Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Posting on behalf of a friend & not for myself, but I assume that DR would apply here.
Service from Glasgow Central to Bolton was scheduled to arrive at 12:06 but arrived at 12:26 and connection from Bolton to Ashton-under-Lyne was scheduled to depart at 12:25 but departed at 12:31.
However, nobody on-board was aware that the connection was delayed, so permission to travel to Manchester & connect from Manchester was obtained from the TM, so they travelled to Manchester & not Bolton. Arrived at Manchester even later, so missed any connection there, they took an Uber in the end (didn't claim for this).
Delay Repay claim rejected on the basis that the connection could've been made.
As far as I understand, DR should be paid out, even though the connection could've been made, it was not used to travel on, but I'm not certain whether this is true or not.
Unless TPE can prove that onboard announcements were made about the connection being delayed, I agree they're liable to pay Delay Repay here. It is entirely reasonable for a passenger to assume a connection has been missed in such circumstances to minimise the total overall delay.
Unless TPE can prove that onboard announcements were made about the connection being delayed, I agree they're liable to pay Delay Repay here. It is entirely reasonable for a passenger to assume a connection has been missed in such circumstances to minimise the total overall delay.
If I were TPE I would ask why the passenger chose to remain on the train to Manchester? Even if the connection were missed I'm struggling to understand how continuing to Manchester Oxford Road / Piccadilly could have been expected to get you to Ashton any sooner than alighting at Bolton as planned and getting the next train to Victoria, unless you switch to a different mode (e.g Uber as the passenger ultimately did).
If I were TPE I would ask why the passenger chose to remain on the train to Manchester? Even if the connection were missed I'm struggling to understand how continuing to Manchester Oxford Road / Piccadilly could have been expected to get you to Ashton any sooner than alighting at Bolton as planned and getting the next train to Victoria, unless you switch to a different mode (e.g Uber as the passenger ultimately did).
There was a connection from Piccadilly to Stalybridge at 13:00ish & would’ve been picked up from Stalybridge by family, but TPE was delayed even further making the connection impossible.
Otherwise at Bolton it would be a 1h wait for the next train at which point the 13:00 would’ve arrived at Stalybridge & would’ve been a lot less of a delay.
Planned service arrives Ashton 13:05ish, the 13:00 from Piccadilly arrives 13:12 to Stalybridge, so wouldn’t of even been eligible for DR
There was a connection from Piccadilly to Stalybridge at 13:00ish & would’ve been picked up from Stalybridge by family, but TPE was delayed even further making the connection impossible.
Otherwise at Bolton it would be a 1h wait for the next train at which point the 13:00 would’ve arrived at Stalybridge & would’ve been a lot less of a delay.
Planned service arrives Ashton 13:05ish, the 13:00 from Piccadilly arrives 13:12 to Stalybridge, so wouldn’t of even been eligible for DR
An arrival time at Stalybridge would be totally irrelevant to a claim for late arrival at Ashton!
Delay Repay is based on what time you reach your destination station. If your friend didn't actually travel to Ashton station, then he shouldn't be claiming DR for a late arrival there. That could be seen as fraudulent.
You don't say what type of ticket your friend had, and whether it was valid for travel to Piccadilly or Stalybridge. However, if your friend's ticket was valid for travel to Piccadilly, and allowed ending his journey short there, then he should be able to claim DR for the late arrival there. Otherwise, he might be able to claim for the delayed arrival in Bolton.
. If your friend didn't actually travel to Ashton station, then he shouldn't be claiming DR for a late arrival there. That could be seen as fraudulent.
I'm not sure that's true. If they eventually travelled to their destination that they would have travelled to Ashton for are they not supposed to claim delay repay for the delay to their final destination? If my final connecting train is cancelled and I have to wait an hour for a taxi I'm not going to just not claim for the delay because I went home.
But permission was obtained from the train manager, as it made the most logical sense to staff & friend to travel to Stalybridge, as it made no difference if they got to Ashton or Stalybridge, they would be picked up from either station.
If this is seen as fraudulent, then what would the correct approach be? Because the journey from Bolton to anywhere never took place, the journey ended at Piccadilly.
The final destination was not Bolton, nor are the tickets to Bolton - so claiming DR there would be more fraudulent I would imagine. One would say abandoned journey, but realistically they made 90% of the journey and didn't travel back to origin (as per NRCoT).
