Delay Repay with split tickets - Refused compensation

[techy000]

Recently travelled with 2 tickets between Cardiff and Dundee.
Had 2 tickets to cover the journey:
Cardiff to Crewe - Purchased through TFW (20:03 from Cardiff, arrival in Crewe 22:55)
Crewe - Dundee -Purchsed with Caledonian Sleeper (23:45 from Crewe - 06:03 Dundee)
Tickets were for a specific train too, so they line up with the connecting times.

Due to delays sleeper arrived in Dundee at 08:30.

I find no way to submit tickets for the Cardiff - Crewe leg of journey with Caledonian Sleeper, only automated claim for the ticket purchased direct from them.

In an online chat they said they refuse the claim for the Cardiff - Crewe leg as it was not purchased as a connecting ticket. Is this correct? In the past with delays on Avanti and TFW doing the same journey and purchasign split tickets through different operators, I have had no problems in having the full journey compensation repaid in delayed incidents.

 

[redreni]

Is this correct?

No, not as far as I'm aware.

I would suggest contacting their Customer Relations department saying you want to make a manual delay repay claim, just gently pointing out that your journey was from Cardiff to Dundee, not Crewe to Dundee. It doesn't matter who you bought the tickets from, or whether you bought them all together, you were travelling on a valid itinerary with valid tickets covering the whole journey.

It can be administratively easier to claim delay repay if all tickets were bought at the same time and issued against an itinerary showing the full through journey. But if you book it as separate legs, that doesn't mean you're not entitled to compensation, as long as you intended to travel on a valid itinerary (i.e., in this case, allowing sufficient connection time at Crewe, which you did).

 

[styles]

Providing both legs were booked before you started your journey (which I assume is the case given one of them is a sleeper), then I can't see any reason to refuse this claim.

That said, a lot of the online claim forms aren't very well setup for split tickets, or at least, tickets purchased as separate bookings.

You'll need to contact Caledonian Sleeper customer services. I find their CS department is very helpful, though I'll admit I haven't had to put in a manual delay repay claim due to split ticketing across multiple retailers.

 

[yorkie]

Recently travelled with 2 tickets between Cardiff and Dundee.
Had 2 tickets to cover the journey:
Cardiff to Crewe - Purchased through TFW (20:03 from Cardiff, arrival in Crewe 22:55)
Crewe - Dundee -Purchsed with Caledonian Sleeper (23:45 from Crewe - 06:03 Dundee)
Tickets were for a specific train too, so they line up with the connecting times.

Due to delays sleeper arrived in Dundee at 08:30.

I find no way to submit tickets for the Cardiff - Crewe leg of journey with Caledonian Sleeper, only automated claim for the ticket purchased direct from them.

In an online chat they said they refuse the claim for the Cardiff - Crewe leg as it was not purchased as a connecting ticket. Is this correct? In the past with delays on Avanti and TFW doing the same journey and purchasign split tickets through different operators, I have had no problems in having the full journey compensation repaid in delayed incidents.

If it was all booked in compliance with minimum interchange times, and all tickets were purchased before any delays were known about, then you are entitled to claim for the full journey, and Caledonian Sleeper are wrong.

If you want to send a Tweet to Caledonian Sleeper, feel free to link it from here and the forum's account will back you up.

While this isn't in any way within the remit of the retailer, if anyone buys - as a through journey - from our ticketing site and is denied such a claim on the basis of having "split tickets", then I would do my best to help, and use any contacts I have to assist with the outcome.

 

[styles]

If it was all booked in compliance with minimum interchange times, and all tickets were purchased before any delays were known about, then you are entitled to claim for the full journey, and Caledonian Sleeper are wrong.

Just to pick up on a specific point here - would a passenger not be required to purchase all of their legs before starting their journey (as opposed to before a delay was realised)?

It seems a little odd to me that you could claim you'd booked a single journey with multiple tickets if you didn't buy all of the relevant tickets before boarding the first train. Logically to me, this would be two journeys.

I'm trying to think critically though, and arguably the CoT don't specify any conditions on when the tickets must be booked. I just wonder if there are any official policies around this.

 

[techy000]

Submitted the claim and just received this reply from customer services

Thank you for submitting your Delay Repay claim for your journey from Crewe to Dundee on 21/02/2025. Our records indicate that your train was delayed by more than 60 minutes. As per the terms of the Delay Repay scheme, we have processed your compensation.

