Delay Repay claims rejected

[Wolfie]

Did you check your junk folder? I've had automated acknowledgments go into there. Also WMT's Twitter team are excellent, but you do need your claim ref. for them to follow up. Or if you definitely didn't receive any acknowledgment perhaps take that up with them and see if they can find it anywhere?

TY. I'll have a nose. The last two were hardcopy though - a complicated journey and no longer trusting the electronic system.

 

[redreni]

Roger French's blog takes a behind-the-scenes look at Northern's Customer Contact Centre which also deals with Delay Repay claims. Useful background info.

Behind the scenes at Northern’s Customer Contact Centre

Tuesday 14th October 2025 Knowing the frustrations I’ve experienced claiming Delay Repay over the years with Avanti West Coast and GWR, when I met up with Alex Hornby during the summer he kindly of…

busandtrainuser.com

For multi leg journeys, John confirmed the initial Train Company causing the delay is the one responsible for meeting the claim even if a further (and more serious) delay is experienced on a subsequent leg with a different Company.


However, he gave the example of a Northern train arriving into Preston 15 minutes late but still made a delayed connection with an Avanti train as that was running 20 minutes late then the claim would be with Avanti as Northern had got the passenger to Preston in time for the connection and therefore the delay to the Northern service had no impact to the customer’s journey as the Avanti service was running late.

It isn't specified in this example whether they delay to the Northern service would have fouled the connection if the Avanti had been on time. If it would, Avanti wouldn't pay that claim. I think I'm beginning to see why we have had so many threads about passengers being fobbed off by Avanti, Northern and XC all blaming each other for delays.

The sooner the DfTO and ultimately GBR gets these people to understand the aim is to make sure passengers with a valid claim for a genuine delay get paid, not to worry about which operator pays it, the better.

 

[styles]

It isn't specified in this example whether they delay to the Northern service would have fouled the connection if the Avanti had been on time. If it would, Avanti wouldn't pay that claim. I think I'm beginning to see why we have had so many threads about passengers being fobbed off by Avanti, Northern and XC all blaming each other for delays.

The sooner the DfTO and ultimately GBR gets these people to understand the aim is to make sure passengers with a valid claim for a genuine delay get paid, not to worry about which operator pays it, the better.

Unfortunately GBR won't completely fix this unless open access operators are canned alongside it.

I maintain that the DfT or some other body should run a centralised delay repay system instead of leaving it to operators.

 

[Dave_D]

I am hearing a lot of reports of Delay Repay claims being rejected for spurious reasons.

Some TOCs have a policy of rejecting claims until you have taken another photograph of the ticket showing the ticket has been "spoiled'' to "prevent you using it again" even when the relevant ticket/portion is only valid on one specific train and/or one specific date.

Some TOCs make it really difficult to make Delay Repay claims by requiring customers to use convoluted forms.

I believe an investigation should be carried out into malpractice by TOCs for making it as difficult as possible for customers to claim.

Does anyone know which TOCs engage in the malpractice of asking passengers to re-upload images of spoiled tickets?
And also, does anyone know what the policies of those TOCs are in relation to retaining tickets at gatelines?

I would have thought a customer should be able to take a photo of their ticket at any point before, during or after their journey, and upload this photo once the extent of delay is known, and the customer should have no further obligation to retain the ticket.

For example if a customer makes a Delay Repay claim while sat on a delayed train, and their destination station retains the ticket, the TOC should not be able to claim the customer should go back to the station and ask for the ticket to be fished out of the machine (!) in order to deface it.

Is there some collective action customers can take against TOCs for wasting their time and rejecting valid claims? I wonder if a class action claim could be brought against TOCs who engage in the malpractice of making Delay Repay claims as difficult as possible? I am not sure if this is the sort of malpractice a class action claim could be brought against, though.

Thoughts welcome.

I would be happy to join a class action and I believe I have some proof.

A valid repay request (LNWR) was declined and the reason given was that my tickets were not valid for the trains I travelled on.

If that was really the case I would have thought that they would be chasing me.

I tried again and got declined for the same reason.

I then called them and explained, politely, that my tickets were valid and that if they didn’t pay me out without any further question I was going to instigate proceedings against them.

I was then paid.

