Delay Repay Claim - GN or LNER?

[jfowkes]

On Thursday 25th July my partner and I travelled from Huntingdon (HUN) to Edinburgh (EDB).

High level summary, we were delayed 66 minutes getting to Edinburgh - I don't think there's any doubt that I have a valid claim. The question is who should the claim be submitted to.

Our original itinerary was:

1. 1836 - 1853 HUN to Peterborough, PBO (GN)
2. 1919 - 2316 PBO to EDB (LNER)

Our tickets were split, HUN to ALM (Alnmouth) and ALM to EDB.

Due to a fatality at/near Hitchin, the ECML was extremely chaotic that evening and our actual travel was:

1. 1837 - 1900 HUN to PBO (i.e. the scheduled GN service was more-or-less on time - though this was actually a different delayed GN service that happened to arrive at HUN at about the time that the cancelled 1836 would have)
2. 1918 - 2009 PBO to Doncaster, DON (the first northbound train from PBO, and thinking we would perhaps need to continue to Leeds and change onto an XC or TPE there)
3. 2116 - 0022 DON to EDB (first train to EDBI - this train did stop at ALM, just in case there was any doubt about the usage of the split ticket on this train)

So we arrived 7 minutes late into PBO and 66 minutes late into EDB.

Here's the crux: I originally submitted a delay repay claim to LNER for this, and their system said "go to GN, it's their problem". I submitted to GN, and their system has said "go to LNER, it's their problem".

Before I start ringing customer service people - who is right? Who do I actually need to submit the claim to?

 

[SuspectUsual]

LNER, surely?

Yes, GN delayed you but not in a meaningful way - you got to PBO in time to make the LNER train (and indeed you left PBO a minute early against your planned schedule)

 

[Watershed]

LNER were wrong to deny and redirect your claim to GN - the slight delay to your GN service had no impact on your journey, as you still arrived at PBO in plenty of time to catch your connecting LNER service. In fact you managed to catch an earlier LNER service from PBO than the one you were booked on. Had the GN service arrived at, say, 1916 then it would be a different story, but that was not the case.

I would get back to LNER and ask them to pay the compensation that is due. It should be 100% of the "relevant portion" of the tickets you held (i.e. presumably their entire value as there are no return tickets available based on a split point of ALM).

 

[yorkie]

Definitely LNER.

 

[jfowkes]

Thanks all, I will commence badgering.

(I did think it was odd that LNER sent me to GN, but you know, I try to play along with the system until it's obviously broken)

 

[swing]

the slight delay to your GN service had no impact on your journey

Looking back at the times from that evening, the original itinerary was for the Great Northern 18:36 train (1P86), which was cancelled at its origin of Kings Cross, and didn't run at all; by coincidence, one of the few trains that did run that evening was the 9J50 Thameslink Horsham to Peterborough, which was running 16L when it arrived at Huntingdon at 18:36, picking up @jfowkes (plus partner) and left at 18:37, arriving Peterborough at 19:00, now 18L.

Does the fact the Great Northern train in the itinerary was cancelled explain why LNER think they shouldn't be paying out, even though that didn't lead to the OP actually being delayed? Also, the train caught arrived at Peterborough 18L, which is enough to trigger delay repay on Great Northern / Thameslink; could that have affected LNER's view?

In case it complicates things further, the 19:19 LNER Peterborough to Edinburgh from the itinerary was also cancelled at Kings Cross and didn't run.

[Note, I'm asking whether it might explain why LNER think it's not their responsibility (eg because the first train was cancelled), rather than commenting on whether that actually makes them liable, given that at that point, the OP was only slightly delayed in their arrival at Peterborough]

 

[SuspectUsual]

Does the fact the Great Northern train in the itinerary was cancelled explain why LNER think they shouldn't be paying out, even though that didn't lead to the OP actually being delayed?

Possibly, but they really should be looking at what happened, not just what didn’t happen

Also, the train caught arrived at Peterborough 18L, which is enough to trigger delay repay on Great Northern / Thameslink; could that have affected LNER's view?