Unfortunately, we are unable to process compensation for your journey from Cardiff to Crewe, as this journey was not affected by the delay to Dundee.

Please do not hesitate to get back in touch if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,


Guest Ambassador


Is there any section of national rail docs I could quote to appeal? Or should I just go straight to rail ombudsman.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2025 ==

Tickets for both legs were booked same time, just cannot book TFW leg on Caledonian website, hence having to book separate tickets.

Submitted the claim and just received this reply from customer services

Thank you for submitting your Delay Repay claim for your journey from Crewe to Dundee on 21/02/2025. Our records indicate that your train was delayed by more than 60 minutes. As per the terms of the Delay Repay scheme, we have processed your compensation.

Unfortunately, we are unable to process compensation for your journey from Cardiff to Crewe, as this journey was not affected by the delay to Dundee.

Please do not hesitate to get back in touch if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,


Guest Ambassador


Is there any section of national rail docs I could quote to appeal? Or should I just go straight to rail ombudsman

 

[redreni]

What a ridiculous response.

As if it matters how close you get to Dundee before the delay occurred. If the train was on time until just south of Dundee station and was then delayed for two hours, would they say you only get a refund on the last 1% of the ticket price as the other 99% of the journey ran on time? This reply is so absurd on its face that it's difficult to think how usefully to move the conversation forward.

You can't go to the Ombudsman without a deadlock letter. Personally I would just reply saying something like "Thanks for your reply. My journey was from Cardiff to Dundee, not Crewe to Dundee. Consequently I will not be accepting compensation based on only part of the fare. Please process my claim for compensation based on the through journey from Cardiff to Dundee, or else provide me with a deadlock letter."

 

[styles]

Submitted the claim and just received this reply from customer services

Thank you for submitting your Delay Repay claim for your journey from Crewe to Dundee on 21/02/2025. Our records indicate that your train was delayed by more than 60 minutes. As per the terms of the Delay Repay scheme, we have processed your compensation.

Unfortunately, we are unable to process compensation for your journey from Cardiff to Crewe, as this journey was not affected by the delay to Dundee.

Please do not hesitate to get back in touch if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,


Guest Ambassador


Is there any section of national rail docs I could quote to appeal? Or should I just go straight to rail ombudsman.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2025 ==

Tickets for both legs were booked same time, just cannot book TFW leg on Caledonian website, hence having to book separate tickets.

Submitted the claim and just received this reply from customer services

Thank you for submitting your Delay Repay claim for your journey from Crewe to Dundee on 21/02/2025. Our records indicate that your train was delayed by more than 60 minutes. As per the terms of the Delay Repay scheme, we have processed your compensation.

Unfortunately, we are unable to process compensation for your journey from Cardiff to Crewe, as this journey was not affected by the delay to Dundee.

Please do not hesitate to get back in touch if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,


Guest Ambassador


Is there any section of national rail docs I could quote to appeal? Or should I just go straight to rail ombudsman

Point them to the Conditions of Travel https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e...3/National_Rail_Conditions_of_Travel_2024.pdf

Specifically Section 14, which details that multiple tickets for a single journey convey the same rights as a single ticket for a journey.

 

[MrJeeves]

Is there any section of national rail docs I could quote to appeal? Or should I just go straight to rail ombudsman

I would point them to a staff brief issued by Rail Delivery Group on 10 January 2020 (emphasis mine):

Compensation for delays is usually paid when customers experience a delay on their full journey, regardless of the number of tickets held. When a delay results in a customer with multiple valid tickets arriving at their destination late, multiple tickets may be submitted with a claim for a delayed journey. Condition 33.1 of the NRCoT states:

In order to make a claim under the industry arrangements.… you must write to the relevant Train Company within 28 days of completing the relevant journey unless informed otherwise by the relevant Train Company. You will need to state the timetabled departure time of the train or trains you intended to use for your journey and provide a Ticket or other authority to travel which was valid for that journey.

It is very clear that the tickets were used to make a full journey from Cardiff to Dundee, and, as per this brief, compensation is due against the value of all tickets used for the journey.