The reason I believe this is evidence is that I can imagine a wrong reason code may have been entered. That could happen once, but twice, this would’ve been an amazing coincidence.

I think they try to explain it as a computer mistake but computers don’t make mistakes they do what they are programmed to do.

Please feel free to contact me. I will be happy to appear as a witness.

I have another case as well.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I would be happy to join a class action and I believe I have some proof.

A valid repay request (LNWR) was declined and the reason given was that my tickets were not valid for the trains I travelled on.

If that was really the case I would have thought that they would be chasing me.

I tried again and got declined for the same reason.

I then called them and explained, politely, that my tickets were valid and that if they didn’t pay me out without any further question I was going to instigate proceedings against them.

I was then paid.

The reason I believe this is evidence is that I can imagine a wrong reason code may have been entered. That could happen once, but twice, this would’ve been an amazing coincidence.

I think they try to explain it as a computer mistake but computers don’t make mistakes they do what they are programmed to do.

Please feel free to contact me. I will be happy to appear as a witness.

I have another case as well.

I am not a lawyer, but given that your case was resolved in your favour, I'm not sure that a court would think that you have anything to litigate. It might be supportive evidence for someone in a similar situation, but nothing more.

 

[Dave_D]

But clearly in the vast, vast majority, probably millions of claims, there doesn’t appear to be a problem whatsoever, given the approval rates are so high, and response times consistently “quick”.

Clearly an ideal system would never reject a valid claim, but this is not reasonable, all systems have their limitations. I’d rather have a less than perfect (but still impressive) approvals rate, if it means a quicker response time that’s fit for purpose for most people.

The independent regulator is providing statistics that seem to prove that in the overwhelming majority of cases, a claim is approved and paid out quickly. I remember being delayed in the days gone past where it took months just for a voucher to turn up.

I believe the real issue with delay repay is that not enough people are claiming it in the first place, but that seems to be getting addressed through fully automated claims.

20% of claims being refused seems reasonable to me, even if you say 10% of that is passenger error and 10% operator error. In reality, strip out those London TfL operators and it’s more like 15% anyway. Incidentally it looks like the TfL rejection stats are so high because they don’t even offer what I would call Delay Repay, so no surprise customers aren’t being paid out successfully!

I am not a lawyer, but given that your case was resolved in your favour, I'm not sure that a court would think that you have anything to litigate. It might be supportive evidence for someone in a similar situation, but nothing more.

Just to clarify, I was only talking about litigation if they had refused to pay me.

You are correct I cannot sue them as I have been paid.

This refusal to pay claims for spurious reasons or deliberately delaying claims could be fraud.

I believe I have evidence that they deliberately avoided paying by saying that my ticket wasn’t valid when, there was absolutely no suggestion that this might be the case.

Obviously, I’m not saying it’s conclusive, but it might help in a fraud charge against the TOC.

I suspect that unless there are some former employees that are prepared to come forward it would be very difficult to prove.

If there were, it could be bigger than the post office scandal.

 

[35B]

Just to clarify, I was only talking about litigation if they had refused to pay me.

You are correct I cannot sue them as I have been paid.

This refusal to pay claims for spurious reasons or deliberately delaying claims could be fraud.

I believe I have evidence that they deliberately avoided paying by saying that my ticket wasn’t valid when, there was absolutely no suggestion that this might be the case.

Obviously, I’m not saying it’s conclusive, but it might help in a fraud charge against the TOC.

There are many steps before words like "fraud" are remotely valid. Without knowing the specifics of the journey and ticket, it's impossible to say why staff might have repeated the same error - or what actually happened when you made the final, successful, challenge. Your account is not evidence of a deliberate attempt to refuse a legitimate payment. It might be if backed up by records showing intent and/or an unreasonably high error rate by LNR that wasn't properly addressed.

 

[styles]

I think it's more widespread incompetence than anything else.

There's certainly examples where companies appear to be deliberately obtuse like taking a passenger saying 'refund' not meaning compensation, when it's clear what the passenger is asking for - money back for a heavily delayed train.

In practice though I expect it's mainly poor scripts, support tickets going to the wrong department, etc.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think it's more widespread incompetence than anything else.

