False complaints - Train Companies seemingly increasing prosecuting false compensation claimants

[krus_aragon]

I might be missing something here, but if a train leaves station A on time and gets held up for over 30 minutes by a signalling issue between A and B, where B is the next stop, then the only people claiming delay repay for that train ought to have been physically on it. Even more so if station A was the start of the service. If I am missing something, please can someone explain.

If it left A on time, then yes, only people on board should have a claim from its operator for that A-B leg. There may be claims from people not on the train, depending on what the train was booked to do after arriving at B (does it terminate? when's it's next working?), as it will already be late when it arrives there. Those people would be claiming for a different journey to those already on board, though.

Similarly, there could be people who were delayed before getting to A and thus weren't on board, but they shouldn't be relevant as a claim is made to the operator of the first train to cause you delay.

It should (in theory) be possible to distinguish between these groups and end up with a number of people who should have physically been on the train between A and B in order to claim. Whether claims departments have the time and resources to do so is another matter.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

If it left A on time, then yes, only people on board should have a claim from its operator for that A-B leg. There may be claims from people not on the train, depending on what the train was booked to do after arriving at B (does it terminate? when's it's next working?), as it will already be late when it arrives there. Those people would be claiming for a different journey to those already on board, though.

Similarly, there could be people who were delayed before getting to A and thus weren't on board, but they shouldn't be relevant as a claim is made to the operator of the first train to cause you delay.

It should (in theory) be possible to distinguish between these groups and end up with a number of people who should have physically been on the train between A and B in order to claim. Whether claims departments have the time and resources to do so is another matter.

It could still be that passengers had intended to connect onto that train from another service operated by the same TOC. For example, passengers might change at Crewe, whilst exclusively travelling on Virgin Trains, to get between stations on the North Wales line to Manchester, or from Wilmslow to stations Preston and northwards, and so on.

There are even route "Virgin Trains" walk-up and season tickets from Chester to Manchester!

 

[maniacmartin]

You don't claim for being a delayed train. You claim if a delayed train causes your whole journey to be delayed. If you have a flexible ticket, and you take an alternative route or service due to your intended train being delayed, and arrive at your final destination sufficiently late, you can still claim against the original itinerary that you intended to take, even if you never set foot on it.

In fact, many TOCs will reject a Delay Repay claim if you wait for a delayed service, when there was an alternative service that could have got you to your final destination with less of a delay.

 

[Deafdoggie]

You don't claim for being a delayed train. You claim if a delayed train causes your whole journey to be delayed. If you have a flexible ticket, and you take an alternative route or service due to your intended train being delayed, and arrive at your final destination sufficiently late, you can still claim against the original itinerary that you intended to take, even if you never set foot on it.

In fact, many TOCs will reject a Delay Repay claim if you wait for a delayed service, when there was an alternative service that could have got you to your final destination with less of a delay.

Indeed, London Midland (as was then) rejected my Stoke-Euston claim (I had an open ticket) when they cancelled their train, as i could have got there earlier on the following VT. The point was, I was supposed to travel with colleagues from Stone, so had to wait an hour anyway.

 

[philthetube]

You can’t claim delay repay for a delayed train you weren’t on.

Er, yes you can.

Example: I am at Birmingham New Street, wanting to go to London on the 1510 Virgin service. A person gets hit by a train at Adderley Park, and therefore there are no services for the foreseeable hour or two. The 1510 is stuck in a logjam somewhere north of New Street.

Tickets are being accepted via XC, GWR and Chiltern to get to London, so I use my ticket to get to London with an hour's delay.

I was never on the 1510, but I must claim against it.

This - and many variants of it - is really common. I hope whoever is doing the survey you mentioned isn't assuming those who weren't on the train but who claimed against it were acting dishonestly without further investigation..

Correcxt, in these circumstances it is probably not worth investigating unless there are loads of people claiming to have been on the delayed train, however there will be other occasions when, for example a train breaks down south or Watford when the only people affected will be passengers on board, too many claims from this service would obviously be worth investigating.

I might be missing something here, but if a train leaves station A on time and gets held up for over 30 minutes by a signalling issue between A and B, where B is the next stop, then the only people claiming delay repay for that train ought to have been physically on it. Even more so if station A was the start of the service. If I am missing something, please can someone explain.

Thats how I see it.

 

[krus_aragon]

Similarly, there could be people who were delayed before getting to A and thus weren't on board, but they shouldn't be relevant as a claim is made to the operator of the first train to cause you delay.

It could still be that passengers had intended to connect onto that train from another service operated by the same TOC. For example, passengers might change at Crewe, whilst exclusively travelling on Virgin Trains, to get between stations on the North Wales line to Manchester, or from Wilmslow to stations Preston and northwards, and so on.

Yes, the operator of the first train could be the same as the A-B. But in the spirit of the question, they would be claiming because of the delay to their first train: the delay to the A-B train (after leaving A) would be immaterial, and there shouldn't be any issue with the fact that the passenger wasn't on the train.

Whether the claims department correctly identify that or not is another matter.

 

[matt_world2004]

I wonder how many of these 'false' claims are actually people wanting ticket refunds after seeing information about severe delays from the operator and deciding not to travel. When in fact they want a refund on their ticket purchase not delay repay.

 

[_toommm_]

I wonder how many of these 'false' claims are actually people wanting ticket refunds after seeing information about severe delays from the operator and deciding not to travel. When in fact they want a refund on their ticket purchase not delay repay.

More than likely - perusing through Twitter on disruption days, when the TOC asks the customer whether they ended up travelling and were delayed, or didn't bother, the customer often gets arsey, then gets even more arsey when they didn't travel thus being refused delay repay.