Non Arrival of Tickets

[PeterY]

Can I please have some advice.

I recently ordered on 13th September some advance tickets from Watford Junction to HighBridge travelling on 5th November, returning 9th November. I used London Midland's website and requested 1st class post. As of today they haven't arrived. They state I should receive them within 5 working days.

I've just rung the helpline number and basically because I requested first class post, they said I don't "have a leg to stand on" Is this correct?

Peter

 

[Llanigraham]

What do there Terms & Conditions state?

 

[Aeion]

I would imagine that your complaint would need to be aimed at the Royal Mail for failure to deliver, rather than LM if recorded delivery was not selected. What was the "not a leg to stand on" in regards to? Getting the tickets reissued or refunded?

 

[SussexMan]

Well I can't find any Terms and Conditions on their website so I wonder whether it is part of the sales process. Having said that, I was under the impression that on-line sellers have to make ther T&Cs available in a downloadable format so the customer can keep a copy.

Their website does say this:

You have 4 options to receive your tickets, although please note that we cannot guarantee delivery if you select First Class post:

However, do The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 not apply to TOCs?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would imagine that your complaint would need to be aimed at the Royal Mail for failure to deliver, rather than LM if recorded delivery was not selected. What was the "not a leg to stand on" in regards to? Getting the tickets reissued or refunded?

The purchaser has no contract with Royal Mail. Their contract was with LM.

 

[100andthirty]

If you order something by mail order, it is up to the supplier to make sure it gets to you. This is true if you order books from Amazon and I don't see why it should be different for train tickets. A strongly worded note to London Midland, followed up by a Tweet to their Twitter team (wno are usually helpful) would be sensible

 

[island]

However, do The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 not apply to TOCs?

Which section of these Regulations do you believe applies? It won't be section 43 (passing of risk) as this applies to the purchase of goods, whereas the OP has purchased services.

 

[yorkie]

In future, I advise choosing collection as Watford Jn has ticket machines which allow tickets to be collected.

For now, your next port of call is Transport Focus. I suspect this sort of thing may interest them.

I know previously East Coast have replaced tickets lost in the post, however if it happens more than once they may remove the option of postal delivery on the basis it's not reliable enough.

 

[Agent_c]

If you order something by mail order, it is up to the supplier to make sure it gets to you. This is true if you order books from Amazon and I don't see why it should be different for train tickets. A strongly worded note to London Midland, followed up by a Tweet to their Twitter team (wno are usually helpful) would be sensible

That is true for products, but this is not a purchase of a product, but services. You don't buy a ticket, the ticket is evidence that you have purchased the service.

My suggestion to the OP would be to escalate this further, and if he meets a brick wall, explore a chargeback with the card company.

 

[pethadine82]

LM would be in breach of the sale of goods and services act 1974.
Write them a letter, and if they don't refund sue them in your local country court.
This should be an easy win.

 

[sheff1]

That is true for products, but this is not a purchase of a product, but services. You don't buy a ticket, the ticket is evidence that you have purchased the service.

Is this definitely the case ? The confirmation email is evidence that you have purchased the service, but the email does not allow you to travel.

A product is defined thus by Dictionary.com:

the totality of goods or services that a company makes available

which suggets that the entitlement to travel (i.e. the ticket) is a product.

 

[najaB]

...which suggets that the entitlement to travel (i.e. the ticket) is a product.

It isn't.

 

[sheff1]

Why not ? It is surely part of the totality of goods or services that a company makes available as you can't travel legally without a ticket.

 

[Starmill]

Are you travelling to Highbridge & Burnham?

 

[Agent_c]

Is this definitely the case ? The confirmation email is evidence that you have purchased the service, but the email does not allow you to travel.

A product is defined thus by Dictionary.com:


which suggets that the entitlement to travel (i.e. the ticket) is a product.

and

Why not ? It is surely part of the totality of goods or services that a company makes available as you can't travel legally without a ticket.

Given that you do not at any point gain ownership of the ticket (it always remains property of the TOC - you merely gain possession), I'm quite confident you do not purchase a good as a part of the transaction.

NCoC:

Tickets remain the property of the relevant Train Company...

 

[gray1404]

It is up to London Midland to ensure that the ticket is delivered to the customer, as for any ticket that being been delivered, which is then used to access a service. If you do not receive the tickets then your bank would certainly regard it as non-receipt of goods/services paid for and you have a case for charge back.

The information given about you not "having a leg to stand on" is totally unfounded and has no basis. The fact remains that London Midland are yet to deliver the tickets to you. I would personally try their call centre again in the hope that you speak to someone who is more helpful and able to reissue tickets. Ask to speak to a Supervisor if they are not helpful and stand your ground.

Failing that make a formal complaint to LM and refer the matter to Transport Focus if you remain unhappy. Remember,you can also raise the matter with your bank/card providor as your have not received the tickets you have paid for.

 

[sheff1]

and
Given that you do not at any point gain ownership of the ticket (it always remains property of the TOC - you merely gain possession), I'm quite confident you never purchase a good as a part of the transaction.