Agreed. I don't think any TOCs are actively operating their delay repay schemes in a criminal manner (which is what "fraud" would suggest). I just think most of them are being operated incompetently. They're using systems designed by the lowest bidder, not well tested to deal with anything other than the most basic "one ticket from station A to B with no changes" (and even that sometimes falls over!), being staffed by people who are poorly trained and usually not well remunerated (peanuts and monkey, etc etc) with probably a fairly high turnover meaning no-one ever really learns there job that well.

It's the same reason why TOC customer services in general are fairly dire. It's not seen as something worth spending any money on so is run on a shoestring and staffed by people who probably can't wait to get a different job doing something else for better money.

There's certainly examples where companies appear to be deliberately obtuse like taking a passenger saying 'refund' not meaning compensation, when it's clear what the passenger is asking for - money back for a heavily delayed train.

This of course isn't helped when staff on the ground describe delay repay as being a refund which I've heard more than once onboard by, I'm sure, well meaning staff.

Really the whole thing either needs to be done centrally through one clearing site (including refunds for abandoned journeys) or it all needs to be done by the retailer you bought your ticket from. Any arguments about who is responsible for paying then becomes an internal matter for the industry to argue about, as well as reducing the fraud risk that has been introduced by splitting refunds and delay compensation from each other.

 

[blimmo]

I just think most of them are being operated incompetently.

The current system of delay repay being operated by the TOCs also results in an active incentive to run it incompetently. Why put money into a system that will increase the amount you have to pay out? A centralised system would at least remove that. Having one centralised system handle refunds might be difficult to integrate. I think the current diverse collection of retailers has worked out pretty well so I'd be happy to see delay repay moved there.

 

[AdamWW]

The current system of delay repay being operated by the TOCs also results in an active incentive to run it incompetently. Why put money into a system that will increase the amount you have to pay out?

Automatic delay repay doesn't seem to fit that narrative.
As well as announcements on delayed trains encouraging passengers to claim (even on the information screens on TfW).

Or were these franchise requirements?

 

[Kite159]

Automatic delay repay doesn't seem to fit that narrative.
As well as announcements on delayed trains encouraging passengers to claim (even on the information screens on TfW).

Or were these franchise requirements?

Assuming the announcements are correct. I've been on a couple of delayed Avanti services where the TM falsely claimed you needed to visit the original retailer to claim delay repay

 

[blimmo]

Automatic delay repay doesn't seem to fit that narrative.

I'm not suggesting that it's impossible to have good developments even when there is an incentive against them, just that if the delay repay system were operated by a body that wasn't the one paying they'd be more likely and quicker.

 

[jfollows]

But does “automatic delay repay” exist?
I think it may have done with Virgin West Coast, when you’d get a credit for a delay without having to do anything, but what Avanti calls “automatic” certainly isn’t.
The industry seems to have too many people motivated to deny Delay Repay claims if possible.
Avanti just eliminates one step in a manual process if you book with them directly.

 

[35B]

I'm not suggesting that it's impossible to have good developments even when there is an incentive against them, just that if the delay repay system were operated by a body that wasn't the one paying they'd be more likely and quicker.

I admire your optimism. That body would be funded by the companies who will be picking up the payments, and detached from their customer service responsibilities. That is a surefire way to ensure that service is degraded over time, and that there is no interest in fixing tricky cases or improving customer satisfaction.

For the same reason, I'd not ask retailers to bear the burden - would you really trust Trainline to get this stuff right? The only thing I might do is make it a condition of accreditation that retailers can receive claims straightforwardly, and that they have automated means to pass those claims onto the TOC.

Better by far to require that the TOC that receives a claim assess it in full, and if it is not the responsible operator, passes that charge on within the industry.

 

[Dave_D]

There are many steps before words like "fraud" are remotely valid. Without knowing the specifics of the journey and ticket, it's impossible to say why staff might have repeated the same error - or what actually happened when you made the final, successful, challenge. Your account is not evidence of a deliberate attempt to refuse a legitimate payment. It might be if backed up by records showing intent and/or an unreasonably high error rate by LNR that wasn't properly addressed.

You might well be right here.

However they may have made a mistake the first time I claimed, I told them about this mistake and they then made the same mistake again.