I'm not sure that's true. If they eventually travelled to their destination that they would have travelled to Ashton for are they not supposed to claim delay repay for the delay to their final destination? If my final connecting train is cancelled and I have to wait an hour for a taxi I'm not going to just not claim for the delay because I went home.
If you had to wait an hour for a railway-supplied taxi to get you to your destination station, then you would be entitled to claim for the whole journey. However, if you abandoned your rail journey at the connecting station, and made your own arrangements to travel directly home, then claiming that you arrived at your destination station xx minutes late when in fact you never went there, then that would be fraudulent.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
But permission was obtained from the train manager, as it made the most logical sense to staff & friend to travel to Stalybridge, as it made no difference if they got to Ashton or Stalybridge, they would be picked up from either station.
If this is seen as fraudulent, then what would the correct approach be? Because the journey from Bolton to anywhere never took place, the journey ended at Piccadilly.
The final destination was not Bolton, nor are the tickets to Bolton - so claiming DR there would be more fraudulent I would imagine. One would say abandoned journey, but realistically they made 90% of the journey and didn't travel back to origin (as per NRCoT).
Your friend was given special permission to travel to Stalybridge, which they only partially used. But this is irrelevant to any DR claim, which is based on the planned itinerary, and the delay in arriving at the final station, and the ticket held.
As your friend did not have a ticket valid for travel to Piccadilly, any claim for late arrival there would almost certainly be rejected. And your friend did not actually travel to either Stalybridge or Ashton stations, so can't claim for a late arrival at either of those stations.
As I see it, the correct course of action is to claim for late arrival at Bolton, using the ticket valid to Bolton, and claim for a fee-free refund of the Bolton to Ashton ticket which your friend did not make use of due to the disruption.
As I see it, the correct course of action is to claim for late arrival at Bolton, using the ticket valid to Bolton, and claim for a fee-free refund of the Bolton to Ashton ticket which your friend did not make use of due to the disruption.
And would this advice be the same if the tickets were non-split?
Edit to add;
To make it clear, an email was sent to TPE in November for this journey for Delay Repay, and not a DR claim. They replied back and opened a DR case for the journey, which was rejected & unable to appeal. When emailing TPE back, they said that an appeal is not possible.
It can't be because you wouldn't be able to get any refund. In my view getting a refund on the second ticket is incorrect since getting permission to use it on a different route doesn't stop it being used. The friend was given permission *to use the second ticket to Piccadilly* not just to travel if they'd have nothing past Bolton.
As I see it, the correct course of action is to claim for late arrival at Bolton, using the ticket valid to Bolton, and claim for a fee-free refund of the Bolton to Ashton ticket which your friend did not make use of due to the disruption.
I disagree with this (partly because of the above) and think the correct course of action is to claim delay repay for the whole journey either to Piccadilly or Ashton. Since there are accusations of fraud I will leave which one to the OP.
Edit to add;
To make it clear, an email was sent to TPE in November for this journey for Delay Repay, and not a DR claim. They replied back and opened a DR case for the journey, which was rejected & unable to appeal. When emailing TPE back, they said that an appeal is not possible.
It can't be because you wouldn't be able to get any refund. In my view getting a refund on the second ticket is incorrect since getting permission to use it on a different route doesn't stop it being used. The friend was given permission *to use the second ticket to Piccadilly* not just to travel if they'd have nothing past Bolton.
Were they? Was the ticket annotated in any way to show it's changed validity? Or was the friend just given verbal authority to travel to Stalybridge? Agreed that the authority may not have been given if they hadn't held the ticket to Ashton, but that is not the same thing as saying they were given authority to use a ticket to Ashton to travel to Stalybridge.
Unless the guard annotated the ticket to show it's changed validity, the friend is going to have a hard time proving that he was given permission to use the ticket to travel to Piccadilly.
I disagree with this (partly because of the above) and think the correct course of action is to claim delay repay for the whole journey either to Piccadilly or Ashton. Since there are accusations of fraud I will leave which one to the OP.
The friend could claim for a late arrival at Piccadilly, but that claim is likely to be rejected without a ticket valid for travel to Piccadilly, unless there is some way of proving that they had authority to use the second ticket to travel there. Note that an advance ticket does not permit stopping short, so if they were given permission to travel to Stalybridge instead of Ashton, it is arguable that stopping short at Piccadilly was not permitted.
