LNWR refused to reroute us

[EUC]

I posted earlier about my plans to travel from Euston to Sheffield yesterday, 19 October. In the end we decided to go there and back in one day on an LNWR/XC only Off-peak Return (£72.10).

We were due to leave Euston on the 0643 departure to Crewe, changing at Tamworth. The departure board showed that the train would be leaving late (it left at 0659¾), which meant we were bound to miss our connection, so we asked the LNWR station staff if they would endorse our tickets to travel on the Avanti West Coast service to Manchester, so that we could take the SHF train from Stockport. They refused, saying that we would have to buy new tickets to do that, even though it was clear that the delay to our LNWR train would mean that we would get to our destination over an hour late.

The train arrived at Tamworth at 0829 instead of the timetabled 0807, and we then got the dangerously overcrowded 5 carriage Cross Country Plymouth-Edinburgh service to SHF, which made an unscheduled stop at TAM. We got to SHF at 1021, which is over an hour later than our 0919 scheduled arrival.

I know we can claim 50% delay repay on the cost of the return ticket (we will!). My question is whether the LNWR station staff at Euston should have been required to endorse our "LNWR/XC only" tickets to travel on AWC via Stockport? Taking this route would have meant getting into SHF 13 minutes earlier than we did.

 

[jfollows]

I'm not aware of any requirement for your ticket to be endorsed as you wished.

I think there's a choice - you can pay for a more flexible ticket allowing multiple routes and operators, or you can pay less for a more restricted ticket as you did. In the latter case, you're stuck with its terms and restrictions unless things go significantly wrong, and being late is not enough. You still reached your destination and you can claim Delay Repay - this seems to be the default answer these days.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

I don't think any TOC would authorise such an endorsement for a 16 minute delay at the start of your journey. It's unfortunate that you ended up so late, but that is what the delay repay scheme is set up for - reimbursement for missed connections and late running.

If the train has been cancelled and would be meant you were more than an hour late leaving Euston then there's a much higher probability that such an endorsement would be provided.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don’t think it was clear that you’d be over an hour late. With the SSO on the CrossCountry you’d have arrived a fraction less than an hour late; it is only that this train was slightly delayed which meant you were 62 minutes late.

 

[KNN]

It's not in the gift of LNR to do so even if they were willing. The Avanti staff would have charged you an excess.

You had three options I think, get on the train and pay the excess, claim a refund for your ticket and buy a new one (if you were lucky there might have been advance tickets still available) or get the train you had a valid ticket for and hope it makes up time.

As pointed out, this is the deal you sign up for with restricted tickets for a cheaper price.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not in the gift of LNR to do so even if they were willing

Nothing stopping WMT purchasing the OP a ticket for Avanti at public price. Indeed, if the delay would be over an hour the PRO effectively requires them to do so, though TOCs don't like to comply.

 

[KNN]

Nothing stopping WMT purchasing the OP a ticket for Avanti at public price. Indeed, if the delay would be over an hour the PRO effectively requires them to do so, though TOCs don't like to comply.

I didn't know that, but I just meant that LNR staff can't tell Avanti what to do

 

[AlterEgo]

It's not in the gift of LNR to do so even if they were willing. The Avanti staff would have charged you an excess.

You had three options I think, get on the train and pay the excess, claim a refund for your ticket and buy a new one (if you were lucky there might have been advance tickets still available) or get the train you had a valid ticket for and hope it makes up time.

As pointed out, this is the deal you sign up for with restricted tickets for a cheaper price.

You can’t excess away a Route: TOC restricted ticket so this wouldn’t have been an option in this case.

 

[Watershed]

I don't think any TOC would authorise such an endorsement for a 16 minute delay at the start of your journey. It's unfortunate that you ended up so late, but that is what the delay repay scheme is set up for - reimbursement for missed connections and late running.

If the train has been cancelled and would be meant you were more than an hour late leaving Euston then there's a much higher probability that such an endorsement would be provided.

