Compensation when you give up and walk

[AdamWW]

I am right that if I'm thrown off a late running train that is turned round short of my destination and I decide to walk the rest of the way, there's no mechanism for compensation as the journey isn't abandoned (I didn't go back to the start) and I can't claim for Delay Repay as that requires the journey to be fully completed by rail?

 

[robbeech]

Some operators would direct you to the retailer for refund regardless of whether you returned to your origin.
Most retailers would direct you to the operator for delay repay.

This is imo more of a problem than the limbo you find yourself in in the first place.

There ought to be clearer rules on this. More often than not an operator would likely pay out delay repay based on the next arrival if pushed. And most retailers would refund that portion of the ticket as if the journey didn’t happen at all, again only when pushed.

I believe it’s only recently been quite so clear as to the necessity of returning to the origin.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe it’s only recently been quite so clear as to the necessity of returning to the origin.

I believe that's because it was abused. There's really no case that I should be able to get a free journey if I bail at MKC rather than continuing to Bletchley having travelled from Wick or something, but people were claiming that and the rules did technically allow it.

However it has left us in the situation where anything at all (bar Delay Repay based on the actual journey made, not the full booked one, which might not even itself be forthcoming if the ticket doesn't permit break of journey) is down to discretion.

 

[AdamWW]

I believe that's because it was abused. There's really no case that I should be able to get a free journey if I bail at MKC rather than continuing to Bletchley having travelled from Wick or something, but people were claiming that and the rules did technically allow it.

Indeed and it seems reasonable to tighten things up.

It's not how things are and I doubt it's going to change, but it would seem fair to me if the rules permitted delay repay based on the next available train even if that's not what the passenger did. (Unless of course the railway provides an alternative, e.g. a taxi).

It seems pretty daft to me that if there is major disruption with all services at a stand-still, in order to get delay repay once trains move again passengers are supposed to all congregate in the station then try to force themselves onto the first train to move.

I'd have thought that letting people go and do something else if able then come back when it's all settled down would be in everyone's interests.

I suppose effectively when it came in Delay Repay did work like this because you could claim to have caught the next train and they wouldn't read the magnetic strip on the ticket to look for anything contradictory. But a bit different now that so many people are on e-tickets.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Mar 2025 ==

However it has left us in the situation where anything at all (bar Delay Repay based on the actual journey made, not the full booked one, which might not even itself be forthcoming if the ticket doesn't permit break of journey) is down to discretion.

And the delay to the actual journey might not even be enough to claim Delay Repay.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd have thought that letting people go and do something else if able then come back when it's all settled down would be in everyone's interests.

I've not seen anything to suggest that if you do complete the journey but not on the very first train available that you can't claim delay repay. I've long had a personal rule of "second train out after disruption".

We were talking about a situation where you ended the journey early due to the disruption.

 

[redreni]

I'd always assumed if you continue to your destination, you claim delay repay, based on your actual arrival time or the time.

I guess it gets more ambiguous if you go directly from the point you abandoned your rail journey to your final destination and do not go via the station, or even the town or village, where the train was supposed to take you.

 

[AdamWW]

I've not seen anything to suggest that if you do complete the journey but not on the very first train available that you can't claim delay repay. I've long had a personal rule of "second train out after disruption".

I was under the impression that you had to actually be on the train you're claiming for Delay Repay on, and that you can't make a valid claim for a delay that you could have minimised by getting an earlier train. So waiting a bit then claiming for the crammed train you could have caught once services resume but chose not to isn't allowed.

We were talking about a situation where you ended the journey early due to the disruption.

We were. But a rule of paying based on the next available train (whether caught or not) would be helpful in both situations.

I'd always assumed if you continue to your destination, you claim delay repay, based on your actual arrival time or the time.

From what I've seen here, the official position is that if you take matters into your own hands (walk, catch a bus, get a lift) that's fine but you've forfeited all rights to Delay Repay because you have to complete the journey by rail (or official substitute) for that. Which worked when the abandoned journey rules were so generous, but tightening up on that appears to have left a gap.

 

[Watershed]

From what I've seen here, the official position is that if you take matters into your own hands (walk, catch a bus, get a lift) that's fine but you've forfeited all rights to Delay Repay because you have to complete the journey by rail (or official substitute) for that. Which worked when the abandoned journey rules were so generous, but tightening up on that appears to have left a gap.

I can't see anything which formalises the position on this point.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was under the impression that you had to actually be on the train you're claiming for Delay Repay on, and that you can't make a valid claim for a delay that you could have minimised by getting an earlier train. So waiting a bit then claiming for the crammed train you could have caught once services resume but chose not to isn't allowed.

I think it would be perfectly valid to claim based on being on the first train post disruption even if you actually were on the second (though I've claimed based on the second when I've been physically unable to board the first). I've done that many times and never had a claim denied.

We were. But a rule of paying based on the next available train (whether caught or not) would be helpful in both situations.

That's how it's generally done.

From what I've seen here, the official position is that if you take matters into your own hands (walk, catch a bus, get a lift) that's fine but you've forfeited all rights to Delay Repay because you have to complete the journey by rail (or official substitute) for that. Which worked when the abandoned journey rules were so generous, but tightening up on that appears to have left a gap.

You've not forfeited all rights but rather can claim based on the shortened journey (though that might be questionable in the case of tickets not allowing ending short).

 

[AdamWW]

That's how it's generally done.

That's fine, and it certainly seems sensible.

I'd thought from what I read here that you had to be on the train you were claiming for or risk getting into trouble if they compared the claim with ticket scans.