That’s irrelevant. If it had been a 30 minute connection all would be well in that situation. Again, they need to look at what happened

 

[yorkie]

Looking back at the times from that evening, the original itinerary was for the Great Northern 18:36 train (1P86), which was cancelled at its origin of Kings Cross, and didn't run at all; by coincidence, one of the few trains that did run that evening was the 9J50 Thameslink Horsham to Peterborough, which was running 16L when it arrived at Huntingdon at 18:36, picking up @jfowkes (plus partner) and left at 18:37, arriving Peterborough at 19:00, now 18L.

Does the fact the Great Northern train in the itinerary was cancelled explain why LNER think they shouldn't be paying out, even though that didn't lead to the OP actually being delayed?

This doesn't justify LNER's actions, however it does identify an inadequacy and flaw in their system.

Also, the train caught arrived at Peterborough 18L, which is enough to trigger delay repay on Great Northern / Thameslink; could that have affected LNER's view?

No; DR is claimed for the entire journey, not individual legs

In case it complicates things further, the 19:19 LNER Peterborough to Edinburgh from the itinerary was also cancelled at Kings Cross and didn't run.

[Note, I'm asking whether it might explain why LNER think it's not their responsibility (eg because the first train was cancelled), rather than commenting on whether that actually makes them liable, given that at that point, the OP was only slightly delayed in their arrival at Peterborough]

They are probably not thinking about it; just identifying an issue with the first booked train in the itinerary. It's a fundamental flaw in their logic.

 

[jfowkes]

Does the fact the Great Northern train in the itinerary was cancelled explain why LNER think they shouldn't be paying out, even though that didn't lead to the OP actually being delayed?

I am on the phone to LNER customer services right now and this is exactly what they are saying.
I feel like acting as a go-between in a bun fight between GN and LNER is not the best use of my lunch hour.
They have told me to go back to GN.

 

[yorkie]

I am on the phone to LNER customer services right now and this is exactly what they are saying.
I feel like acting as a go-between in a bun fight between GN and LNER is not the best use of my lunch hour.
They have told me to go back to GN.

Ask for a deadlock letter and go to the ombudsman.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I am on the phone to LNER customer services right now and this is exactly what they are saying.
I feel like acting as a go-between in a bun fight between GN and LNER is not the best use of my lunch hour.
They have told me to go back to GN.

They're wrong

GN delivered you to Peterborough in time for your LNER train

LNER then delayed you

 

[redreni]

I concur it's LNER. Definitely.

I suspect LNER may be looking at the actual arrival time of your booked GN train at Peterborough. If GN had behaved in the way LNER seems to think is acceptable and best practice, they would have told you not to board the train that turned up at Huntingdon within 1 minute of your booked departure time and insisted you instead delay yourself further by waiting to see whether, and if so when, your booked train train might turn up. In that fictional scenario, GN might well have been responsible for your delay. As it didn't happen, however, they're not. LNER are.

TOCs do seem to train both their automated systems and their staff to disregard anything the silly old passenger tells them and just look at the quickest possible journey the data says you could have made under a series of assumptions which don't always reflect reality (such as that nobody is ever allowed to travel on an earlier-scheduled train than their booked train during disruption, nobody ever makes an unofficial connection, nobody is ever delayed because they received bad advice or failed to predict what the fastest journey opportunity would be or because a train is too full to board, and so on).

 

[yorkie]

The latest news is that LNER have agreed to pay, but have said they will only pay for the "LNER portion of the journey".

However, it is not correct that Delay Repay is claimed on a leg-by-leg basis; I do not understand why this myth pervades among some of the staff who are responsible for DR claims.

LNER's social team has now reached out and asked @jfowkes to send their reference number:

x.com

twitter.com

Hello, are you able to send us a DM with your case reference so I can look into this for you.

So, credit to at least someone at LNER for doing that!

But this is just the tip of the iceberg; LNER seems to have a wide range of quality of staff, ranging from absolutely superb, diligent and caring, right down to ... in some cases the opposite of that; I do hope that the company can carry out a review and implement appropriate safeguards in place to ensure that staff, at all levels, behave appropriately and correctly, and that misinformation is not provided to customers in future.