The OP is referring to the right to be re-routed under Article 16 of the PRO. This refers to the anticipated delay in arrival exceeding an hour (i.e. being 61+ mins); the delay in departure isn't actually what matters.

Indeed, as this journey demonstrates, it's entirely plausible that a comparitively small departure delay of 16 minutes may cause a connection to be missed, resulting in the arrival being more than an hour later - meaning the right to re-routing would be engaged.

LNR's Euston staff should have either endorsed the OP's ticket, or issued a zero-fare ticket allowing the OP to take an Avanti service to minimise the delay. If/when they refused to do so, the OP would have been entitled to buy a new ticket to use Avanti, and to claim the cost back from LNR afterwards.

Unfortunately the OP's experience at Euston is very much in line with what I'd expect - there is no training whatsoever given to frontline staff on things like PRO re-routing obligations. So TOCs breach these obligations on a daily basis, and you have to be prepared to pay out upfront for a new ticket, and then claim it back later, if you want to vindicate your rights.

 

[Starmill]

I didn't know that, but I just meant that LNR staff can't tell Avanti what to do

They don't have to, luckily. However that's also not at all the customer's problem.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2024 ==

I don’t think it was clear that you’d be over an hour late. With the SSO on the CrossCountry you’d have arrived a fraction less than an hour late; it is only that this train was slightly delayed which meant you were 62 minutes late.

Surely it depends on why CrossCountry made the extra stop? There is no suggestion that this was expected when the OP was at Euston.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2024 ==

I don't think any TOC would authorise such an endorsement for a 16 minute delay at the start of your journey. It's unfortunate that you ended up so late, but that is what the delay repay scheme is set up for - reimbursement for missed connections and late running.

If the train has been cancelled and would be meant you were more than an hour late leaving Euston then there's a much higher probability that such an endorsement would be provided.

They'd be obligated to or not in the same way regardless of which circumstance applies though, which is what the OP is asking for.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2024 ==

The OP is referring to the right to be re-routed under Article 16 of the PRO. This refers to the anticipated delay in arrival exceeding an hour (i.e. being 61+ mins); the delay in departure isn't actually what matters.

Indeed, as this journey demonstrates, it's entirely plausible that a comparitively small departure delay of 16 minutes may cause a connection to be missed, resulting in the arrival being more than an hour later - meaning the right to re-routing would be engaged.

LNR's Euston staff should have either endorsed the OP's ticket, or issued a zero-fare ticket allowing the OP to take an Avanti service to minimise the delay. If/when they refused to do so, the OP would have been entitled to buy a new ticket to use Avanti, and to claim the cost back from LNR afterwards.

Unfortunately the OP's experience at Euston is very much in line with what I'd expect - there is no training whatsoever given to frontline staff on things like PRO re-routing obligations. So TOCs breach these obligations on a daily basis, and you have to be prepared to pay out upfront for a new ticket, and then claim it back later, if you want to vindicate your rights.

Unfortunately, for this case I would expect the customer service department at West Midlands Trains to dig in very hard, as technically the delay was only just across the threshold, and the bill for new tickets would likely be very, very expensive. The Rail Ombudsman would likely be entirely useless if this were the case. Accordingly the likely option for the OP to actually rely on their right under the PRO would be recourse to the County Court.

 

[EUC]

Thank you, everyone. Thank you for referring me to Article 16. I couldn't remember that at 6.30 on a Saturday morning, when the LNWR staff told all the complaining passengers that we'd just have to buy new tickets if we wanted to travel with Avanti West Coast. Since Article 16 states that

Where it is reasonably to be expected that the delay in the arrival at the final destination under the transport contract will be more than 60 minutes, the passenger shall immediately have the choice between:
... (b) continuation or re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity; ...

how can a passenger at his or her origin station actually exercise their immediate (!) choice of "re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity"? If the staff at the station are trained to stonewall passengers, then this choice simply doesn't exist, does it?

