Delay Repay - taxi

[reb0118]

........I travel a lot due to a long-distance relationship, I've probably spent two grand on train fares with EastCoast alone in the last year......

Just wait, they cost a whole lot more once they more in - and you don't get your shirts ironed these days.

Just had some diversity training today - don't think it has rubbed off yet!

 

[PermitToTravel]

I agree with Arctic Troll. I do not understand why, morally or contractually, one should not claim delay compensation if the TOC have provided a taxi for you and you have still been delayed. I cannot bring myself to feel sympathetic towards a corporation.

 

[orpine]

Indeed, threads such as these are not a good idea in my opinion, it often backfires on the person asking the question. I think orpine is just curious, and wouldn't make the claims suggested (eg. for a 75 min delay) but the posts are certainly open to interpretation as to the motives.

As noted earlier, I am just curious. I have a general dislike of overly bureaucratic systems because they inherently lack flexibility. Thus when a situation comes along like this, what does said bureaucracy say should be done? I can't see it clearly spelt out which means we're into the "interpretation" range.
I'll certainly be putting in a claim for 30-60 mins, so a refund of a princely £3.50 will probably be heading my way. I don't really consider the taxi-to-home much of a bonus. Unlike many people I don't mind walking.
Furthermore, I'm *not* the sort of person to claim entitlements; quite the opposite, I'm opting out of an excellent pension scheme at the loss of thousands of £'s a year for purely ethical reasons. Oddly enough the TOC's consistently poor treatment of passengers doesn't engender me to feeling like I need to give them a "break" by not claiming.

-----

One thought relating to the taxi only taking you to the station - What happens if there was onward transport (i.e. a bus) that you now can't catch leaving you stranded? Bonus points if you have a plusbus as part of your ticket? (Neither is the case, here, more curiousity. )

 

[Greenback]

I didn't get anything apart from the usual compensation when a delayed train caused me to miss the last bus home and meant a 6 mile taxi trip from the station. I didn't have PlusBus.

That was ten years ago though.

 

[Anvil1984]

There's a few posts in this thread which makes me wonder whether the compensation balance has went too far in the way of the passenger. Train and track failures for all means claim for tickets but when the lines are flooded, fatalities etc beyond the railways fault in my opinion should be exempt especially as some people some to revel in the fact they may get a delay repay claim

 

[yorkie]

As noted earlier, I am just curious. I have a general dislike of overly bureaucratic systems because they inherently lack flexibility. Thus when a situation comes along like this, what does said bureaucracy say should be done? I can't see it clearly spelt out which means we're into the "interpretation" range.

In that case, arrival at final destination on ticket, so your taxi should go to the station so you have a comparison.

We are only into the "interpretation" range because the railway and its agents did you a favour.

Many will think you should return the favour by accepting your delay was, by the sound of it, actually 29 minutes at your house, and not claim :P

I'll certainly be putting in a claim for 30-60 mins, so a refund of a princely £3.50 will probably be heading my way. I don't really consider the taxi-to-home much of a bonus. Unlike many people I don't mind walking.
Furthermore, I'm *not* the sort of person to claim entitlements; quite the opposite, I'm opting out of an excellent pension scheme at the loss of thousands of £'s a year for purely ethical reasons. Oddly enough the TOC's consistently poor treatment of passengers doesn't engender me to feeling like I need to give them a "break" by not claiming.

That isn't the impression you are giving though

I agree the TOCs should give passengers their rights, and I spend a fair bit of time trying to defend their rights, but the best way to fight them is to deal with those specific issues.

Yes you have the right to a claim, but being given a favour and then saying that favour means the compensation rules are open to interpretation, then asking if you can claim for a 75min delay to your house (100% compo) compared to an actual delay of 29 mins (0% compo) is going to make some people rather annoyed.

(I'm sticking with 29 mins, as you said about half an hour, and I expect you will be over-estimating rather than under-estimating )

I think this thread has run its course now!

 

[bb21]

As noted earlier, I am just curious. I have a general dislike of overly bureaucratic systems because they inherently lack flexibility. Thus when a situation comes along like this, what does said bureaucracy say should be done? I can't see it clearly spelt out which means we're into the "interpretation" range.

You can't see it clearly spelt out because it isn't clearly spelt out.

You say you don't like overly bureaucratic systems because they inherently lack flexibility, yet you are trying to nail down something which can be down to discretion. You have been told the minimum you are entitled to, and anything else is a bonus and is down to discretion. It seems from the way your questions are asked that for some reason you expect this to be an "overly bureaucratic system" with everything prescribed to the last word despite it actually offering lots of flexibility.

 

[455driver]

Maybe he would prefer it if the taxi took you to your destination station even if it goes past your house on the way.

No bureaucracy and everyone knows where they stand.

 

[GadgetMan]

Oddly enough the TOC's consistently poor treatment of passengers doesn't engender me to feeling like I need to give them a "break" by not claiming.

Yes, proven by the fact the TOCs still go out of their way in trying to get passengers to their destination even when the cause is outside of the railway's control and they could if they wanted to, leave you stranded.

Providing you with a taxi and also (potentially) providing compensation for the delay is another great example of the 'consistently poor treatment'.