The full PDF can be found in this post: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-of-number-of-tickets-held-mythbuster.198338/

 

[Watershed]

Recently travelled with 2 tickets between Cardiff and Dundee.
Had 2 tickets to cover the journey:
Cardiff to Crewe - Purchased through TFW (20:03 from Cardiff, arrival in Crewe 22:55)
Crewe - Dundee -Purchsed with Caledonian Sleeper (23:45 from Crewe - 06:03 Dundee)
Tickets were for a specific train too, so they line up with the connecting times.

Due to delays sleeper arrived in Dundee at 08:30.

I find no way to submit tickets for the Cardiff - Crewe leg of journey with Caledonian Sleeper, only automated claim for the ticket purchased direct from them.

In an online chat they said they refuse the claim for the Cardiff - Crewe leg as it was not purchased as a connecting ticket. Is this correct? In the past with delays on Avanti and TFW doing the same journey and purchasign split tickets through different operators, I have had no problems in having the full journey compensation repaid in delayed incidents.

Caledonian Sleeper are incorrect. It doesn't matter how or where you bought your tickets; if the conditions for splitting were met then you have a valid claim.

CS do seem to have form for rejecting Delay Repay claims that don't neatly fit into their automatic DR system. Ask them for a letter of deadlock so you can take it to the Rail Ombudsman - not that the Ombudsman is necessarily the best avenue for pursuing it.

Just to pick up on a specific point here - would a passenger not be required to purchase all of their legs before starting their journey (as opposed to before a delay was realised)?

It seems a little odd to me that you could claim you'd booked a single journey with multiple tickets if you didn't buy all of the relevant tickets before boarding the first train. Logically to me, this would be two journeys.

I'm trying to think critically though, and arguably the CoT don't specify any conditions on when the tickets must be booked. I just wonder if there are any official policies around this.

The NRCoT don't explicitly state you need all tickets before you begin your journey, however it is something that could be interpreted as an implied term. Certainly most TOCs' Charters (as well as the PRO) would rule out compensation for any delay that could be anticipated at the time of purchase.

 

[Snow1964]

The problem is they keep insisting journey started at Crewe, it needs the start of journey manually amended to Cardiff

So needs to be a manual delay repay claim for whole journey, not an automatic one for part of the journey. They have got the time at end correct (and ignored the intermediate changes), but not included all the journey tickets so basing repay on incorrect ticket price.

 

[behuk]

Submitted the claim and just received this reply from customer services

Thank you for submitting your Delay Repay claim for your journey from Crewe to Dundee on 21/02/2025. Our records indicate that your train was delayed by more than 60 minutes. As per the terms of the Delay Repay scheme, we have processed your compensation.

Unfortunately, we are unable to process compensation for your journey from Cardiff to Crewe, as this journey was not affected by the delay to Dundee.

Please do not hesitate to get back in touch if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,


Guest Ambassador


Is there any section of national rail docs I could quote to appeal? Or should I just go straight to rail ombudsman.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2025 ==

Tickets for both legs were booked same time, just cannot book TFW leg on Caledonian website, hence having to book separate tickets.

Assuming that you told Caledonian Sleeper that your journey started from Cardiff and not Crewe then I think the First Ambassador's reply is bordering on fraud to be honest.

To meet the definition of fraud by false representation:

• Their statement needs to be dishonest, that is, something that should have been reasonably known to be untrue. I think this is the case because I think it's reasonable for Train Operating Companies to understand and consistently apply the rules set out in the National Rail Conditions of Travel.
• Their statement needs to make a gain for them or to cause a loss (or risk of loss) to another person. Depriving you of the compensation that you are entitled to is a loss.

On this basis I would be tempted to summarise the relevant facts in a letter before action and send it to the registered office of Caledonian Sleeper. Although the Citizens Advice template only allows for 14 days before a claim, I would suggest allowing 28 days as this makes it harder for anyone to claim that you've been unreasonable. As well as claiming for the missing compensation you can also claim for your costs to date – I generally claim £15 per email or £20 per letter (the latter including second or first class postage as required, but charging extra for e.g. special delivery with consequential loss if the letter is being sent pursuant to an order by the court).