 

[Watershed]

Thank you, everyone. Thank you for referring me to Article 16. I couldn't remember that at 6.30 on a Saturday morning, when the LNWR staff told all the complaining passengers that we'd just have to buy new tickets if we wanted to travel with Avanti West Coast. Since Article 16 states that



how can a passenger at his or her origin station actually exercise their immediate (!) choice of "re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity"? If the staff at the station are trained to stonewall passengers, then this choice simply doesn't exist, does it?

In practical terms, no - the train company is therefore in breach of the PRO. If you want to take advantage of those rights, you have to buy a new ticket and later claim back your reasonable expenses arising from the PRO breach (i.e. the cost of the new ticket) from the train company.

 

[rocrat]

Thank you, everyone. Thank you for referring me to Article 16. I couldn't remember that at 6.30 on a Saturday morning, when the LNWR staff told all the complaining passengers that we'd just have to buy new tickets if we wanted to travel with Avanti West Coast. Since Article 16 states that



how can a passenger at his or her origin station actually exercise their immediate (!) choice of "re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity"? If the staff at the station are trained to stonewall passengers, then this choice simply doesn't exist, does it?

My approach with this now is to try once with station staff (and usually fail) and then ring their customer service on a recorded line so it is documented that I reasonably tried to get my ticket endorsed.

The railway therefore has zero recourse to suggest I was trying to fare dodge etc. and so cannot issue a penalty fare etc. This phone call can be obtained via a SAR if needs be. [There's nothing in PRO that states you have to have the re-routing in writing.]

Most guards won't mind and won't try to argue with you if you mention PRO.
Let them try to take me to court if they so wish. They will lose.

The only time I've had issue is with staff on high speed gateline at STP. They are terribly trained and do not understand the routeing guide. This usually results in an email to southeastern and compensation sent to me.

 

[EUC]

My approach with this now is to try once with station staff (and usually fail) and then ring their customer service on a recorded line so it is documented that I reasonably tried to get my ticket endorsed.

The railway therefore has zero recourse to suggest I was trying to fare dodge etc. and so cannot issue a penalty fare etc. This phone call can be obtained via a SAR if needs be. [There's nothing in PRO that states you have to have the re-routing in writing.]

Most guards won't mind and won't try to argue with you if you mention PRO.
Let them try to take me to court if they so wish. They will lose.

The only time I've had issue is with staff on high speed gateline at STP. They are terribly trained and do not understand the routeing guide. This usually results in an email to southeastern and compensation sent to me.

I applaud your approach, however I'm concerned that the TOCs are not being proactive in giving passengers their Article 16 rights without having to jump through so many hoops. I can be bolshie, and make a nuisance of myself, but I suspect most people wouldn't, especially when the staff at the station insist that the passengers have no rights to be rerouted. That's certainly what the LNWR station staff told us on Saturday, and I wasn't able to quote chapter and verse against them.
Maybe the giant video walls at Euston could be used to display Article 16 of the PRO (Rail passengers' rights and obligations regulation) 1371/2007!

 

[Starmill]

Arguing with the staff at the station is a complete waste of your time. All they'll do is try to get rid of you. You need to argue the point directly with customer relations.

 

[rocrat]

I applaud your approach, however I'm concerned that the TOCs are not being proactive in giving passengers their Article 16 rights without having to jump through so many hoops. I can be bolshie, and make a nuisance of myself, but I suspect most people wouldn't, especially when the staff at the station insist that the passengers have no rights to be rerouted. That's certainly what the LNWR station staff told us on Saturday, and I wasn't able to quote chapter and verse against them.
Maybe the giant video walls at Euston could be used to display Article 16 of the PRO (Rail passengers' rights and obligations regulation) 1371/2007!

I absolutely agree. It is disgraceful that passengers aren't told these additional rights and supported by TOCs to do so.

