Delay Repay - Intentionally Catching Late Trains

[Bantamzen]

No, I did understand your point, i just disagree completely. How on earth is it even remotely fraudulent to change your plans based on train running times? What a ridiculous idea.

The only fraud is when you claim for a train you weren't on. End of. The only remotely grey area is if you catch a late running train which you wouldn't have caught if it were on time, as in that situation you haven't actually been delayed.

As for being "rumbled", how exactly? You're sitting on the delayed train being delayed. "We're not paying out because you should have left work sooner" won't really fly.

Sorry but you do seem to be missing the point completely. I, and I believe the OP was, am talking about people who deliberately use late running trains simply to take advantage of Delay Repay. If I am still not making this point clear to you then so be it, we won't agree on this.

 

[Richard_B]

Very much doubt that a TOC would seriously come after someone for this. As long as you do indeed travel on the train that is delayed, you have no requirement to provide a justification for why you chose to use any particular service that it is valid for your ticket to be used on.

I suspect that if the TOCs are even looking for this, and they suspect you of doing this they would send an officious sounding letter saying your travel patterns and claims are suspicions are under investigation, then if you don't stop send another very over the top letter demanding the repayment of some sum of money and claim they will take you to court over if it you don't pay. If i was into betting, my money would say that you don't get taken to court.

It reminds me of people who buy airline tickets with a connection that are cheaper than the direct flight to the connecting airport, and then get off after the first flight. Drives airlines a bit nuts but there is not that much that they can do about it.

But, it is still a lot of hassle, and if it goes wrong it will be quite badly wrong. And if your route is that regularly delayed to make it doable then you should be getting a fair wedge of money back anyway.

 

[big all]

delay repay is for people who have suffered delay or inconvenience because on late running trains
as you havent suffered by the late running it would be wrong and indeed could be seen as fraud to claim you where

 

[kristiang85]

I'm sure TOCs use algorithms to see if certain users have an average higher delay repay claim than the average train delays, which would trigger someone to take a closer look.

I get the same train every morning without fail, but in the evenings I always get different ones, depending on work/pub/etc. and lately I've had a lot of bad luck with my late ones. I'm half expecting to trigger such a check, so I just screenshot my Google Maps timeline just in case.

Maybe I'm giving SWR too much credit and they won't, but I guess it won't hurt.

 

[yorkie]

No, I did understand your point, i just disagree completely. How on earth is it even remotely fraudulent to change your plans based on train running times? What a ridiculous idea.

I agree, it is a ridiculous idea. @Bantamzen is welcome to his own moral viewpoint but it is not fraud if someone claims for a delay they did actually experience.

To claim it is "fraud" is obviously incorrect information and I'd like to remind people that we do ask that people try not to post incorrect information in the fares sections please.

Sorry but you do seem to be missing the point completely.

I can assure you @Arctic Troll has not missed the point in the slightest, and has posted correct information.

 

[farleigh]

There is no question that is fraud let alone embezzlement.

In my opinion it is perfectly moral too.

 

[Mathew S]

Commuting as I do with Northern, I have to say that Delay Repay is indeed, to quote an earlier poster, "a nice little earner." I would far rather not be delayed, but if I arrive at my destination more than 15 minutes after the time I should have, I'm claiming. Personally, I calculate that as the time I should have arrived at Manchester Piccadilly on the train I had planned to catch. If that train is delayed/cancelled and I catch an alternative, I'm still calculating based on that original arrival time.

Do I check for delays before leaving home/the office? Of course I do. That means that I have claimed for journeys where I've not gone to the station for my planned train but caught a different one. It also means I've claimed for journeys I wasn't able to make at all, and had to drive instead.

I don't view any of this as remotely dodgy. As far as I'm concerned my contract with the train company says that if I'm delayed by more than 15 minutes arriving at my planned destination, I'm entitled to compensation. And you'd better believe I'm claiming every single penny.

 

[drspa44]

Thanks for the very interesting discussion, everyone. Clearly there isn't consensus on whether the strategy is morally acceptable. I am quite surprised about this given other methods of creative money-saving are discussed on this board, many of which TOCs wouldn't like publicised. One thing that is apparent is however, is that no-one has cited any specific terms and conditions, which would block this strategy.

Fraud is to make a false representation, dishonestly and with a view to make gain or cause loss. I feel like were it to ever go to court, and it wasn't thrown out immediately, there would be much scrutiny on what it means to be delayed - whether delay refers to the time pressures of oneself or to one's train. It will come down to the exact wording of the forms being submitted, I think. Having a look at Thameslink's form, there is no clear piece of wording that says either way - just "If your journey has been delayed by 15 minutes or more,
we’ll give you compensation under the Delay Repay scheme.". Personally, I think I should have the right to state when my journey begins.

