Why are there no clear rules on what should happen when a train is cancelled?

[XAM2175]

When the next Lumo service is able to run, comparable transport conditions certainly mean a Lumo service, right?

I can't see how it wouldn't.

Of course, just waiting for the next Lumo service to run is already permitted by the NRCoT.

 

[Haywain]

I can't see how it wouldn't.

Of course, just waiting for the next Lumo service to run is already permitted by the NRCoT.

Yes, I think it is intended to mean st a future date.

 

[Watershed]

When the next Lumo service is able to run, comparable transport conditions certainly mean a Lumo service, right?

Not necessarily. Comparable transport conditions refers to factors such as the number of changes, the journey time and the class of travel.

And the phrase "continuation or re-routing" is the same for the right to travel on a later date, as it is for the right to travel at the earliest opportunity (where it is well established that this may mean travelling on a different TOC to the originally planned one).

 

[HarryF]

I’m a bit late to this thread but I wish there was a clear understanding of what happens when an LNER train is cancelled. I was yelled at by a train manager for booking the cancelled train “it’s always cancelled, anyone with any sense would avoid it”

So my question is, If an LNER train is cancelled is there a different policy to say, if a Thameslink train was cancelled?

 

[XAM2175]

So my question is, If an LNER train is cancelled is there a different policy to say, if a Thameslink train was cancelled?

No, that TM was just being a twit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The exact wording of the article is "continuation or re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at a later date at the passenger’s convenience", without any mention of it needing to be reasonable.

However, I made that statement with the intent it be read as applying only until the next Lumo service was able to run. I personally wouldn't expect to be allowed to travel on an LNER service with a Lumo-only ticket at some distant point in the future on the strength of this regulation - but on the wording of the regulation alone there is perhaps an argument that doing exactly that would be permitted.

Your dutiful concern for your employer's revenue is noted regardless, though

I suspect that wording is such because of the number of infrequent operations in the EU. If for instance your NightJet is cancelled, which operates only once per 24 hours or sometimes less often than that, it would be reasonable to want to be put up in a hotel then to go forward on a suitable day train, such as an ICE or TGV, which are not operated by OeBB.

And yes, regarding LNER, Lumo could simply purchase passengers tickets at the full public fare for them to travel with them. I don't think (correct me if I am wrong) that there would be scope for LNER to refuse the sale of those tickets simply because the person happening to purchase them was a Lumo manager with his corporate credit card. And this is exactly what would happen were it easyJet needing to reroute passengers on BA - there is no system to arrange acceptance there at all because easyJet does not and cannot issue endorseable IATA e-tickets. (It may be possible between legacy airlines which do, though).

 

[Haywain]

Lumo could simply purchase passengers tickets at the full public fare for them to travel with them. I don't think (correct me if I am wrong) that there would be scope for LNER to refuse the sale of those tickets simply because the person happening to purchase them was a Lumo manager with his corporate credit card.

That’s what Grand Central would do in their early days before they realised there were easier ways of doing things.

 

[XAM2175]

I don't think (correct me if I am wrong) that there would be scope for LNER to refuse the sale of those tickets simply because the person happening to purchase them was a Lumo manager with his corporate credit card.

I would certainly hope that such refusal is not permitted, but the PRO makes no mention either way.

Neither does EU261, for that matter, although there is a proposal to amend those regulations such that there would be a price control mechanism for instances of an airline needing to re-route its passengers with a different airline that requires new tickets be bought, but it was held up for years until late 2019 by dispute between the UK and Spain as to how it would apply to Gibraltar airport (seriously) and a few other squabbles. It's due to go back before the Commission and Parliament either later this year or sometime next year, though obviously it won't apply to the UK now. The relevant addition is:

Art. 8 Para. 5: Where passengers choose the option referred to in paragraph 1(b) [continuation or re-routing at earliest opportunity], they shall, subject to availability, have the right to re-routing via another air carrier or another mode of transport where the operating air carrier cannot transport the passenger on its own services and in time to arrive at the final destination within 12 hours of the scheduled arrival time. Notwithstanding Article 22(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, the other air carrier or other transport operator shall not charge the contracting carrier a price that goes beyond the average price paid by its own passengers for equivalent services in the last three months.

 

[mildertduck]

That’s what Grand Central would do in their early days before they realised there were easier ways of doing things.

I have a vague memory of a member of train crew walking down a train cancelled at an intermediate point handing out tickets for a different service. From recollection, it was somewhere on the ECML at a commuter stop outside London, and the tickets were for (then) FCC trains. Perhaps this was one of those times.