PRO regularly results in disputes for me. I have great joy in pointing out article 18 is far stronger than NRCOT 28.5 too... see also articles 15-18 being stronger than all of of NRCOT 28...

My favourite dispute so far was on a train taking a more expensive and direct route due to disruption, and being told under 28.2, re-routeing was only allowed where a CSL2 had been declared. An argument then broke out for a good 20 minutes as the TM refused to listen to me, before I happened to produce another, completely irrelevant ticket routed "any permitted." He then appeared to be satisfied, despite that ticket having no baring whatsoever to the journey I was taking...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2024 ==

Arguing with the staff at the station is a complete waste of your time. All they'll do is try to get rid of you. You need to argue the point directly with customer relations.

I've actually had great success at Peterborough! No issues and ticket endorsed despite this being another operator's fault (LNER managed, XC at fault) without any challenge. Sometimes you find someone highly competent and they're quite helpful...

 

[EUC]

Surely it depends on why CrossCountry made the extra stop? There is no suggestion that this was expected when the OP was at Euston.

Why the XC train made the extra stop is somewhat of a mystery. That stop wasn't in the temporary Cross Country timetable for Saturday, and we didn't know about it when we were at Euston.



It wasn't even announced as an additional stop, but it appeared on the video displays at Tamworth only some time after the 80 or so of us got off the delayed service from Euston.

On RTT, it's still showing as a "pass", but the train definitely did stop to squash us all on board!


I suspect they made the extra stop because the train which was due an hour later (1019) turned out to be have been cancelled north of Bristol Parkway at around 0847.



== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2024 ==

Arguing with the staff at the station is a complete waste of your time. All they'll do is try to get rid of you. You need to argue the point directly with customer relations.

I can see that. The problem is, though, that as far as the passenger is concerned, the station staff sitting behind the desk saying "help point" is the face of customer relations. It's only now I realise that they seem to be specifically trained to try to get rid of us.

 

[Starmill]

I've actually had great success at Peterborough! No issues and ticket endorsed despite this being another operator's fault (LNER managed, XC at fault) without any challenge. Sometimes you find someone highly competent and they're quite helpful...

Yes of course, always politely ask. Clarify if necessary. But by "arguing" what I was getting at was repeating the same position over and over again. That's not helping anyone.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Oct 2024 ==

I can see that. The problem is, though, that as far as the passenger is concerned, the station staff sitting behind the desk saying "help point" is the face of customer relations. It's only now I realise that they seem to be specifically trained to try to get rid of us.

Indeed so. But the reality is that the station staff are incredibly unlikely to help you if you ask them once and they say no. They are often trained to avoid conflicts, and part of that is getting rid of people quickly.

 

[BongoStar]

If the additional stop was not made, it would not have been over an hour delay, which might explain the reluctance of staff in not endorsing the ticket at the start of the journey.

Do you know when the announcement for the extra stop happened?

 

[LowLevel]

I can see that. The problem is, though, that as far as the passenger is concerned, the station staff sitting behind the desk saying "help point" is the face of customer relations. It's only now I realise that they seem to be specifically trained to try to get rid of us.

They aren't - they just haven't got the foggiest idea of what the PRO are. They're not mentioned in front line training at all in the UK, thus unless you wish to get legal they may as well not exist.

I've been a train guard for years and never seen any reference to them outside this forum and my own interest. Your common or garden help desk person or station supervisor isn't going to have a clue.

The onus isn't on providing an endorsement to your existing ticket in any case as that implies the alternative carrier has an obligation to assist you which they don't outwith stranded etc covered elsewhere - the obligation is to provide re-routeing.

This may mean getting ticket acceptance from the other TOC and then an endorsement being provided to that effect, or it may mean new tickets being provided for you. Specifically requesting an endorsement may be counter productive as the reaction may well just be "but we aren't allowed to provide those for other TOCs other than our own without their permission, so we're just not going to do anything as we've had no lead on the matter".