Claiming a late arrival at a station they never travelled to would be fraud - I would strongly advise against this if they have already told TPE they didn't travel to Ashton.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
With advance tickets, you are not permitted to stop short. Were they given explicit permission to stop short at Piccadilly, or were they given permission to travel via Piccadilly to Stalybridge? Any advice would depend on exactly what they were given permission to do, and what proof they have of it.
Fortunately, with the split tickets, they can legitimately claim based on the journey to Bolton, regardless of anything else that happened after that.
Edit to add;
To make it clear, an email was sent to TPE in November for this journey for Delay Repay, and not a DR claim. They replied back and opened a DR case for the journey, which was rejected & unable to appeal.
What do you mean by "unable to appeal"? Do you mean that your friend tried to appeal but was unable to do so, or TPE said in the rejection email that there was no way to appeal?
Did TPE say why they were not permitting an appeal? Rejecting a claim that they themselves opened seems absurd, to not even allow an appeal is ridiculous - unless your friend failed to appeal before the deadline for doing so.
The date before which an appeal must be raised should have been stated on the email rejecting the claim. It would not be possible to appeal after this date. Do you know the date the claim was rejected, and the date your friend tried to appeal.
Assuming that your friend did try and appeal before the deadline, I suggest emailing TPE back, asking if their refusal to allow an appeal constitutes a letter of deadlock for you to raise the issue with the ombudsman. That may spur them into a rethink of the case, but if not then raise it with the ombudsman.
They were provided a written note by the TM, allowing them to travel to Stalybridge via Piccadilly with their tickets. They would've had a hard time to exit the barriers at Piccadilly without it otherwise
But they missed any train from Piccadilly, leaving them with either another 1h wait there, or attempt to go to Victoria with luggage, so they opted to take a taxi of their own expense.
When they attempted to appeal the DR Claim, it would redirect them to open a brand new claim. They emailed TPE with this information, following the existing email chain, and TPE replied back saying that the rejection is correct, they also said this:
While I understand that you chose to remain on the service as you believed you may have missed your connection, Delay Repay calculations are based on the next available service. Had you remained on your originally intended train, you would have arrived in time to make your connection at Bolton.
We provided a response to TPE and there has been no reply since, granted was only a few days ago so will give them some time.
Just to be clear, an email was sent to TPE in November with this information, as a DR Claim wouldn't of really been appropriate, nor was "Abandoned Journey". They replied a few weeks ago and on behalf of my friend, opened 2 DR Claims - one for this journey and one for another unrelated journey. This journey has been rejected based on the facts above.
The claim was rejected on Tue 3rd Feb. We emailed TPE CS on Wed 4th Feb requesting an appeal, TPE replied on Thu 5th Feb, and a response to TPE was provided on the same-day. TPE responded on the 5th Feb with the above comment, and we provided a response 2h later.
edit to add:
I just realised that the response from TPE says:
Had you remained on your originally intended train, you would have arrived in time to make your connection at Bolton
I'm not sure that they quite understand the geography or what exactly happened, so when / if they respond, it might be worthwhile to explain the journey precisely...
(When I say 'we' I refer to me helping my friend write the email / go over the details. I was not travelling on the service.)
They were provided a written note by the TM, allowing them to travel to Stalybridge via Piccadilly with their tickets. They would've had a hard time to exit the barriers at Piccadilly without it otherwise
So they did not have authority to travel TO Piccadilly, only authority to travel VIA Piccadilly based on a ticket that does not permit stopping short. That makes it very likely that any claim based on late arrival at Piccadilly would fail, as your friend did not have a valid itinerary to travel to Piccadilly.
That is the way some TOC appeal systems work. It gives the opportunity for the claimant to re-enter the details, in case they originally entered something incorrectly. At some point in re-entering the details there should have been the option to select "appeal" as the reason for the claim. Did your friend go through the full process of re-entering the claim, or did they just give up when they saw that it was generating a new claim?
They emailed TPE with this information, following the existing email chain, and TPE replied back saying that the rejection is correct
We provided a response to TPE and there has been no reply since, granted was only a few days ago so will give them some time.
Just to be clear, an email was sent to TPE in November with this information, as a DR Claim wouldn't of really been appropriate, nor was "Abandoned Journey". They replied a few weeks ago and on behalf of my friend, opened 2 DR Claims - one for this journey and one for another unrelated journey. This journey has been rejected based on the facts above.
