TOC referring Delay Repay claim to another TOC

[TUC]

I had a journey which involved several TOCs, starting with a journey on South Western Railway and finishing on Northern Trains. I was over 15 minutes late due to Northern on the final leg. I therefore submitted a Delay Repay claim to Northern. I have received a rejection of the claim from SWR. I will challenge this, but I am surprised at the claim being sent onto them. As Northern was the cause of the delay, shouldn't it have dealt with the claim?

 

[island]

TOCs can forward DelayRepay claims to other TOCs where the other TOC is the appropriate one to process the claim. From your post I can’t say whether that’s right or wrong.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

I had a journey which involved several TOCs, starting with a journey on South Western Railway and finishing on Northern Trains. I was over 15 minutes late due to Northern on the final leg. I therefore submitted a Delay Repay claim to Northern. I have received a rejection of the claim from SWR. I will challenge this, but I am surprised at the claim being sent onto them. As Northern was the cause of the delay, shouldn't it have dealt with the claim?

A key thing here would be to know what trains you travelled on and how late they were to each connection point (and your destination) if, as you claim, Northern were fully responsible for the delay, then they would indeed be expected to give you delay repay.

 

[JamesT]

I'm waiting for LNER to come back to me. They referred a claim to TPE, even though I never travelled on a TPE train during my journey. (XC, Avanti, then LNER). TPE understandably bounced the claim back, but it's all gone quiet.

 

[londonbridge]

A key thing here would be to know what trains you travelled on and how late they were to each connection point (and your destination) if, as you claim, Northern were fully responsible for the delay, then they would indeed be expected to give you delay repay.

Yes, we would need to know the full details of the journey and of the delay (when it occurred and how it was caused) before advising on which TOC should be dealing with the claim.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

I have had instances where I've made a DR claim to the correct TOC and their automated response has forwarded it to a different TOC. Only for the second TOC's automated response refer it back to the first. It was probably at that point that the first human looked at the claim and it was settled very quickly.

I have received a rejection of the claim from SWR.

Is it just a straight forward rejection, or have SWR said they have referred it back to Northern?

 

[TUC]

I have had instances where I've made a DR claim to the correct TOC and their automated response has forwarded it to a different TOC. Only for the second TOC's automated response refer it back to the first. It was probably at that point that the first human looked at the claim and it was settled very quickly.



Is it just a straight forward rejection, or have SWR said they have referred it back to Northern?

Straightforward rejection, saying the delay was less than 15 minutes, even though I supplied specific details of each leg of the journey, showing that the Northern Service was over 15 minutes late.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

That's probably because their automated system can see that no SWT train delayed you. I suggest you post your intended and actual itineraries here, so that one of the forum experts can advise whether you have a valid claim and if so, which TOC is responsible.

If it is Northern as you suspect, you can then complain to them, as opposed to SWT, that your claim was incorrectly passed on to another TOC and ask them to look at it again.

 

[TUC]

That's probably because their automated system can see that no SWT train delayed you.

That does become a circular argument though if the only reason SWT is looking at the claim is because Northern forwarded it to them even though the claim did not suggest that SWT was the cause of the delay.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

It's a problem if Northern's system rejects a valid claim and incorrectly passes it on. It's also a problem if SWT's automated system cannot recognise the difference between an invalid claim and one which is valid, but is the responsibility of another TOC. In your case the result is; computer says, no!

You need to get a human, ideally at the TOC responsible, to look at your claim. The best way to do that is by writing a formal complaint to the TOC you believe has wrongly rejected it. If you believe that's Northern, complain to them. But I would advise getting the opinion of one of the many helpful experts here to be certain of the basis of your DR claim and therefore your complaint.

 

[redreni]

This is a good example of an initiative that is passenger-friendly in theory, but not in practice. The passenger-friendly element can't survive contact with the TOCs.

If a claim has been made to TOC A and forwarded by TOC A to TOC B, it should not be open to TOC B to reply to the claimant rejecting the claim on the basis that TOC B wasn't responsible for the delay. They should send the claim to the TOC they think was responsible (even if that's TOC A).

Otherwise, you get this problem where any claim for a journey involving more than one TOC can very easily get forwarded inappropriately and then rejected not because the claim isn't valid, but simply because it's been forwarded inappropriately.

Personally I would much rather, if the TOC I've claimed from thinks another TOC is responsible, that they replied to me to tell me that. That way I can take the matter up with them if I don't agree. If I really have claimed from the wrong company then it's not especially unreasonable to expect me to fill in another form.

(It may be, of course, that ministers are quite keen on any initiative that makes it easier for TOCs to reject delay repay claims, since they don't seem to think passengers are paying enough as it is so won't like giving money back, and (paradoxically) they do not appear to want people to travel by train and seem oblivious or indifferent to the impact driving down passenger numbers will inevitably have on revenue).

 

[HurdyGurdy]

Personally I would much rather, if the TOC I've claimed from thinks another TOC is responsible, that they replied to me to tell me that.

To be fair to the TOCs concerned, in all of the cases where I have seen DR claims forwarded, that has been the case. It's usually because the claimant has made the error of sending a claim to the TOC they purchased from, rather than the one which delayed them in the first instance. So in cases like that, automatically forwarding the claim to the right TOC, as well as informing the claimant, it is attempting to be passenger friendly.

