Delay repay with GWR

[Fawkes Cat]

And delay repay is there to give compensation for the railway's failures

'Delay Repay' is compensation for inconvenience arising from delayed a arrival at one's destination regardless of the cause.

- I haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but yes, on this point I was wrong, and Starmill right. Many apologies for setting off that tangent.

 

[35B]

I'm familiar with St David's and think 6 minutes is adequate time for an able-bodied and able-minded person to find an information screen and look up their train. The railway sets the minimum time at 6 minutes, too.



This is plainly not reasonable - if a passenger agrees to a 25 minute connection at Exeter St David's and it comes to 20 minutes because of a 5 minute delay, this does not warrant Delay Repay.

The only key here is whether the passenger had the minimum connection time, which is a time set by the railway to account for someone unfamiliar with a station to arrive at it, find where the next one is, and go to the correct platform.

If people are suggesting 6 minutes is too tight at Exeter St David's then that is a separate question, but from what I see, GWR have acted in accordance with the rules.

You miss something. She arrived at 1605, after her 1603 connection was already supposed to have left. In those circumstances, I wouldn’t expect someone to be showing the urgency required for a tight connection if they didn’t know their connecting train was also late. Certainly, I would not be expecting to make a connection in those circumstances.

 

[najaB]

I assume the connecting train hadn't disappeared off the screens?

It might have. Where a train has a booked wait different PIS has different behaviour. In any case, even going to look at the screen (for a train they didn't necessarily know would be there) eats into the six minutes.

 

[John R]

I would show some urgency in that scenario, given the relatively short delay, as there is a reasonable possibility that the onward train is late or is being held (as indeed was the case). And the national Rail app would also have shown that the connection was late too which is available to all passengers with a smartphone (ie 99.9% of the population under 20 likely to be travelling a long distance on their own).

 

[najaB]

And the national Rail app would also have shown that the connection was late too which is available to all passengers with a smartphone (ie 99.9% of the population under 20 likely to be travelling a long distance on their own).

The railway must not assume that passengers have constant access to online journey planning tools.

I would show some urgency in that scenario, given the relatively short delay, as there is a reasonable possibility that the onward train is late or is being held (as indeed was the case).

There is no reason for a passenger to assume that because one train is late any other train will also be delayed.

 

[Starmill]

I would show some urgency in that scenario, given the relatively short delay, as there is a reasonable possibility that the onward train is late

It's very unlikely that the typical person is going to be thinking like this. They shouldn't reasonably be expected to. It's quite typical of some railway enthusiasts to retcon in this way, though. What the majority of uninitiated people will do is ask a member of staff on the train, at a station or use a help point for advice.

This is an edge case at the very worst, although I think it's fairly clear. The customer's train ran late and their journey was delayed as a result. 'Delay Repay' compensation is therefore due. It really is that simple.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

So practical advice for the OP: it's not clear to us whether delay repay is due or not. So it's probably not clear to GWR either. Which means it's worth asking them to have another look at the Delay Repay claim. Maybe whoever has the other look will agree that it is payable. Or maybe they won't, but there's nothing to lose so unless the amount involved is negligible you may as well try.

 

[yorkie]

Without seeing the exact times of the services involved it is difficult to be certain, but there were 8 minutes (as booked) to make the connection, and the first train was 3 minutes late, and the second train departed on time, then there was - in practice - less than the minimum 6 minute interchange time.

As 6 minutes is the minimum interchange time, if you were left with only 5 due to a delay on the first train, then this is a valid Delay Repay claim, and GWR need to pay up. If they refuse, the next step is to contact the Rail Ombudsman.

 

[221129]

Without seeing the exact times of the services involved it is difficult to be certain, but there were 8 minutes (as booked) to make the connection, and the first train was 3 minutes late, and the second train departed on time, then there was - in practice - less than the minimum 6 minute interchange time.

As 6 minutes is the minimum interchange time, if you were left with only 5 due to a delay on the first train, then this is a valid Delay Repay claim, and GWR need to pay up. If they refuse, the next step is to contact the Rail Ombudsman.

But that's not what happened.

 

[221129]

I also note that it was a cross platform connection...

 

[najaB]

I also note that it was a cross platform connection.

I'm not familiar with the track layout at Exeter - is there any chance that a booked cross-platform connection wasn't cross platform on the day?

 

[800002]

Without seeing the exact times of the services involved it is difficult to be certain, but there were 8 minutes (as booked) to make the connection, and the first train was 3 minutes late, and the second train departed on time, then there was - in practice - less than the minimum 6 minute interchange time.

As 6 minutes is the minimum interchange time, if you were left with only 5 due to a delay on the first train, then this is a valid Delay Repay claim, and GWR need to pay up. If they refuse, the next step is to contact the Rail Ombudsman.

The itenaery was:

1C15 - 1315 PAD - Exeter SD 1555 (1556H, working) arrived at 1605 (10L)
2T22 - 1523 Exmouth - Paignton.
Exter SD 1554-1603 arrived 1556 (2L), departed 1611 (8L) - Teignmouth 1621 arrived 1631 (10L).

 

[800002]

I'm not familiar with the track layout at Exeter - is there any chance that a booked cross-platform connection wasn't cross platform on the day?

Possible - yes.
How long does CCF hold its data for? *anyone care to look?

 

[221129]

I'm not familiar with the track layout at Exeter - is there any chance that a booked cross-platform connection wasn't cross platform on the day?

Having looked at available data it shows it was as booked.

 

[najaB]

Having looked at available data it shows it was as booked.

If this was the case (a cross platform connection), then I'm leaning towards GWR being right to deny the claim. The six minutes available satisfies the minimum connection time, and even the least experienced of travellers should have been able to figure out in that time which train to catch when it was literally in front of them.

That said, I suppose it's possible that they couldn't see it depending on station layout.

 

[221129]

If this was the case (a cross platform connection), then I'm leaning towards GWR being right to deny the claim. The six minutes available satisfies the minimum connection time, and even the least experienced of travellers should have been able to figure out in that time which train to catch when it was literally in front of them.

That said, I suppose it's possible that they couldn't see it depending on station layout.

I mean the only you couldn't see it would be if you had a dog and a white stick. They also have a few agency staff pointing people in the right direction.

 

[tivoli]

Hello all. I haven't been back on here for a few days so was quite surprised and the conversations that have evolved but then that is what the forum is for. Anyway, good news is GWR have refunded full cost of the ticket. Thank you for the advice from those who were positive that this should be the result.