I feel like if the law removes a person's ability to state when they intended to leave and intended to arrive, then you could say that a casual journey with no real time constraints is ineligible for delay repay. It would be insane to demand proof that you wanted to leave or arrive at a certain time.

Also worth bearing in mind that many of these delays are intentionally there due to decisions made by TOCs. A company that strives for 100% punctuality will not make money. A train being cancelled due to lack of staff or signalling issues could have been avoided if there was more investment and redundancy. Is it immoral for a TOC to hire only enough drivers that they can only afford for one of them to be ill?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I am talking about people who deliberately use late running trains simply to take advantage of Delay Repay.

Staying at work/in bed an extra half hour in order to catch a delayed train is not fraud. One is actually delayed by the late train. There is no obligation to rush.

Saying you were on a delayed train when you weren't is fraud.

Saying you were delayed by a late train when you weren't (e.g. you caught an earlier train you didn't think you'd catch, or the delayed train ran at the time your intended train ran) is a grey area.

 

[sefton]

The only grey area for me is if you turn up at 1755 for the 1800 but actually get on the delayed 1730 at 1800. In that case there's no delay to claim, even if the train itself is delayed.

A better example is if the 1730 was cancelled.

Who on the 1800 intended to catch the 1730 and has been delayed and who intended to catch the 1800 and hasn't been.

With the public encouraged to make use of the live train information you could not say that someone who turned up at 1755 didn't intend to catch the 1730.

In such circumstances the only argument a train company would seem to have about a fraudulent claim being submitted is if it would physically not have been possible to catch the 1730.

Arguing that the person never intended to catch the 1730 would seem quite tricky, particularly if they have an ability to vary their working hours.

 

[Bantamzen]

Staying at work/in bed an extra half hour in order to catch a delayed train is not fraud. One is actually delayed by the late train. There is no obligation to rush.

I don't believe I said they are.

Saying you were on a delayed train when you weren't is fraud.

Saying you were delayed by a late train when you weren't (e.g. you caught an earlier train you didn't think you'd catch, or the delayed train ran at the time your intended train ran) is a grey area.

You are still somehow missing my point, deliberately delaying yourself purely so that you can claim Delay Repay is fraud.

 

[sefton]

You are still somehow missing my point, deliberately delaying yourself purely so that you can claim Delay Repay is fraud.

It clearly isn't.

It may not be moral, but it isn't illegal.

And frankly the train companies are not complete innocents given the games they play to game their stats.

 

[JohnR]

Sorry, I don't think you get my point.

You are sitting in the office constantly checking RTT for a delayed train. On a day without delays you would catch the 1800 (which runs on time), but today you see that the 1830 is running 30 late so you decide to work until 1845 (lets assume the station is 5 or so minutes away) & claim a bit more additional time knowing full well that you will also be claiming Delay Repay. So you have changed your plans simply because a later train is running late so as to claim compensation. The TOC are not responsible for your delay, because you have deliberately targeted a train that you knew to be late before making your plans, making you responsible for your delay. Had you got the 1800 as usual, you would have encountered no delays.

You then repeat this whenever you can. That is definitely wrong, immoral & if you get rumbled further down the line might be considered fraudulent.

So what you seem to be saying is that you should only claim if you are at the station when you discover the delay? What if you then catch a bus? Or get a lift home? Should you be entitled to then?

 

[AM9]

I think that if there is any habitual gaming the delay repay system then it is by season ticket holders. As the TOCs develop the data collection of their customers' usage, it's those holders that they have the most comprehensive picture of, particularly if (or when) smart card or e-tickets become more prevalent. So those who are adamant that it is their right to make gains in this way should be careful what they wish for.
It would be quite easy to match the time of presenting the ticket at the gateline and if the coincidence of that with delays and a subsequent claim was more than might be expected there might be restrictions on regular travellers such as a payment for delays over a period.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I don't believe I said they are.



You are still somehow missing my point, deliberately delaying yourself purely so that you can claim Delay Repay is fraud.

Legal citation, please. You’re just handwaving at this point.

 

[TUC]

A better example is if the 1730 was cancelled.

Who on the 1800 intended to catch the 1730 and has been delayed and who intended to catch the 1800 and hasn't been.

With the public encouraged to make use of the live train information you could not say that someone who turned up at 1755 didn't intend to catch the 1730.

In such circumstances the only argument a train company would seem to have about a fraudulent claim being submitted is if it would physically not have been possible to catch the 1730.

Arguing that the person never intended to catch the 1730 would seem quite tricky, particularly if they have an ability to vary their working hours.

