Northern Delay Repay declined

[kuepper]

My advanced single ticket was for 14 September 2021 and specified 0822 Northern train Glossop to Manchester Piccadilly then 0913 Northern train Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport. I was told by Northern ticket staff at Glossop that because of the cancellation of the 0822 the next train I could get was 0852 and the revised connection in Manchester Piccadilly was the 0951 to Manchester Airport though when I checked that online it was a TPE train and I wasn't sure if I'd have to pay for the journey as it wasn't a Northern train. When I arrived at Piccadilly I looked at the departure board and the next train to Manchester Airport was in fact a delayed Northern train to Crewe that left at 0945 arriving at Manchester Airport at 1004 - >30 minutes later than my ticket was supposed to get me there by.

I submitted a delay repay application and this was rejected by Northern as they said my train arrived at 0924 at Piccadilly and I could have caught the 0928 (TPE) train to Manchester Airport. As the 0928 (which I have discovered was a delayed 0926) would have closed its doors 30 secs before departure and as I had a 20kgs suitcase and a backpack to negotiate 2 barriers and get a lift to get between platforms 1 and 13 that seems v fanciful even if my train had arrived at exactly 0924 it could have arrived at 0924 and 59 secs.

 

[_toommm_]

My advanced single ticket was for 14 September 2021 and specified 0822 Northern train Glossop to Manchester Piccadilly then 0913 Northern train Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport. I was told by Northern ticket staff at Glossop that because of the cancellation of the 0822 the next train I could get was 0852 and the revised connection in Manchester Piccadilly was the 0951 to Manchester Airport though when I checked that online it was a TPE train and I wasn't sure if I'd have to pay for the journey as it wasn't a Northern train. When I arrived at Piccadilly I looked at the departure board and the next train to Manchester Airport was in fact a delayed Northern train to Crewe that left at 0945 arriving at Manchester Airport at 1004 - >30 minutes later than my ticket was supposed to get me there by.

I submitted a delay repay application and this was rejected by Northern as they said my train arrived at 0924 at Piccadilly and I could have caught the 0928 (TPE) train to Manchester Airport. As the 0928 (which I have discovered was a delayed 0926) would have closed its doors 30 secs before departure and as I had a 20kgs suitcase and a backpack to negotiate 2 barriers and get a lift to get between platforms 1 and 13 that seems v fanciful even if my train had arrived at exactly 0924 it could have arrived at 0924 and 59 secs.

Northern did this to me a month or two ago, with nearly the exact same journey. My train was late into Platform 14 from the Airport, meaning I had only three minutes to get from 14 to 1 for the train to Flowery Field. Of course that isn’t possible without running, and I didn’t fancy running after a 12 hour shift. They initially declined it saying I could’ve made it, but on appeal, they accepted it.

My advice would be to appeal and hopefully they’ll come to some sense.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

A quick Google suggests that the minimum connection time at Piccadilly is ten minutes (n.b. suggests rather than confirms: I think there is a definitive source for this but I have just gone for the Google headline). When you appeal, point out that the four minute connection that Northern used when they refused DR is less than the minimum connection time.

 

[_toommm_]

A quick Google suggests that the minimum connection time at Piccadilly is ten minutes (n.b. suggests rather than confirms: I think there is a definitive source for this but I have just gone for the Google headline). When you appeal, point out that the four minute connection that Northern used when they refused DR is less than the minimum connection time.

Yeah, ten minutes. You can check all the times on Brtimes.com.

 

[Kite159]

They tried that with me before at Leeds quoting that I could have made a connection within 3 minutes from a delayed service from the Shipley direction which went into one of the bay platforms on top of another unit to a train departing from P17, at the height of the Leeds one-way system madness where it took 5 minutes to actually get up the stairs due to the volume of passengers along platform 8.

If they don't come to any sense after appealing, lodge it as a formal complaint to get the ball rolling so you can take it to the Ombudsman.

 

[Class360/1]

Have you mentioned that you were carrying heavy luggage to Northern?

 

[py_megapixel]

Have you mentioned that you were carrying heavy luggage to Northern?

I doubt it's relevant, as I'd wager that even if he wasn't, making that connection literally all the way across the station would have been tricky.