The claim was rejected on Tue 3rd Feb. We emailed TPE CS on Wed 4th Feb requesting an appeal, TPE replied on Thu 5th Feb, and a response to TPE was provided on the same-day. TPE responded on the 5th Feb with the above comment, and we provided a response 2h later.
edit to add:
I just realised that the response from TPE says:
I'm not sure that they quite understand the geography or what exactly happened, so when / if they respond, it might be worthwhile to explain the journey precisely...
If you haven't explained it already, then you should certainly do so!
However, I am not sure that you understand what Delay Repay is intended to do. It is not intended to compensate for late arrival home. It compensates for late arrival at the specified destination station. Assuming that the destination station entered on the actual Delay Repay claim was Ashton, that will be the basis on what the claim will have been decided on: what time would your friend have arrived at Ashton if they had stuck to their planned itinerary. The late arrivals at Bolton and Piccadilly or potential late arrival at Stalybridge would not have been considered, if they were not specified as the destination station on the claim. It is important that you and your friend are clear with TPE about what you are actually claiming for, within the constraints of the Delay Repay rules. What station is your friend claiming late arrival at?
Unfortunately there are things that a passenger can do to speed up their journey that can affect their eligibility to delay repay, and I fear this is such a case. By choosing to change their itinerary, your friend unwittingly delayed themselves. TPE are unlikely to pay for this.
As I see it, your friend has four options. Either continue to press for a claim for a late arrival at Ashton, which is likely to continue to be rejected as your friend would have arrived there on timeish if they had stuck to the planned itinerary. Claim for late arrival at Stalybridge, which is likely to be rejected as your friend never actually travelled there. Claim for late arrival at Piccadilly, which is likely to be rejected as your friend had no authority to end their journey there. Or claim for late arrival at Bolton.
A claim for late arrival at Bolton should have been an open and shut case: they held a ticket valid for travel to Bolton, and arrived there late. Whether your friend could get TPE to reconsider their claim on this basis at this stage is questionable, but might be worth a try. If TPE claim it is now too late to do so, point out their delay in responding to your original email.
That is the way some TOC appeal systems work. It gives the opportunity for the claimant to re-enter the details, in case they originally entered something incorrectly. At some point in re-entering the details there should have been the option to select "appeal" as the reason for the claim. Did your friend go through the full process of re-entering the claim, or did they just give up when they saw that it was generating a new claim?
Which is impossible to do, because the system rejects any date that is over 28 days, which this was considering it was in November.
We'll continue to push TPE for a full refund, as imho, I can't see anything that would've been done differently. It's unreasonable to ask the passenger to (a) know that their original connection was on-time, when nobody on-board knew and (b) wait an hour+ for a train to get to their destination.
Any reasonable person would've done the same, especially after getting this advice from the TM.
If this is a reference to Delay Repay, it's compensation and not a refund. You have no entitlement to a refund of a used ticket so it is important not to get the terms confused especially when you are disputing the decision.
I don't agree. I don't think a delay repay claim to Bolton would have been technically valid since their whole journey (remember the delay repay rules are based on journeys and not tickets) was not to Bolton (it was to Ashton).
(I'm sure practically it would have been accepted and no one would notice if it had been submitted to Bolton)
We'll continue to push TPE for a full refund, as imho, I can't see anything that would've been done differently. It's unreasonable to ask the passenger to (a) know that their original connection was on-time, when nobody on-board knew and (b) wait an hour+ for a train to get to their destination.
Any reasonable person would've done the same, especially after getting this advice from the TM.
Your friend was very lucky to get a guard who was prepared to not only authorise re-routing (especially for an advance ticket), but to put it in writing too. The usual response is that if you have missed a connection, then you wait for the next one (be that one, two or more hours later), and tell you to claim Delay Repay. And Delay Repay is calculated based on the passenger doing that.
I don't think anyone disagrees with what your friend did on the day. However, I think you and your friend probably need to be clearer with TPE as to what it is you want now. Yes, you want to claim Delay Repay, but what for? Delay Repay claims are based on the destination station and the itinerary followed to get there. Customer Services seem to have translated your email into a claim for Delay Repay for an itinerary to Ashton, overlooking the fact that your friend didn't actually travel to Ashton. As you have seen, this claim has been rejected because, if your friend had followed that itinerary, they would have made the connection and arrived within time. I suspect that if you continue to appeal this claim, it will continue to be rejected for that reason.
What actually happened was that your friend changed their itinerary, to travel to Stalybridge. And then changed their itinerary again, to stop short at Piccadilly. In my opinion, that is the itinerary that you should be asking for your friend's claim to be assessed on.