 

[Haywain]

If a claim has been made to TOC A and forwarded by TOC A to TOC B, it should not be open to TOC B to reply to the claimant rejecting the claim on the basis that TOC B wasn't responsible for the delay. They should send the claim to the TOC they think was responsible (even if that's TOC A).

According to post #7, the claim has not been rejected on the basis of responsibility but on the basis of it being less than 15 minutes.

 

[Deerfold]

According to post #7, the claim has not been rejected on the basis of responsibility but on the basis of it being less than 15 minutes.

Although the OP has said their train wasn't the late one.

 

[Haywain]

Although the OP has said their train wasn't the late one.

Indeed, but there's a difference between 'not delayed by 15 minutes' and 'not delayed by this TOC'. It may be that the OP has fallen foul of the "Published Timetable of the Day".

 

[redreni]

Straightforward rejection, saying the delay was less than 15 minutes, even though I supplied specific details of each leg of the journey, showing that the Northern Service was over 15 minutes late.

How late the Northern train was is not necessarily relevant. It's how late you arrived at your destination.

Edit: Though on reading your first post, I see the Northern leg was the final one, so it is relevant.

 

[TUC]

Indeed, but there's a difference between 'not delayed by 15 minutes' and 'not delayed by this TOC'. It may be that the OP has fallen foul of the "Published Timetable of the Day".

My final train of the journey was shown on RTT as being 17 minutes late on arrival.

I also now notice that I received two emails in quick succession from SWT, one saying 'Thank you for submitting your delay repay claim to South Western Railway' (which I presume in reality was when Northern forwarded the claim to SWT), and another two minutes later declining the claim, which does not suggest anything but automated scrutiny took place.

 

[yorkie]

This is typical of Northern.

I'd appeal; inform Northern you did not consent to them forwarding the claim - erroneously - to a TOC who did not cause the delay, and state that SWR - quite correctly - rejected the claim because they did not cause it.

If Northern refuse, ask if you are in deadlock, and the next stage is the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman is almost as clueless as Northern but this should be such a clear and obvious claim that even the Ombudsman might actually get it right.

Edit: "should' instead of "would", as per the reply below, we shouldn't be too optimistic!

 

[Travelmonkey]

A game of DR football is afoot wonder if they'll pass it too the 3rd TOC you used.

I know in the past I have had it between Avanti and EMR, EMR tried to claim their cancelled train was Avanti's fault to whit the claim was passed back and I tweeted both TOCs to see what the crack was in the end EMR did give me my money, I'm currently waiting on a XC claim for a missed connection onto a EMR so time will tell if I'm placed into the pass the parcel of delay attribution.

 

[yorkie]

For my proposal, see:

Delay Repay should be provided by retailers

The current system, whereby a refund request goes to the retailer but a delay repay request goes to the TOC who is deemed to have caused the delay, is not fit for purpose. Passengers get confused and not only that but TOCs themselves have been known, on numerous occasions, to erroneously palm...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Deafdoggie]

The Ombudsman is almost as clueless as Northern but this would be such a clear and obvious claim that even the Ombudsman might actually get it right.

I admire your optimism

 

[Travelmonkey]

A game of DR football is afoot wonder if they'll pass it too the 3rd TOC you used.

I know in the past I have had it between Avanti and EMR, EMR tried to claim their cancelled train was Avanti's fault to whit the claim was passed back and I tweeted both TOCs to see what the crack was in the end EMR did give me my money, I'm currently waiting on a XC claim for a missed connection onto a EMR so time will tell if I'm placed into the pass the parcel of delay attribution.

As I suspected, wonder if EMR will ping it back to Cross-country,

*edit photo is a screen grab of an email from Cross-country referring my claim to EMR

Text says:
Thank you for your correspondence, which we received here on 18/09/2023.

Unfortunately, I am unable to comment on your correspondence as the service is not operated by CrossCountry Trains. Therefore, I have forwarded your correspondence to:

East Midlands Railway DR
Freepost EMR DELAY REPAY
03457 125 678
contact@eastmidlandsrailway.co.uk

*

 

[HurdyGurdy]

wonder if EMR will ping it back to Cross-country

I suspect that's exactly what EMR's automated response will be.

In the meantime it may be worth replying to CrossCountry's email (put the XC-yymmdd-aaaa reference as the subject line) stating that despite the automated response you've received, it was a CrossCountry service which delayed you. There's a chance a human might read your reply and you break out of the auto-responder ping pong.

 

[Alex365Dash]

Personally I would much rather, if the TOC I've claimed from thinks another TOC is responsible, that they replied to me to tell me that. That way I can take the matter up with them if I don't agree. If I really have claimed from the wrong company then it's not especially unreasonable to expect me to fill in another form.

This has been my past experience with Delay Repay, where after claiming with Lumo for their cancelled train, they sent my claim to Thameslink because my first leg was a rail replacement bus.

They did tell me they were doing so, which allowed me to appeal my Lumo decision with them and get them to pay out. They eventually decided to give out a cheque instead of bank transfer which was issued by First Hull Trains!

 

[Travelmonkey]

I suspect that's exactly what EMR's automated response will be.

In the meantime it may be worth replying to CrossCountry's email (put the XC-yymmdd-aaaa reference as the subject line) stating that despite the automated response you've received, it was a CrossCountry service which delayed you. There's a chance a human might read your reply and you break out of the auto-responder ping pong.

I have emailed them both back as well as reaching out too both TOCs on X (twitter) though on nightshift the EMR admin was quite helpful having a look and XC never did pass the file on, not sure if I'm past the statute of limitations now though,