Delay Repay - does online claim form allow enough information?

[DynamicSpirit]

I've just today resubmitted a delay repay claim to Thameslink that had been rejected. The reason I was claimed is that, on a journey from Bedford to St Pancras on 25 May, a rail replacement bus from Bedford to Harpenden took longer than advertised to make the journey, meaning I missed the booked connection from Harpenden to St Pancras.

I actually wasn't surprised that the initial claim was rejected because there is absolutely no option on the delay repay form to explain what happened: All I was able to do was tick the 'Missed connection' box as the reason for the delay, and hope that Thameslink would be able to figure it out - which seemed unlikely because (a) there was nowhere on the form for me to even specify which connection got missed, and (b) unlike trains, I don't think arrival times of rail replacement buses are automatically logged - which means Thameslink probably had no way to fill in the missing detail of the delayed bus. I of course know those details but unable to provide that information because of the way the online form is designed.

(I was surprised for the reason for the rejection, which was, 'the ticket provided is not valid for the journey claimed' since I'm very certain I travelled on the exact services specified by my ticket, up until the point where the late-running rail replacement bus forced me to take a later train. But I guess that's another story)

So my claim is resubmitted, but other than checking 'resubmitted claim' as the reason for my claim, the form did not allow me to supply any information that I didn't supply last time, so I can't see the outcome being any different. Thameslink still probably doesn't have enough information to validate my claim.

But it struck me that this seems to be a wider problem. There are all sorts of legitimate reasons why you might miss a train that wouldn't show up on the train running data: For example, last minute platform alteration that gives the passenger no time to run to the new platform, or problems getting a booked cycle or a wheelchair onto the train, or the train simply being too full to let more people on. And the standard online delay repay form - as far as I can tell - provides no means for the passenger to communicate that information. So what are people claiming delay repay expected to do in that kind of situation? Shouldn't the online form be changed - for example, by adding a free text field to let people add in additional explanation?

 

[Watershed]

TOCs want to minimise the cost of processing Delay Repay claims, especially since many of them are for a comparitively small amount. Hence they look to automation - with only a sample of claims being manually checked. Automation can't deal with freetext, and getting AI involved could have unintended consequences, which is why many TOCs just don't give that option.

Nevertheless I agree there should be a freetext field, at the very least for appeals. This would allow a human to see what has gone on when the automated system rejects a claim, or under/overvalues a claim, rather than potentially getting the wrong end of the stick.

 

[BG2024]

So what are people claiming delay repay expected to do in that kind of situation?

I think the honest answer is that people are expected to give up, and I'm sure a very large number do. It's a feature, not a bug.

 

[Tram203]

Sometimes even an appeal with a free-text option doesn't yield success.

I submitted a claim several weeks back for a 3-leg journey involving 3 TOC's. The first leg (TOC A) was delayed causing me to miss all subsequent planned (and valid) connections, resulting in a 60+ minute delay arriving at my destination.

I claimed from TOC A, the journey planner tool within their delay repay claim system found my intended journey, I thought "good, simple, no reason for them not to pay this promptly".

A few days later, claim rejected. TOC A incorrectly claiming TOC B was responsible.

I appealed, stating clearly in writing why TOC B are not responsible and TOC A are responsible, even typing out my planned and actual journey times to try to make it as easy as possible for them. This time I absolutely expected success.

This morning, roughly 3 weeks after my appeal, guess what.... appeal rejected, for the exact same reason as the initial claim was rejected.

My next step is to email customer services, typing out (again) planned and actual journey times, explaining why they are responsible, and firmly requesting prompt payment of the claim or notification of deadlock in order that I can escalate the matter further.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

TOCs want to minimise the cost of processing Delay Repay claims, especially since many of them are for a comparitively small amount. Hence they look to automation - with only a sample of claims being manually checked. Automation can't deal with freetext, and getting AI involved could have unintended consequences, which is why many TOCs just don't give that option.

That makes sense. Although if the reason there's no free-text field is because that requires a human to read it, I can't help wonder what they do with the picture of your paper ticket that they ask you to upload - since that presumably also requires either a human or AI to do anything with it. Also, if it's all automated, why does it take a week or so to process each claim? A fully automated system should be able to work out whether to accept a claim within seconds of the claim being submitted.

Nevertheless I agree there should be a freetext field, at the very least for appeals. This would allow a human to see what has gone on when the automated system rejects a claim, or under/overvalues a claim, rather than potentially getting the wrong end of the stick.

That's how I would envisage the ideal system would work. You provide a free-text field which the automated system ignores. But if the automated system rejects the claim, then a human will check anything that's been entered in the free-text field, to see if that should change the decision.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jun 2025 ==

I appealed, stating clearly in writing why TOC B are not responsible and TOC A are responsible, even typing out my planned and actual journey times to try to make it as easy as possible for them. This time I absolutely expected success.

This morning, roughly 3 weeks after my appeal, guess what.... appeal rejected, for the exact same reason as the initial claim was rejected.

My next step is to email customer services, typing out (again) planned and actual journey times, explaining why they are responsible, and firmly requesting prompt payment of the claim or notification of deadlock in order that I can escalate the matter further.

What mechanism did you use to appeal, which allowed for free text? I certainly didn't have that option when I resubmitted my claim with Thameslink.

 

[Tram203]

What mechanism did you use to appeal, which allowed for free text? I certainly didn't have that option when I resubmitted my claim with Thameslink.

When the initial claim was rejected I got an email saying something akin to "if you would like to appeal our decision you can do this by logging in to your journey history".

The words "journey history" in that email could be clicked on, and that took me straight in to the claim details where I found an option to "re-submit claim" and I think that's where the free-text box appeared.

When the appeal was rejected yesterday, I resorted to typing an email and sending it to the TOC customer services email address, gleaned from the "contact us" page of their website.

I currently await their response with interest.

 

[Vexed]

What mechanism did you use to appeal, which allowed for free text? I certainly didn't have that option when I resubmitted my claim with Thameslink.

When the initial claim was rejected I got an email saying something akin to "if you would like to appeal our decision you can do this by logging in to your journey history".

The words "journey history" in that email could be clicked on, and that took me straight in to the claim details where I found an option to "re-submit claim" and I think that's where the free-text box appeared.

When the appeal was rejected yesterday, I resorted to typing an email and sending it to the TOC customer services email address, gleaned from the "contact us" page of their website.

I currently await their response with interest.

I don't know if the system has changed recently, but what I do after a rejection with GTR is contact them and ask them to add a note to the case, then I use the re-submit claim button and usually get the correct amount approved after a few days.

 

[35B]

Where the online form is too restrictive, I write a letter and make that part of the ticket photograph that I upload.