Is a better analogy someone intended to travel on the 1730, arrived at the station late at 1755 due to their own tardiness, discovered the 1730 had been delayed until 1758, caught it, and then submitted a Delay Repay claim. That would be morally questionable.

 

[arb]

I find this a very grey area with some very subtle lines between what's acceptable and what isn't. Personally, when I'm still at home or work, I first make a mental choice of "I'm going to go for the train at xx:xx" (it helps to have memorised the timetable!). Only then do I look at the live tracking sites and see what's happening. If the train I've chosen is delayed/cancelled, I'll adjust my plans to avoid waiting at the station, but I'll claim Delay Repay based on my original mental choice of train.

Where this falls down is if I know of major disruption via other means (e.g. twitter feeds, or this forum) before I make the mental choice of train. My commute is between Ely and Cambridge, which has the luxury of three different TOCs, and it's pretty rare for all three of them to have major disruption. So if I know of major disruption on e.g. Great Northern, should I still make the mental choice of a Great Northern train, or shouldd I deliberately avoid them and only choose between the other TOCs' trains? I still don't have an entirely satisfactory answer that I'm personally comfortable with for this situation. That said, we're talking about a 70p claim each time for me, so I haven't spent *too* long thinking about it

 

[Mathew S]

Is a better analogy someone intended to travel on the 1730, arrived at the station late at 1755 due to their own tardiness, discovered the 1730 had been delayed until 1758, caught it, and then submitted a Delay Repay claim. That would be morally questionable.

Morally possibly, but legally there's not a lot can be done to enforce it. It's just a feature of the delay repay system that I'm sure TOCs are aware of and budget for.

 

[Strat-tastic]

Interesting topic. What do you feel about this scenario: I take a leisure trip to B, changing trains at A. When I get to A, I find the first service from A to B is cancelled, and the next one delayed. I decide that it's no longer worth going to B and as A is pleasant enough, decide to stay there awhile instead. Is it ok to claim delay repay here, in your opinion?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interesting topic. What do you feel about this scenario: I take a leisure trip to B, changing trains at A. When I get to A, I find the first service from A to B is cancelled, and the next one delayed. I decide that it's no longer worth going to B and as A is pleasant enough, decide to stay there awhile instead. Is it ok to claim delay repay here, in your opinion?

I'd suggest that that should strictly speaking need an approach to Customer Services to ask that you are refunded the difference between the fare to B and the fare to A because you did not make the journey due to disruption. Potentially even a full refund due to "giving up and going back" may be due.

 

[mallard]

Is a better analogy someone intended to travel on the 1730, arrived at the station late at 1755 due to their own tardiness, discovered the 1730 had been delayed until 1758, caught it, and then submitted a Delay Repay claim. That would be morally questionable.

Except that promotional material for Delay Repay very often uses phrasing that refers to delayed trains rather than delayed journeys. See the CrossCountry website for an example:

If your CrossCountry train has been delayed by 30 minutes or more to the destination printed on your ticket, you will be entitled to compensation. You can rest assured that your journey is covered whatever happens.

The extremely poor phrasing (the on-train posters are even more unclear) definitely gives the impression that valid claims could include the situation you describe. An ordinary customer is not going to dig into the fineprint of the Ts&Cs before claiming.

It also almost explicitly says that if no actual train was delayed by 30 minutes (e.g. 15 minute delay causes you to miss hourly connection) you can't claim and seems to deny that you can claim at all for a journey that concludes on a non-CrossCountry train... Personally, I'd say that wording that overall would have the effect of discouraging many valid claims is not accidental (and most definitely not acceptable).

 

[ainsworth74]

Interesting topic. What do you feel about this scenario: I take a leisure trip to B, changing trains at A. When I get to A, I find the first service from A to B is cancelled, and the next one delayed. I decide that it's no longer worth going to B and as A is pleasant enough, decide to stay there awhile instead. Is it ok to claim delay repay here, in your opinion?

I would suggest that a refund is due via NRCoT Condition 30 rather than Delay Repay.

 

[WelshBluebird]

A couple of people have mentioned that its delay compensation is more meant for if your journey (rather than your train) is delayed, so you shouldn't claim if you specifically delay your journey (by getting a later train or by not leaving for the station until a later time etc). But what about cases where you have a frequent service, for simplicity sake say every 15 mins starting on the hour. Your aim to catch the 08.15 but the 08:00 is running 15 mins late and so you actually catch that. That train is 15 mins late, so would it be wrong to claim delay repay (if the ToC is doing the new 15 mins compensation)? I'm not so sure.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A couple of people have mentioned that its delay compensation is more meant for if your journey (rather than your train) is delayed, so you shouldn't claim if you specifically delay your journey (by getting a later train or by not leaving for the station until a later time etc). But what about cases where you have a frequent service, for simplicity sake say every 15 mins starting on the hour. Your aim to catch the 08.15 but the 08:00 is running 15 mins late and so you actually catch that. That train is 15 mins late, so would it be wrong to claim delay repay (if the ToC is doing the new 15 mins compensation)? I don't see it as.