NCoC:

Goods - no, but part of the 'totality of goods or services ' (i.e product) made available by the TOC - yes.

 

[ian959]

It is up to London Midland to ensure that the ticket is delivered to the customer, as for any ticket that being been delivered, which is then used to access a service. If you do not receive the tickets then your bank would certainly regard it as non-receipt of goods/services paid for and you have a case for charge back.

The information given about you not "having a leg to stand on" is totally unfounded and has no basis. The fact remains that London Midland are yet to deliver the tickets to you. I would personally try their call centre again in the hope that you speak to someone who is more helpful and able to reissue tickets. Ask to speak to a Supervisor if they are not helpful and stand your ground.

Failing that make a formal complaint to LM and refer the matter to Transport Focus if you remain unhappy. Remember,you can also raise the matter with your bank/card providor as your have not received the tickets you have paid for.

LM state that they cannot guarantee delivery if you use First Clas post, which to me puts the risk on the purchaser's shoulders, not the vendor's shoulders. If the purchaser wants to be guaranteed delivery, choose an appropriate postal service. I fail to see why it is LMs fault that the OP chooses to use a (cheaper) delivery method that does not guarantee delivery. That is a risk inherent that has been accepted by the OP by choosing that method, presumably after conducting their own risk assessment.

I also don't see how a charge back would necessarily be successful, for the very same reasons. Just because the ticket was not received does not mean that they charge is not a valid one. LM have sent the tickets which is all they said they would do, that RM have failed to deliver is NOT LMs problem - once in the hands of RM, there is NOTHING LM can do about what happens.

All that said however, it does seem rather silly in this day and age for LM to even offer a system of delivery that is not guaranteed.

 

[SussexMan]

Which section of these Regulations do you believe applies? It won't be section 43 (passing of risk) as this applies to the purchase of goods, whereas the OP has purchased services.

I did not state it applied, I asked whether it applied.

However, are we saying that despite all the various consumer legislation, including the new Consumer Rights Act which came into force today, a person who purchases a travel ticket has no comeback if the ticket fails to be delivered?

I understand that it is a "service" being purchased but the only way the consumer can avail themselves of this service (if they select post delivery) is if they are physically sent, and receive, the ticket. In that way it is very different to the vast majority of other service contracts.

 

[35B]

LM state that they cannot guarantee delivery if you use First Clas post, which to me puts the risk on the purchaser's shoulders, not the vendor's shoulders. If the purchaser wants to be guaranteed delivery, choose an appropriate postal service. I fail to see why it is LMs fault that the OP chooses to use a (cheaper) delivery method that does not guarantee delivery. That is a risk inherent that has been accepted by the OP by choosing that method, presumably after conducting their own risk assessment.

I also don't see how a charge back would necessarily be successful, for the very same reasons. Just because the ticket was not received does not mean that they charge is not a valid one. LM have sent the tickets which is all they said they would do, that RM have failed to deliver is NOT LMs problem - once in the hands of RM, there is NOTHING LM can do about what happens.

All that said however, it does seem rather silly in this day and age for LM to even offer a system of delivery that is not guaranteed.

That may or may not be true, but it is not reasonable for a supplier to try to wash its hands of any residual responsibility if their supplier fails to do their job properly. The cynic in me would also like to know whether LM can actually prove that the tickets were passed to Royal Mail.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That may or may not be true, but it is not reasonable for a supplier to try to wash its hands of any residual responsibility if their supplier fails to do their job properly. The cynic in me would also like to know whether LM can actually prove that the tickets were passed to Royal Mail.

This is precisely the reason why I never, when selling things on eBay, send them by any non-tracked/non-insured postal/courier service, even if the buyer claims they are willing to take on the risk. I don't think the TOCs should either; if the insurance that comes with First Class post doesn't cover things (it's around 30 quid max, but does it even cover tickets at all?), they should either cover themselves or insist on Special Delivery.

Yes, that's to some extent to the disadvantage of the customer in terms of the fees, but it also makes the situation clear.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That may or may not be true, but it is not reasonable for a supplier to try to wash its hands of any residual responsibility if their supplier fails to do their job properly. The cynic in me would also like to know whether LM can actually prove that the tickets were passed to Royal Mail.

If it's looked at that way (and I can see why it should be), even offering a non-tracked postal service for items of value is bordering on negligent. Ticketmaster, for example, won't use regular post for tickets above a specified value.

 

[najaB]

However, are we saying that despite all the various consumer legislation, including the new Consumer Rights Act which came into force today, a person who purchases a travel ticket has no comeback if the ticket fails to be delivered?

Given that they have declined the option to send it by tracked mail (at cost) or collect at a station (at no cost) and chosen a delivery method that specifically says can't be guaranteed - I'd say very little comeback.

...if the insurance that comes with First Class post doesn't cover things (it's around 30 quid max, but does it even cover tickets at all?), they should either cover themselves or insist on Special Delivery.

Yes, I believe it does cover tickets as long as you have a certificate of posting and some form of receipt for the tickets.