 

[185143]

I doubt it's relevant, as I'd wager that even if he wasn't, making that connection literally all the way across the station would have been tricky.

Though surely there's the bigger issue of the fact that a Northern advice ticket wouldn't ordinarily be valid on a TPE service?

 

[221129]

Though surely there's the bigger issue of the fact that a Northern advice ticket wouldn't ordinarily be valid on a TPE service?

Unless ticket acceptance was in place that day? But otherwise that is also true.

 

[Merseysider]

Northern are chatting out their arse. Again.

Write back reminding them that the minimum connection time at Piccadilly is ten minutes, and your delay repay claim is valid.

 

[kuepper]

Have you mentioned that you were carrying heavy luggage to Northern?

Yes

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2021 ==

Though surely there's the bigger issue of the fact that a Northern advice ticket wouldn't ordinarily be valid on a TPE service?

That's what I thought but I was told by station staff that was my next connection with my ticket and in declining my delay repay the 0928 they quote was also a TPE train. I've also just discovered the connecting train I actually got was supposed to leave at 0930 so the staff at Glossop obviously didn't think that was an option from the 0852 but the person declining my claim thought an even earlier train was!

 

[robbeech]

The 0930 wasn’t an option officially because that too fouls the minimum connection time at Piccadilly. This will be why staff at Glossop didn’t suggest it as by doing so they might have encouraged you to run, or realistically, when they checked a journey planner it wouldn’t have shown.

Without wishing to stick up for the operator (because I am not doing, Infact I’m outlining an ongoing systemic problem) it’s not strictly Northern “trying it on” with you, there is no person assuming you could have caught an earlier train and no person rejecting your claim. It’s simply the atrocious way their automated delay repay system is setup.

If your first train arrives above 0 minutes before your connecting train leaves, regardless of minimum connection time, regardless of previous disruption then the system will assume you caught it and respond accordingly, which in most cases is an outright rejection, but in some cases will end up being an acceptance for a lower amount depending on the full journey details.
The system has been setup by people who, put simply, haven’t got a clue what they’re doing but coincidentally these errors and poor choices always seem to favour the operator rather than the passenger.

What you need to do here is get a human to look at it. They’ll hopefully see the issue and I am fairly confident it will be paid out straight away.

There are countless examples of this sort of thing happening, and Northern have known about the problem for nearly 3 years now. The trouble is, they’d have to pay someone to change it, and the result would be higher levels of pay out, so there’s no incentive to do anything about this.

 

[nickswift99]

The 0930 wasn’t an option officially because that too fouls the minimum connection time at Piccadilly. This will be why staff at Glossop didn’t suggest it as by doing so they might have encouraged you to run, or realistically, when they checked a journey planner it wouldn’t have shown.

Without wishing to stick up for the operator (because I am not doing, Infact I’m outlining an ongoing systemic problem) it’s not strictly Northern “trying it on” with you, there is no person assuming you could have caught an earlier train and no person rejecting your claim. It’s simply the atrocious way their automated delay repay system is setup.

If your first train arrives above 0 minutes before your connecting train leaves, regardless of minimum connection time, regardless of previous disruption then the system will assume you caught it and respond accordingly, which in most cases is an outright rejection, but in some cases will end up being an acceptance for a lower amount depending on the full journey details.
The system has been setup by people who, put simply, haven’t got a clue what they’re doing but coincidentally these errors and poor choices always seem to favour the operator rather than the passenger.

What you need to do here is get a human to look at it. They’ll hopefully see the issue and I am fairly confident it will be paid out straight away.

There are countless examples of this sort of thing happening, and Northern have known about the problem for nearly 3 years now. The trouble is, they’d have to pay someone to change it, and the result would be higher levels of pay out, so there’s no incentive to do anything about this.

There is an incentive. If automated acceptance of valid claims was at higher rates, the human element needed to verify claims would reduce. This could result in a cost saving or, heaven forbid, better customer service.

Of course, if the amount of claims being incorrectly rejected is so high that this benefit is negligible then one has to wonder whether the operator are running the scheme in good faith.

 

[kuepper]

Appeal successful. Thanks for replies.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Appeal successful. Thanks for replies.

Good news - thanks for letting us know.

 

[Class360/1]

That’s good