suppose the TOC could claim that the 10:00 King's Cross to Edinburgh doesn't exist. With an advance, the passenger will have the departure and arrival time on their phone or on a print out. Not sure how the TOC can claim there is no delay in that situation. If the following train is busy, the displaced passenger might have to stand too.

They're not claiming that there's no delay, just that said delay is not eligible for Delay Repay.

 

[Bikeman78]

They're not claiming that there's no delay, just that said delay is not eligible for Delay Repay.

Wonderful. I bet that goes down well. Fortunately I never bother with advances. Presumably one can still ask for a refund if the pre booked train vanishes?