:roll:

 

[455driver]

Orpine, nobody is forcing you to use the train, and if you think you are so badly done to why do you use them at all?

My principals would prevent me from using the services of any company I felt so strongly about!

Maybe I hold my principals in higher regard than you hold yours?

 

[orpine]

Orpine, nobody is forcing you to use the train, and if you think you are so badly done to why do you use them at all?

I don't feel as strongly as I am apparently coming across. There are plenty of organisations I boycott, but trains aren't one. For one thing there is no alternative - I don't drive and buses for this sort of journey are infeasible.

Many will think you should return the favour by accepting your delay was, by the sound of it, actually 29 minutes at your house, and not claim

I thought from this thread the "correct" delay was the "from train station to train station" one. That makes more sense than "train station to home" which is where ~30mins comes from. Station to station was about 45 minutes per earlier in the thread.

Maybe he would prefer it if the taxi took you to your destination station even if it goes past your house on the way.

Actually my ticket allows me to finish short. And I've remembered that my ticket was actually to Warwick Parkway (a station 2miles further along than Warwick). The journey there by taxi is actually a few minutes further away than my house, so the train company made a saving.

Further thought - what happens if the passenger wanted to have a break of Journey?

Providing you with a taxi and also (potentially) providing compensation for the delay is another great example of the 'consistently poor treatment'.

At the risk of repeating myself - they only provided these things because I knew to ask for them. They sure as heck didn't announce it for us passengers.

It seems from the way your questions are asked that for some reason you expect this to be an "overly bureaucratic system" with everything prescribed to the last word despite it actually offering lots of flexibility.

You make a fair point. I think it's because when rules are so open to interpretation everyone gets a different result. Sure on this forum I may be encouraged to do one thing but get an overzealous guard who'll penalty me in person (I've had two, both that I won on appeal). Or vice-versa, a nice staff member in person and a forum that thinks I'm "entitled" for wanting to get home at a reasonable hour (though partly my fault for miscommunicating).
One set of nice simple rules that don't require interpretation is my preference. The NRCoC aren't that.

 

[bb21]

Actually my ticket allows me to finish short. And I've remembered that my ticket was actually to Warwick Parkway (a station 2miles further along than Warwick). The journey there by taxi is actually a few minutes further away than my house, so the train company made a saving.

The train company would probably be charged to the station anyway, especially if it is not metered, which would be the case in the majority of situations for out-of-town jobs I would imagine.

Further thought - what happens if the passenger wanted to have a break of Journey?

If you want to have a break of journey at a station en route then that is perfectly fine as long as you have a valid ticket, which doesn't necessarily need to be one that finishes there. Just state your actual destination and a taxi will be provided.

Having a break of journey at a random location is a different kettle of fish. I wouldn't imagine there normally be an issue, especially if you ask the driver.

After all, your ticket would not allow you to have a break of journey at Langley Green for example if you are on a train. (Well, not if you want to have all parts of your body intact that is.)

You make a fair point. I think it's because when rules are so open to interpretation everyone gets a different result. Sure on this forum I may be encouraged to do one thing but get an overzealous guard who'll penalty me in person (I've had two, both that I won on appeal). Or vice-versa, a nice staff member in person and a forum that thinks I'm "entitled" for wanting to get home at a reasonable hour (though partly my fault for miscommunicating).
One set of nice simple rules that don't require interpretation is my preference. The NRCoC aren't that.

There is a minimum standard that is consistent across all TOCs, ie. to convey you to your destination station (or provide overnight accommodation). That is the "nice simple rules" you are looking for.

The extras cannot be pinned down and will be down to discretion.

 

[Greenback]

I don't feel as strongly as I am apparently coming across. There are plenty of organisations I boycott, but trains aren't one. For one thing there is no alternative - I don't drive and buses for this sort of journey are infeasible.

I'm afraid you are coming across quite storngly here. It sounds as though you would love to boycott the railway because of all the wrongs and injustices you perceive, but you can't!

One set of nice simple rules that don't require interpretation is my preference. The NRCoC aren't that.

The nice simple rule is that the TOC is obligated to take you to your destination station and nowhere else. If the taxi actually takes you to your house, presumably that is quicker and easier than being dropped at the station and making your own way home?

In this case it sounds as though you would have preferred to have been taken to the station and then walked home, even though you would have been later arriving at your address?

Most people would look at going straight home as a bonus!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Train and track failures for all means claim for tickets but when the lines are flooded, fatalities etc beyond the railways fault in my opinion should be exempt

The TOCs don't agree with you, hence why they all have teams of people in "delay attribution" making arguments why Network Rail were liable for the delays and why Network Rail should cough up compensation money. The TOCs take it so far as to argue about the size of the creature when there's a bird strike: big birds are Network Rail's fault because they "didn't provide the clear path they were obliged to".

Fatalities, by the way, are attributed to Network Rail, again for "failing to secure the contracted path".

The TOCs get their money (and at a lower delay threshold than Delay Repay). So why shouldn't passengers?

That said, I still don't agree that TOCs "hide" Delay Repay. They're a lot better at it these days than they ever used to be.