At the risk of stating the obvious, I am not a lawyer so please do not consider the above as formal "advice", although I can confirm that this approach worked fairly well with Govia Thameslink Railway when they incorrectly declined 3 delay repay claims that I submitted in about as many weeks – they sent through a settlement payment early in the morning on the day when we were due to confirm our hearing date in the County Court.

 

[Cantab26]

Assuming that you told Caledonian Sleeper that your journey started from Cardiff and not Crewe then I think the First Ambassador's reply is bordering on fraud to be honest.

To meet the definition of fraud by false representation:

• Their statement needs to be dishonest, that is, something that should have been reasonably known to be untrue. I think this is the case because I think it's reasonable for Train Operating Companies to understand and consistently apply the rules set out in the National Rail Conditions of Travel.
• Their statement needs to make a gain for them or to cause a loss (or risk of loss) to another person. Depriving you of the compensation that you are entitled to is a loss.

This is legally irrelevant as far as a civil claim in respect of any unpaid compensation is concerned.

As well as claiming for the missing compensation you can also claim for your costs to date – I generally claim £15 per email or £20 per letter (the latter including second or first class postage as required, but charging extra for e.g. special delivery with consequential loss if the letter is being sent pursuant to an order by the court).

There is no legal basis to claim such amounts.

 

[AlterEgo]

Assuming that you told Caledonian Sleeper that your journey started from Cardiff and not Crewe then I think the First Ambassador's reply is bordering on fraud to be honest.

To meet the definition of fraud by false representation:

• Their statement needs to be dishonest, that is, something that should have been reasonably known to be untrue. I think this is the case because I think it's reasonable for Train Operating Companies to understand and consistently apply the rules set out in the National Rail Conditions of Travel.
• Their statement needs to make a gain for them or to cause a loss (or risk of loss) to another person. Depriving you of the compensation that you are entitled to is a loss.

By your definition any statement a staff member makes which ends up being contrary to the NRCoT is "bordering on fraud", an obviously ridiculous position.

 

[styles]

Assuming that you told Caledonian Sleeper that your journey started from Cardiff and not Crewe then I think the First Ambassador's reply is bordering on fraud to be honest.

To meet the definition of fraud by false representation:

• Their statement needs to be dishonest, that is, something that should have been reasonably known to be untrue. I think this is the case because I think it's reasonable for Train Operating Companies to understand and consistently apply the rules set out in the National Rail Conditions of Travel.
• Their statement needs to make a gain for them or to cause a loss (or risk of loss) to another person. Depriving you of the compensation that you are entitled to is a loss.

On this basis I would be tempted to summarise the relevant facts in a letter before action and send it to the registered office of Caledonian Sleeper. Although the Citizens Advice template only allows for 14 days before a claim, I would suggest allowing 28 days as this makes it harder for anyone to claim that you've been unreasonable. As well as claiming for the missing compensation you can also claim for your costs to date – I generally claim £15 per email or £20 per letter (the latter including second or first class postage as required, but charging extra for e.g. special delivery with consequential loss if the letter is being sent pursuant to an order by the court).

At the risk of stating the obvious, I am not a lawyer so please do not consider the above as formal "advice", although I can confirm that this approach worked fairly well with Govia Thameslink Railway when they incorrectly declined 3 delay repay claims that I submitted in about as many weeks – they sent through a settlement payment early in the morning on the day when we were due to confirm our hearing date in the County Court.

I think you'd have a very hard time proving that a staff member making a mistake is dishonest. Or at least, the staff member's defence would be that it was a mistake and proving the opposite would be incredibly difficult.

I also think threatening legal proceedings before putting in an appeal, and if rejected, before trying the rail ombudsman, is a bit strong.

As for county court, that would be a legitimate and reasonable route if the operator and rail ombudsman didn't back you up; but that is for a civil claim for the money, not to hear a criminal charge of fraud, which is a whole other ball game, and would be one for the police and CPS to pursue (which I don't believe they would on the basis of the evidential test).

 

[techy000]

Wanted to say thank you to all for you help and information. Finally secured the full claim with Caledonian sleeper today. Being able to quote the NRCoT and staff guide was instrumental in them agreeing to the claim.
Anyone else coming across this post and having same issues, just quote the NRCoT and Staff guide as has been posted here.