They have held their ground and provided a deadlock letter for the Ombudsman. It was provided by Customer Relations and not a Complaint process (I'm not sure if there's a difference)
This is probably the only useful part of the email that they provided, which seems to be a complete copy/paste of what they sent before:
In regards to your request for Delay Repay compensation, as previously mentioned, your service from Glasgow Central to Bolton was scheduled to arrive at 12:06 but arrived at 12:26. Your connecting service from Bolton to Ashton?under?Lyne was scheduled to depart at 12:25 but departed at 12:31. As Bolton station has a minimum connection time of 5 minutes, it is determined that there was sufficient time for you to make your connection, and therefore the journey does not meet the criteria for Delay Repay compensation.
A message to the Ombudsman was sent, and we'll see how it goes. Considering the length of time it's been (4 months now), it's not really about money. I will update the post when the Ombudsman replies.
It doesn't surprise me. They are continuing to treat your claim on the basis of your friend's original itinerary. It looks to me that they feel confident that the ombudsman will too. I hope that in your submission to the ombudsman you made it clear that was not the itinerary that your friend actually followed, and so should not be used to assess the claim.
It doesn’t surprise me either to be honest, they probably get so many emails too and every response feels like it’s the same thing just copy / pasted, so they likely didn’t even read the email properly to understand.
I made sure that it was pointed out very clearly that the itinerary was not followed and pointed out what actually took place as well as attaching the Uber fare, one can hope but neither of us have high expectations
My friend wanted to leave it originally (not escalate it) but I insisted to see where it’d go
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The Ombudsman has provided us with a response from TPE.
TPE is offering £25.50, £20 goodwill gesture and £5.50 delay compensation (TPE say it's 15-29 delay) - the delay compensation is excluding the SF upgrade, as TPE says that compensation was received already for it, but they are looking at the return portion upgrade that was compensated, and not outbound.
My friend is reluctant to proceed further and is leaning towards accepting; I on the other hand would take my chances and ask for more, but with how long-winded the process has been, I feel like accepting the offer too.
Total paid (for this portion) was £63, so £25.50 isn't a horrendous outcome.
At present, the ombudsman has not considered your case. All that has happened is that he has forwarded your submission to TPE, and forwarded their response back to you. It does surprise me that TPE are now offering something, when they have previously refused.
You previously stated that you told the ombudsman that you didn't want the claim considered on the basis of the itinerary to Ashton, that TPE were basing their earlier rejections on. What did you ask for it to be based on? What station are you now claiming your friend was late arriving at?
And what are TPE offering compensation for? A 15-29 minute delay to where? And on what ticket(s). I suspect that this is based on the late arrival at Bolton, calculated on the price of the Bolton ticket. £5.50 is not a recognised DR fraction of £63.
You told us previously that the journey was made using two advance single tickets. What is this SF upgrade and return portion that you are now mentioning? Singles don't have outbound and return portions.
I hope that your communications with the ombudsman are clearer than those you post on here!
If you reject TPE's response, then the ombudsman will consider your case. If the £5.50 that TPE are offering is for the late arrival into Bolton, and based on the price of the Bolton ticket alone, then personally I would accept it. As previously noted, there are good grounds for the ombudsman to reject a claim based on a late arrival at a station that your friend never actually travelled to (Ashton or Stalybridge) or didn't have authority to travel to (Piccadilly).
I would like to think that the ombudsman wouldn't take away what TPE have now offered. But depending on what exactly you are now claiming for, it is possible he could rule that it isn't a valid claim.
You previously stated that you told the ombudsman that you didn't want the claim considered on the basis of the itinerary to Ashton, that TPE were basing their earlier rejections on. What did you ask for it to be based on? What station are you now claiming your friend was late arriving at?
When submitting the complaint to the Ombudsman, we requested that the case be reviewed on the basis that they remained travelling towards Manchester that further connections there were missed.
And what are TPE offering compensation for? A 15-29 minute delay to where? And on what ticket(s). I suspect that this is based on the late arrival at Bolton, calculated on the price of the Bolton ticket. £5.50 is not a recognised DR fraction of £63.
They use the late arrival into Bolton to calculate DR:
As the ticket was used, the consumer would not be entitled to a full refund. However, I would be happy to offer compensation for a 15–29 minute delay, as the TPE service arrived 19 minutes later than scheduled. This equates to £5.50 (25% of the combined ticket value of £19.70 and £2.30).