If the boot was in the other foot and a passenger had the wrong ticket, they were warned and then caught again, wouldn’t the TOC suggest Fraud?

 

[35B]

You might well be right here.

However they may have made a mistake the first time I claimed, I told them about this mistake and they then made the same mistake again.

If the boot was in the other foot and a passenger had the wrong ticket, they were warned and then caught again, wouldn’t the TOC use suggest Fraud?

Unlikely - and then typically as part of exerting leverage in seeking a settlement in place of a bylaws prosecution. That hyperbole is rightly disliked on here, and I'm not sure should be used the other way round.

 

[D1537]

But does “automatic delay repay” exist?
I think it may have done with Virgin West Coast, when you’d get a credit for a delay without having to do anything, but what Avanti calls “automatic” certainly isn’t.
The industry seems to have too many people motivated to deny Delay Repay claims if possible.
Avanti just eliminates one step in a manual process if you book with them directly.

LNER is automatic if it's an LNER service and you've booked through them. Once I got the email before I'd even walked past the front of the terminating Azuma at Edinburgh.

I've had no problem with LNER for non-LNER trains either.

Avanti, though ...

 

[Egg Centric]

For the same reason, I'd not ask retailers to bear the burden - would you really trust Trainline to get this stuff right? The only thing I might do is make it a condition of accreditation that retailers can receive claims straightforwardly, and that they have automated means to pass those claims onto the TOC.

This may well fix 90% of the problems by itself, assuming that the retailers don't stuff it up - as the TOCs can presumably then "trust" what the retailer says about liability and quantum rather than assessing it for themselves incorrectly.

 

[styles]

But does “automatic delay repay” exist?
I think it may have done with Virgin West Coast, when you’d get a credit for a delay without having to do anything, but what Avanti calls “automatic” certainly isn’t.
The industry seems to have too many people motivated to deny Delay Repay claims if possible.
Avanti just eliminates one step in a manual process if you book with them directly.

To be honest, I don't really have a problem with Avanti/GWR's process whereby they populate the claim for you automatically then just ask you to confirm the details. This ensures the passenger has actually made the journey, rather than erroneously issuing Delay Repay compensation to passengers who haven't travelled.

Of course, if an Advance ticket has been scanned, it could be issued without the passenger reviewing it. The problem here would be if the passenger had split tickets, then the Delay Repay claim processed automatically would usually be for a lesser amount than the passenger is entitled to, so the passenger would need to appeal the amount, arguably making things more difficult again. Another consequence of complex ticketing.

Overall this is why I think it's fine that the most automatic we make it is prompting a passenger to review a pre-populated claim when the operator believes a delayed journey has been made.

 

[35B]

To be honest, I don't really have a problem with Avanti/GWR's process whereby they populate the claim for you automatically then just ask you to confirm the details. This ensures the passenger has actually made the journey, rather than erroneously issuing Delay Repay compensation to passengers who haven't travelled.

Of course, if an Advance ticket has been scanned, it could be issued without the passenger reviewing it. The problem here would be if the passenger had split tickets, then the Delay Repay claim processed automatically would usually be for a lesser amount than the passenger is entitled to, so the passenger would need to appeal the amount, arguably making things more difficult again. Another consequence of complex ticketing.

Overall this is why I think it's fine that the most automatic we make it is prompting a passenger to review a pre-populated claim when the operator believes a delayed journey has been made.

Absolutely. The LNER system works quite well, but it has limitations like requiring payment to the card on which the purchase was made (not helpful when using a work Amex and claiming for the loss of my own time!). I therefore try to remember to disable the option whenever possible

 

[Wolfie]

Just to clarify, I was only talking about litigation if they had refused to pay me.

You are correct I cannot sue them as I have been paid.

This refusal to pay claims for spurious reasons or deliberately delaying claims could be fraud.

I believe I have evidence that they deliberately avoided paying by saying that my ticket wasn’t valid when, there was absolutely no suggestion that this might be the case.

Obviously, I’m not saying it’s conclusive, but it might help in a fraud charge against the TOC.

I suspect that unless there are some former employees that are prepared to come forward it would be very difficult to prove.

If there were, it could be bigger than the post office scandal.