Asking for re-routing and leaving the ball in their court on how to satisfy that seems best to me.

 

[EUC]

If the additional stop was not made, it would not have been over an hour delay, which might explain the reluctance of staff in not endorsing the ticket at the start of the journey.

Do you know when the announcement for the extra stop happened?

The additional stop was on the Plymouth - Edinburgh train an hour after the one we missed due to the dodgy connection. The PLY-EDI service only stops at Tamworth every other train.
It wasn't on the screens when we arrived at 0829, but I saw it there 20 minutes later. I suspect they arranged the stop when the following hour's train was cancelled beyond Bristol Parkway (otherwise there would have been 4 hours between trains on that service).

 

[Starmill]

If the additional stop was not made, it would not have been over an hour delay, which might explain the reluctance of staff in not endorsing the ticket at the start of the journey.

Do you know when the announcement for the extra stop happened?

The additional stop saved the OP time by my reading, not cost it.

WMT got off very lucky that XC made that additional stop and there was room for the OP to board that train. Otherwise the delay could have been over two hours.

 

[185]

continuation or re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to the final destination at the earliest opportunity;

What are comparable transport conditions? Could that exclude other commercial rail operators of higher cost?

 

[Watershed]

What are comparable transport conditions? Could that exclude other commercial rail operators of higher cost?

The EU interpretive guidelines state the following:

4.2.3. Concept of ‘comparable transport conditions’ in cases where a journey is continued or re-routed (Article 16(b) and (c))

‘Transport conditions’ are the defining characteristics of the transport services provided by the carrier under a transport contract between a railway undertaking or ticket vendor and a passenger. In accordance with Article 16(b) and (c) of the Regulation, when passengers are offered the option of a continuation or re-routing of a journey, due to a delay of more than 60 minutes, this must be ‘under comparable transport conditions’. Whether transport conditions are comparable can depend on a number of factors and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the circumstances, the following good practices are recommended:

—if possible, passengers are not downgraded to transport facilities of a lower class (where this occurs, passengers such as first class ticket holders should receive reimbursement of the difference of the ticket price);

—where passengers can only be re-routed on another rail carrier or on a transport mode of a higher class or with a higher fare than paid for the original service, re-routing shall be offered without additional costs for the passenger;

—reasonable efforts are made to avoid additional connections;

—when using another rail carrier or an alternative mode of transport for the part of the journey not completed as planned, the total travel time should be as close as possible to the scheduled travel time of the original journey;
...

These are, of course, not binding but they give a clear indication of the lawmakers' intentions and might be referred to in any legal dispute.

In the field of air passenger rights, the EU261 regulation (retained in British law as "UK261") uses the same phrases - "comparable transport conditions" and "at the earliest opportunity" - for re-routing. The CAA has similarly published guidance on this, which notes:

Re-routing agreements with other carriers
6.3 We are aware that some airlines have agreements in place with other airlines that facilitate re-routing and allow passengers to be easily transferred onto other airlines. Such arrangements are welcome in that they can minimise both the cost to airlines of re-routing passengers and the inconvenience experienced by passengers in being re-routed. However, where airlines do not have such arrangements in place, we do not accept that this should be a barrier to rerouting passengers on other airlines.

 

[EUC]

To close this story: I claimed 50% delay repay on the cost of the return ticket because of the 62 minute delay in arrival at Sheffield.
Can anyone explain why the payout from LNWR was for 100% of the ticket price? Search me!

 

[OscarH]

To close this story: I claimed 50% delay repay on the cost of the return ticket because of the 62 minute delay in arrival at Sheffield.
Can anyone explain why the payout from LNWR was for 100% of the ticket price? Search me!

At a guess, their re-planning of the journey ignored the special stop order, so assumed you in fact were stuck at Tamworth and ended up over 2 hours late. They pretty much just ignore what you enter your delay as and compute it themselves, which is helpful if you make an unofficial connection or something odd it doesn't take into account happens