You told us previously that the journey was made using two advance single tickets. What is this SF upgrade and return portion that you are now mentioning? Singles don't have outbound and return portions.
There were two separate journeys made; Glasgow Central - Ashton and Ashton - Glasgow Central. The latter was approved as a DR claim just fine & compensation for declass first class.
A Seatfrog upgrade was used for both (two separate upgrades purchased) Glasgow Central - Ashon and Ashton - Glasgow Central
TPE has looked at the compensation received from the second journey (Ashton - Glasgow Central), and applied the compensation received from that journey to the claim being made here via the Ombudsman.
I would say they did have authority - they had permission from the train manager to travel via Manchester to Stalybridge, at which point the journey was no longer feasible at Manchester.
In regards to your request for Delay Repay compensation, as previously mentioned, your service from Glasgow Central to Bolton was scheduled to arrive at 12:06 but arrived at 12:26. Your connecting service from Bolton to Ashton?under?Lyne was scheduled to depart at 12:25 but departed at 12:31. As Bolton station has a minimum connection time of 5 minutes, it is determined that there was sufficient time for you to make your connection, and therefore the journey does not meet the criteria for Delay Repay compensation.
Yet again another ToC claiming that the MCT is some form of maximum connection time also.
What happens if the pax is disabled or has a large amount of luggage to convey between platforms?
I am also intrigued how accurate those times are, it would be nice to know more exact timings to see if it was perhaps less than the prescribed 5 minutes taking into account door opening on arrival and pre departure door closing (e.g. 30 seconds before booked departure time).
I had a similar dispute with GTR recently and did finally come out on top, however I still need to refer the case to the ombudsman as they seem to wish to kosh down journeys that are itineraries on NRE that are slightly shorter than the MCT due to the allow less time to cross London at exactly the same time. So the MCT for them is a sort of maximum and minimum to use against you.
I am also intrigued how accurate those times are, it would be nice to know more exact timings to see if it was perhaps less than the prescribed 5 minutes taking into account door opening on arrival and pre departure door closing (e.g. 30 seconds before booked departure time).
Probably doable in terms of MCT, allowing 30 seconds for door openings on TPE and 30 seconds for door closings on NT, but I’m not sure how accurate actual arrival is in terms of pulling into the station and stopping, or if it’s just a simple “train pass signal at this time”
I had a similar dispute with GTR recently and did finally come out on top, however I still need to refer the case to the ombudsman as they seem to wish to kosh down journeys that are itineraries on NRE that are slightly shorter than the MCT due to the allow less time to cross London at exactly the same time. So the MCT for them is a sort of maximum and minimum to use against you.
There were two separate journeys made; Glasgow Central - Ashton and Ashton - Glasgow Central. The latter was approved as a DR claim just fine & compensation for declass first class.
A Seatfrog upgrade was used for both (two separate upgrades purchased) Glasgow Central - Ashon and Ashton - Glasgow Central
TPE has looked at the compensation received from the second journey (Ashton - Glasgow Central), and applied the compensation received from that journey to the claim being made here via the Ombudsman.
When TPE compensated your friend for the declass first class, was that compensation based on the cost of BOTH upgrades, or just the cost of the Ashton - Glasgow upgrade?
Provided you can show that your friend had two separately-priced upgrades, and you can show that TPE did NOT refund the Glasgow - Ashton upgrade, then I feel that you have a good case for asking for the cost of this upgrade to be included in the DR calculation.
The one fly in the ointment is that if as you say the upgrade was for Glasgow - Ashton, and TPE are only providing DR for Glasgow - Bolton, how much of the upgrade cost should be included in the DR calculation?
I would say they did have authority - they had permission from the train manager to travel via Manchester to Stalybridge, at which point the journey was no longer feasible at Manchester.
Just because there would be a wait for the next connection, doesn't mean that the journey wasn't feasible. And as previously explained, authority to travel VIA is not the same as authority to travel TO. Advance tickets do not allow you to break journey, or stop short. In practice, it is unlikely that anyone would stop you ending a journey short, although there have been cases reported of barrier staff being reluctant to let passengers through the barriers. Strictly speaking, your friend did not have a valid ticket or authority to travel from Bolton TO Manchester. As such, and also because your friend did not travel to Ashton, I would be wary about pushing the ombudsman to have the cost of the Bolton - Ashton ticket included in the DR calculation.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