Since l am unaware of anyone either jailed or committing suicide as a result of denied delay repay that last sentence is utterly ridiculous.

Oh and if a class action was instigated and your suspicions are correct TOCs would be in an absolute world of hurt at the disclosure stage.

 

[dvboy]

I was delayed on an XC leg of a journey involving GWR and then XC

The GWR train was delayed, but not enough to miss my connection with XC, but the XC train was cancelled and so I had to take the next one.

So I claimed Delay Repay from XC, who passed it to GWR for some unknown reason.

I disputed it with XC because it was XC who had delayed me, expecting GWR to reject it.

Both TOCs paid out.

 

[trainophile]

I was delayed on an XC leg of a journey involving GWR and then XC

The GWR train was delayed, but not enough to miss my connection with XC, but the XC train was cancelled and so I had to take the next one.

So I claimed Delay Repay from XC, who passed it to GWR for some unknown reason.

I disputed it with XC because it was XC who had delayed me, expecting GWR to reject it.

Both TOCs paid out.

Sounds like the reverse of my recent experience (without the claim redirects), detailed here...

Who to claim DR from? Could have just made GWR off late inbound XC but it was cancelled anyway.

Bit of a shambles travelling back from Bournemouth to Hereford today due to an emergency services incident in “the London area” disrupting many trains out of Paddington. Obviously very sad incident so one wouldn’t want to be unsympathetic, but the knock-on effects have been chaotic. My 11:45...

www.railforums.co.uk

To my surprise and delight I've had an email from XC today agreeing my claim, which they are paying in full. That's a result I wasn't optimistic about but good news. I didn't claim from GWR as well, as per the advice on here. You got lucky there!

 

[Belperpete]

I was delayed on an XC leg of a journey involving GWR and then XC

The GWR train was delayed, but not enough to miss my connection with XC, but the XC train was cancelled and so I had to take the next one.

So I claimed Delay Repay from XC, who passed it to GWR for some unknown reason.

I disputed it with XC because it was XC who had delayed me, expecting GWR to reject it.

Both TOCs paid out.

One of the advantages of each TOC administering their own scheme, rather than having a centrally administered scheme.

 

[PG]

One of the advantages of each TOC administering their own scheme, rather than having a centrally administered scheme.

However, receiving a sum which you know you are not entitled to, does mean you should notify the payer(s) of their error. It is then up to them whether they decide to request reimbursement or not.

 

[styles]

However, receiving a sum which you know you are not entitled to, does mean you should notify the payer(s) of their error. It is then up to them whether they decide to request reimbursement or not.

That does work on the assumption the payments are in error. I could reasonably assume both operators have decided to compensate me.

 

[PG]

That does work on the assumption the payments are in error. I could reasonably assume both operators have decided to compensate me.

While the (wo)man on the Clapham omnibus may come to that conclusion, I think an established member of this forum, who has posted on a public forum, would have a somewhat harder time relying on that argument!

 

[aar0]

I have had some back and forth recently with no success yet (this may justify its own thread if wanted). Thameslink service cancelled from Horsham, as was the subsequent one, so caught a Southern service to Victoria, tube to Paddington, where I just missed the GWR train to Swansea and so was an hour delayed, and the following hour’s train was then delayed en route. Claimed with Thameslink who said claim with GWR. Claimed with GWR who said claim with Thameslink. GWR have the option to appeal so I did that and stated that Thameslink had told me to claim from GWR. GWR said they would contact Thameslink directly, after a week I contacted Thameslink directly, and two weeks later Jesus from Thameslink said that I should have taken an alternative route to Reading, via Three Bridges and East Croydon, and I would have caught the GWR. He also pointed out that I had seats booked on a later service that wasn’t delayed - which is true but only because I had to select a train to get an anytime single and the freedom that offers.

I feel like I’m playing delay repay ping pong and Thameslink are hoping I’ll just let it slide - but I was delayed for nearly two hours from my planned arrival!

 

[3rd rail land]

Seems like Thameslink are going out of their way to fob you off. You absolutely have a valid claim based on your post. Don't give up, get a deadlock letter if needs be. Heck, take them to court if it comes to it. They can't be allowed to get out their responsibility of paying you delay replay, however much they don't wan't to.