Delay repay between Northern/TPE

[td97]

I had a journey last November which involved 1 change.

There is a 5 minute minimum connection at the interchange station.

My itinerary interchange time was exactly 5 minutes.

The first leg was on TPE, and the arrival was 4 minutes late.

The second leg was on Northern, whose service was pre-cancelled due to a 'short notice change to the timetable'. I held my ticket before this service was cancelled, and was aware of this cancellation prior to travelling.

I previously sent a delay repay (30-59 minutes) claim to Northern, who are refusing the claim - stating the TPE was +4 late, and therefore the connection would have been missed regardless of if the Northern service was running or not.

My original view is that Northern are at fault, as they cancelled their service before the TPE was delayed.

Northern have now referred my claim to TPE (as yet no further correspondence).

Can anyone provide a second opinion on who is to blame here?
Thanks in advance

 

[Adam Williams]

I think I'd be claiming from TPE. It was their delay that fouled the Minimum Connection Time and they were the operator that first broke the itinerary.

However, they are both publicly-owned DOL operators. I wish there was a bit more pragmatism in cases like this; forwarding it on will just slow the process down and what does it actually ultimately gain them?

 

[Hadders]

I agree that TPE are responsible as they caused the initial delay. Although only four minutes it's unlikely that the connection would have been made.

 

[td97]

The plot thickens.

Northern have passed over to TPE (as expected above, thank you for the clarifications).

Now TPE are refusing the claim, as every Northern service from the interchange station was cancelled on that day (a Sunday, prior to Northern's emergency timetable).
To complete my journey, I remained on the TPE 1 extra stop and changed onto a Northern service that was actually running.

As multiple Northern services were cancelled (not just the 17:03) this is the reason for referring this to Northern to resolve. If the Northern service had run, or it was just the 17:03 that was cancelled, I would be more than happy to process the Delay Repay claim for you.

I will be sending a deadlock request but clarity/reassurance on where this should be directed would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!

 

[Adam Williams]

This is just dumb. There needs to be a consistently applied used rule that's applied here, not "oh but Northern was disrupted and hypothetically if our service ran then you would've had a different delay..."

It's even more silly that it's squabbling between DfT Operator Ltd TOCs.

Yet another reason why the retailer should be the one initiating this process and it shouldn't be the TOCs themselves making the decisions.

 

[AlterEgo]

The OP says their second service was “pre cancelled” so what, in fact, was their itinerary under the Published Timetable of the Day? If it had been cancelled before 10pm the day before the Northern leg can’t be counted on here.

 

[Watershed]

The OP says their second service was “pre cancelled” so what, in fact, was their itinerary under the Published Timetable of the Day? If it had been cancelled before 10pm the day before the Northern leg can’t be counted on here.

That is a fair point, but it relies on accepting the gaslighting concept of PToD as an enforceable limitation/exclusion for compensation - not that it has a formal name anymore, PToD perhaps being seen as a term that's too toxic.

Given the circumstances I think it would be very hard for either Northern or TPE to make out that it would constitute a fair term in the context of a consumer contract to effectively exclude any possibility of contractual compensation at their whim. Whether or not the OP wishes to argue that is another matter, of course.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, what a wonderful example of passenger-focused service the railway has exemplified here (!).

It is all so unnecessarily complex. OP, keep us updated.

 

[td97]

Followed up with both, and quite clearly TPE customer service is much more pragmatic than Northern. Successful outcome finally, now awaiting the cheque to arrive by post! Only 4 months to reach a resolution!

This case went back to Transpennine Express on 18th February 2025, as explained this was due to a Transpennine Express train being delayed by 4 minutes meaning you had 1 minute to catch your connection ... which regardless of what happened to our train would have been impossible. This has been explained to TPE on 18th February 2025 and as of yet I have had nothing back disputing this.

I am sorry that you are unhappy with the process however I can assure you this is not a Northern Trains issue.

Thank you for your response and I am sorry to hear that the Delay Repay claim [redacted] was rejected.

I am happy to let you know that this has been successfully appealed and that you will be receiving a cheque within 28 days due to the length of the delay.

Once again I would like to sincerely apologise for the length of time this has taken to resolve and thank you for contacting TransPennine Express.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It appears from a few recent experiences that the way they work it is that if a delay reduces the connection time below the minimum for that station it is assumed the connection was not made even if it actually was. I think this may be why I had a few payouts for a higher sum than claimed.