 

[yorkie]

Wanted to say thank you to all for you help and information. Finally secured the full claim with Caledonian sleeper today. Being able to quote the NRCoT and staff guide was instrumental in them agreeing to the claim.
Anyone else coming across this post and having same issues, just quote the NRCoT and Staff guide as has been posted here.

Great; thanks for the feedback

 

[BrasseyFan]

Point them to the Conditions of Travel https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e...3/National_Rail_Conditions_of_Travel_2024.pdf

Specifically Section 14, which details that multiple tickets for a single journey convey the same rights as a single ticket for a journey.

I must be being dense, but I cannot see anything in Conditions of Travel Section 14 about multiple 'split' tickets conveying the same rights as a single ticket for the complete itinerary (see below).

Can someone clarify as I'm submitting a claim where the first leg of a journey (which also ended at the first 'split') was over a hour late and caused all downstream connections to be missed?

Is this the correct section referred to?



Cheers,
BrasseyFan

 

[MrJeeves]

I must be being dense, but I cannot see anything in Conditions of Travel Section 14 about multiple 'split' tickets conveying the same rights as a single ticket for the complete itinerary (see below).

It's the fact that multiple tickets can be used to complete one single journey, and delay repay is a claim against your journey being delayed rather than a specific leg.

If you need to argue the case, you'd be better off quoting the staff brief issued by Rail Delivery Group on this matter, referenced above in post #9.

 

[londonbridge]

I had similar problems with Northern after a match at Bolton, train from Horwich Parkway to Piccadilly was delayed so I missed my booked train from Piccadilly to Euston. They refused the claim as the Parkway to Piccadilly leg wasn’t delayed enough to trigger compensation, had to appeal stating my journey was Parkway to Euston before they coughed up my full entitlement.

 

[redreni]

I had similar problems with Northern after a match at Bolton, train from Horwich Parkway to Piccadilly was delayed so I missed my booked train from Piccadilly to Euston. They refused the claim as the Parkway to Piccadilly leg wasn’t delayed enough to trigger compensation, had to appeal stating my journey was Parkway to Euston before they coughed up my full entitlement.

This happens so often that I have begun to suspect (though I am not alleging this as I don't know) that it is a deliberate policy to make these claims go through an escalation process before they can be paid in full.

By 'these claims', I mean claims where the amount claimed for a longer journey due to a delay on a connecting leg is higher than the fare paid to the TOC that caused the delay for the connecting leg.

From the TOC's point of view it introduces an extra check on those claims to make double sure they're valid before they're paid. And of course it has the happy side effect that many people will simply give up after the initial refusal.

 

[Starmill]

Realistically, if the company makes a mistake in their own favour (or an alleged mistake, as relevant) a hundred times, and then on the 101st time pays up, there's pretty much nothing you can do about it if they pay.

If you don't wish to tolerate this kind of behaviour, then your only option is to clearly state what you want after you've been around the houses twice, and point out you'll litigate if you don't get it within a reasonable time, setting a deadline date to receive payment. Then you must follow through on your deadline. Most people simply will not do that, so for most people the company will get away with the mistakes in their favour.

If you make a mistake, of course, and for that a criminal penalty can be threatened, then there's every chance you would be threatened with prosecution for it on the first occasion.

 

[redreni]

Realistically, if the company makes a mistake in their own favour (or an alleged mistake, as relevant) a hundred times, and then on the 101st time pays up, there's pretty much nothing you can do about it if they pay.

If you don't wish to tolerate this kind of behaviour, then your only option is to clearly state what you want after you've been around the houses twice, and point out you'll litigate if you don't get it within a reasonable time, setting a deadline date to receive payment. Then you must follow through on your deadline. Most people simply will not do that, so for most people the company will get away with the mistakes in their favour.

If you make a mistake, of course, and for that a criminal penalty can be threatened, then there's every chance you would be threatened with prosecution for it on the first occasion.

Quite. And to be clear, I would have no objection if they wanted to introduce extra checks, internally, on claims that meet certain criteria that mean they're particularly concerned to make sure they're not paid out wrongly. But the process for that should be that the system flags it for a manual check, and maybe the first person who checks it has to get it cross-checked by a colleague or a supervisor before they can approve it. The customer would know nothing about that.

What I would object to, if it is happening (which I suspect it is), is misusing the rejection and appeal process as a way of preventing payment without additional scrutiny.