 

[jfowkes]

Literal managing director of LNER, David Horne has also said he will look at the case!

This should not be a thing that needs to happen. Great (for me) that it is, but this would have put the average person off the railway for good. As I said on twitter I am lucky that I have a) railforums account b) some knowledge of how this stuff is meant to work c) a job that allows me the time to pursue this stuff.

 

[jfowkes]

Just an update on this: after hearing nothing from GTR or LNER for a while, GTR came back and said they will pay delay repay for all four tickets, and it's just landed in my bank account.

I have no idea why they suddenly decided to do this (especially as everyone seemed to be in agreement that it was LNERs problem), but I'm not complaining!

 

[ainsworth74]

The industry really does need a single delay repay portal...

 

[jfowkes]

The industry really does need a single delay repay portal...

Absolutely yes.

 

[yorkie]

Or even better, allow retailers to do it; that way customers have a single point of contact (regardless of whether it is a refund or delay request); 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

 

[Wallsendmag]

Or even better, allow retailers to do it; that way customers have a single point of contact (regardless of whether it is a refund or delay request); 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

Much better idea

 

[FaresGuru22]

Here's the crux: I originally submitted a delay repay claim to LNER for this, and their system said "go to GN, it's their problem". I submitted to GN, and their system has said "go to LNER, it's their problem".

Before I start ringing customer service people - who is right? Who do I actually need to submit the claim to?

In terms of the initial responses from each operator, did they appear to be automated or did they appear to be resolved by a human?

I've just tried to replicate your claim on LNER's website - it tries to understand your itinerary and it recognises the 18:36 as the 23:05 arrival, while the 18:50 is the 23:16 arrival. It doesn't look able to match your itinerary initially (I think you've given yourself dwell time at PBO?). Did you then enter the legs separately or did you pick one of the ones that popped up? Or is this a new thing?

Either way, when you spoke to somebody, it still didn't work out as expected.. You could argue that the first impact for which you had to adapt your journey was the GTR cancellation. So GTR should pay out. However, they happened to replace that service with almost an exact equivalent. So GTR should not pay out. You've then been impacted by an LNER cancellation, so LNER should pay out. The alternatives they were able to offer weren't sufficient to avoid being delayed, so yes LNER should pay out. However, there is one thing that really stands out from the story. The disruption was due to a fatality. So what was the reason for the LNER cancellation? I assume the fatality and not being able to run through Hitchin. Hitchin being GTR's patch. Or it was GTR involved in the incident? And so delay repay goes via GTR? I'm just trying to fit an explanation to the result, mind.. I think if GTR is the correct result then it's because of the first cancellation and that's how automated systems would operate.

 

[mathstrains19]

Or is this a new thing?

Yes, it's appeared in the last week or two

 

[Haywain]

The disruption was due to a fatality.

Of no relevance at all.

Hitchin being GTR's patch. Or it was GTR involved in the incident?

Again, of no relevance.

 

[jfowkes]

In terms of the initial responses from each operator, did they appear to be automated or did they appear to be resolved by a human?

Difficult to say, I think. Even if a human looked at it, I imagine they'd just choose from a set of preset responses anyway...?

It doesn't look able to match your itinerary initially (I think you've given yourself dwell time at PBO?)

The tickets were the suggested trains and splitting by our very own tickets.railforums.co.uk, so nothing extra/custom that I did.

Did you then enter the legs separately or did you pick one of the ones that popped up? Or is this a new thing?

Can't quite recall exactly what was entered and LNER and GTR have quite different forms for delay repay and neither handles split tickets particularly well.

And so delay repay goes via GTR? I'm just trying to fit an explanation to the result, mind.. I think if GTR is the correct result then it's because of the first cancellation and that's how automated systems would operate

I imagine automated systems were responsible for pushing each claim to the other company. I don't mind that, automated systems have their limits and the chaos on the ECML that evening combined with our journey shared between GTR and LNER clearly broke them.

But once I started ringing customer services, I did not expect to continue to be bounced around and get CEOs involved!