If it's looked at that way (and I can see why it should be), even offering a non-tracked postal service for items of value is bordering on negligent. Ticketmaster, for example, won't use regular post for tickets above a specified value.

But I can imagine the story in the Daily Wail "Greedy train companies FORCE people to pay EXCESSIVE charges just to post train tickets".

 

[IanD]

LM have sent the tickets which is all they said they would do, that RM have failed to deliver is NOT LMs problem - once in the hands of RM, there is NOTHING LM can do about what happens.

It is LMs problem. RM will not listen to a complaint from the recipient so there is something LM can do. They can raise a complaint with RM.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, I believe it does cover tickets as long as you have a certificate of posting and some form of receipt for the tickets.

As it has to be claimed by the sender, not the recipient, surely then in this case LM should be assisting the passenger by making the claim and paying them the relevant sum?

Though it is possible the tickets will turn up late, which if they're walk-ups will only mean a loss of £10 admin fee per ticket to refund them.

 

[najaB]

As it has to be claimed by the sender, not the recipient, surely then in this case LM should be assisting the passenger by making the claim and paying them the relevant sum?

Agreed it would be LM making the insurance claim, but they have (legitimately?) said that they can't guarantee delivery so will likely continue to decline to assist the customer.

 

[Tetchytyke]

LM state that they cannot guarantee delivery if you use First Clas post, which to me puts the risk on the purchaser's shoulders, not the vendor's shoulders. If the purchaser wants to be guaranteed delivery, choose an appropriate postal service. I fail to see why it is LMs fault that the OP chooses to use a (cheaper) delivery method that does not guarantee delivery.

They don't say it when you choose the delivery option. They may bury it in the T&Cs, but that's not the same thing at all.

I am also not convinced that a vendor can transfer the postage risk from themselves to the purchaser.

However my recent experiences of London Midland are that the chances of you getting a penny out of that company are extremely slim.

Interestingly, all other railway ticket retailers will re-issue tickets that have been lost in the post. I've had both TheTrainLine and East Coast do that for me. Checking through websites, it seems that only London Midland have chosen to decide they're not responsible if they never send them out due to incompetence* they go missing in the post.

I guess that's reason 66,781 to avoid using London Midland.

*and this is fairly likely: I've had East Coast send me someone else's tickets before now.

 

[Puffing Devil]

However, do The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 not apply to TOCs?

I agree that this would cover LM in this situation, s.43(2).

I would be tempted to edit and fire off these two letters from Which? and be prepared to complain after the fact to Transport Focus and maybe claim in the Small Claims Court; You have nothing to lose as LM say you need to buy new tickets anyway.

This one first, before the journey:
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/action/letter-to-complain-about-undelivered-goods

This one post journey, if you buy new tickets:
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rig...laint-about-tickets-that-didnt-arrive-on-time

 

[northwichcat]

The purchaser has no contract with Royal Mail. Their contract was with LM.

Yes.

Royal Mail say the following:

From 10 August 2015, items sent using 1st Class and 2nd Class services (including Royal Mail Signed For) will be treated as lost if they are not delivered 10 or more working days after the due delivery date. This has been reduced from 15 working days.

Compensation available for lost items (1st class)
For stamped, metered and by account* items a postage refund plus compensation on the basis of actual loss, where evidence of posting and evidence of value can be provided. This compensation is subject to the maximum payable being the lower of the market value of the item and the maximum of £20.00.

Postage refund (a minimum payment of 6 x 1st Class letter stamps at the first weight step) shall be payable where only basic evidence is provided or the item is of no intrinsic value.

Claims must be submitted within 80 calendar days of posting.

*Refers to VAT exempt 1st and 2nd Class payable on account

http://www.royalmail.com/personal/help-and-support/available-compensation-for-lost-items

The interesting thing is to LM a lost ticket is never worth more than £20, it can be replaced for much less than £20. However, to the customer getting £25 compensation for a lost £25 Advance ticket may not allow them to purchase a replacement ticket for the same train on the same day.

 

[bb21]

Yes.

Royal Mail say the following:



http://www.royalmail.com/personal/help-and-support/available-compensation-for-lost-items

The interesting thing is to LM a lost ticket is never worth more than £20, it can be replaced for much less than £20. However, to the customer getting £25 compensation for a lost £25 Advance ticket may not allow them to purchase a replacement ticket for the same train on the same day.

Not quite. If a ticket has to be reprinted LM will have to swallow the full cost of the replacement ticket AIUI.

Of course if they just endorse a piece of paper then there is little cost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I guess that's reason 66,781 to avoid using London Midland.

Is it actually London Midland, or is the operation run by Atos on their behalf?

(Talking of incompetent, that's quite a Hobson's choice! )
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Agreed it would be LM making the insurance claim, but they have (legitimately?) said that they can't guarantee delivery so will likely continue to decline to assist the customer.

Likely, yes, but it is extremely shoddy practice. How do we know LM have not claimed the £20 from RM and pocketed it, for instance? They probably haven't, but it's an interesting point.

 

[Tetchytyke]

How do we know London Midland actually despatched the tickets? I wasn't joking when I said I'd had East Coast send me other people's tickets before.