Yes, it would be wrong. The purpose of Delay Repay is to compensate you for your journey being delayed. If you take a delayed train that actually results in your journey not being delayed (sometimes even being earlier than planned), you are not entitled to compensation.

Similarly, if you have a 35 minute connection at B in A-B-C, but train A-B is 31 minutes late and you still make the connection, you are not entitled to claim anything because your journey (A-C) was not delayed. Though if you intended (and were permitted) a break of journey at B or to end short at B you may well decide to claim for A-B alone because the purpose of your break of journey was affected. If break of journey was not permitted, such a claim is not valid.

 

[Mathew S]

A couple of people have mentioned that its delay compensation is more meant for if your journey (rather than your train) is delayed, so you shouldn't claim if you specifically delay your journey (by getting a later train or by not leaving for the station until a later time etc). But what about cases where you have a frequent service, for simplicity sake say every 15 mins starting on the hour. Your aim to catch the 08.15 but the 08:00 is running 15 mins late and so you actually catch that. That train is 15 mins late, so would it be wrong to claim delay repay (if the ToC is doing the new 15 mins compensation)? I'm not so sure.

Yes, it would be wrong.

"If your train is delayed... " is the wording most TOCs seem to use. On that basis, wrong or otherwise, you'd have a strong legal case I think for claiming delay repay for the train you travel on being delayed whether it's the train you intended to catch or not.

I can also say that there are TOCs who pay out claims on this basis.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can also say that there are TOCs who pay out claims on this basis.

Largely because there isn't any way for them to know whether you intended to catch a given train or not. It's a lie you will absolutely get away with (unless you start doing it too often which is a giveaway) but it is still a lie.

 

[Mathew S]

Largely because there isn't any way for them to know whether you intended to catch a given train or not. It's a lie you will absolutely get away with (unless you start doing it too often which is a giveaway) but it is still a lie.

I disagree. If it's true that the Consumer Rights Act says that the most customer friendly interpretation of any terms and conditions is what applies; then my journey being delayed can apply to the train I planned to catch, or the one I'm on. Where TOCs use advertising (and some do) saying "if you're train is delayed/cancelled claim delay repay" - paraphrasing obviously - then that makes the interpretation of when one should/can claim even broader.
It may not be what Delay Repay was ever intended to do but, with the scheme operated as it is, it is what it is.
Ultimately, delay repay is part of my contract with the train company. I have no problem with seeking to apply that contract in the way most generous to myself. I equally have no problems with a TOC pushing back. That's why we have contract law, ombudsmen and, ultimately, civil courts.

 

[Skie]

Thameslink's Passenger Charter says "Under our Delay Repay scheme, if your journey is delayed by 15 minutes or more, irrespective of what caused the delay, you’re entitled to claim compensation.". National Rail says to refer to the TOCs' charters. The fact that one's journey start time is not consistent day-to-day does not seem to make a difference.
.

Hmm, so someone could be the cause of the delay and still claim the delay repay? What was the penalty for improper use of the passcom again?...

 

[johntea]

I've been claiming all my delay repay since the start of the year and most of my claims end up with a grand total of £1 - £2, falling under the relatively new for Northern land 15-30 minute delay. It almost isn't worth the hassle of having to fill in the online application each time but I've decided to be very stubborn this year!

If I could claim for all the 30 minute waits in Leeds station due to missing a tight but fairly easily done connection if my other train didn't arrive into Leeds 3-5 minutes late virtually every day I would be much richer!

 

[Sussex nick]

Interesting debate here, as someone who commutes regularly and suffers delays on a regular basis, I too see there is a line between claiming for services you had no intention to catch and one where your plans had been disrupted, but this may not be as fine as some people suggest.
It is open to interpretation and you have to look at the case of the couple who were fined for claiming almost daily on riduluous journeys which they could not possibly have taken- now that is fraud and quite rightly they were caught (with the evidence of CCTV) at the other end of the scale commuters have to make daily decisions based on the availability of trains, and for that they should be compensated.
I still use the a paper season ticket I’m not convinced that the automatic payment for smart cards is actually efficient enough as it will only account for delays where you have passed through a barrier, something you would not do if your train is delayed and you remain on the concourse (as the operators ask you to do !)
One area where I recon a lot of people miss out is on the 15 - 30 minute delays - I have around 2 a week where I arrive late to the office, most people don’t bother to claim as they see it as effort to do, but doing 5 at a time is not to hard and for me that’s about £15