Offer of refund for one minute early arrival?

[Skymonster]

I have Advance tickets for the Avanti 1A09 07:18 Tamworth to Euston and the Avanti 1P07 20:31 Euston to Tamworth on Saturday 20th July.

I have just received an email saying my journey has changed and I can travel on the next later Avanti service - or request a refund.

I’ve looked on National Rail, Real Time Trains etc and the only change I can see is that 1A09 arrives one minute earlier than originally scheduled into Euston.

Now I’ll admit I’m not really bothered about travelling tomorrow so the refund is attractive. Is the railway really [so stupid] offering a refund on an Advance for a one minute early arrival - or is there something else more material that’s changed that I’m missing?

Insights would be appreciated.

 

[Flying Snail]

Sounds like an auto generated message triggered by the change in schedule.

 

[MrJeeves]

Now I’ll admit I’m not really bothered about travelling tomorrow so the refund is attractive. Is the railway really [so stupid] offering a refund on an Advance for a one minute early arrival - or is there something else more material that’s changed that I’m missing?

Yes, and you can take it. Any change in schedule, no matter how minor, makes you eligible for a full fee-free refund.

 

[AngusH]

Unless I'm very much mistaken, the ticket will be cancelled if you take the refund.

This isn't a delay repay offer and isn't compensation for a delayed journey.

(if that was obvious then apologies!)


So if you bought the ticket but now deeply regret ever deciding to travel take the refund.
Otherwise if you actually want to travel you shouldn't take the refund.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the OP did say they preferred not to travel and to have a refund.

 

[Skymonster]

I’m just not bothered about travelling now and was considering just losing the money. So an offer of a refund is like a gift from the heavens - although the fare isn’t that great.

I appreciate it would be difficult to set a cutoff, but I’d have thought the rules / software would judge a change by one minute (early) to be irrelevant. However, as I said, I really not that fussed about the trip now so getting my money back is an easy get out.

Thank you everyone for your input.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I appreciate it would be difficult to set a cutoff, but I’d have thought the rules / software would judge a change by one minute (early) to be irrelevant.

Yes, and you can take it. Any change in schedule, no matter how minor, makes you eligible for a full fee-free refund.

On the basis of what @MrJeeves says, them’s the rules. Software appears to be interpreting the rules correctly: it’s just that the rule is daft. Presumably no one ever thought about the rescheduled earlier case, in that it’s hard to see how any passenger could be disadvantaged by an early arrival at the final destination.

 

[AngusH]

The exact wording for the refund rule seems to be:

"rescheduled after you have purchased a Ticket or Tickets"

which is simple and in this case correctly applied.

I think that this rule is well written because it is simple, honest and it also avoids any debate about how much of a change in the schedule is needed for a refund.
(10 minutes? an hour? a reasonable delay as interpreted by somebody reading refund requests?)

 

[Bletchleyite]

(10 minutes? an hour? a reasonable delay as interpreted by somebody reading refund requests?)

This is the issue - 10 minutes might mean a missed bus connection rendering the journey useless, for instance.

This rule makes sense, there will only be a small number of people who will get refunds "under false pretences" as the OP looks likely to do (simply because most people who buy a ticket intend to use it). You don't have to deal with every single use case, it's better customer service just to have a simple blanket rule.

 

[Skymonster]

To be blunt I resent the use of the term “under false pretences”. The railway is usually keen to enforce the rules even if it disadvantages the passenger, so once in a while leveraging the rules in ones favour is no bad thing in my opinion. Using the rules to ones advantage would be a wholly more appropriate expression.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be blunt I resent the use of the term “under false pretences”. The railway is usually keen to enforce the rules even if it disadvantages the passenger, so once in a while leveraging the rules in ones favour is no bad thing in my opinion.

It was deliberately in quotes - it implies no wrongdoing on your part, but rather that the railway didn't intend for you to get a refund under such circumstances. You are totally entitled to it and claiming it is neither illegal nor immoral.

 

[Royston Vasey]

1 minute later (not what has happened here) can also break connections, so it's difficult to apply a blanket time difference that the railway considers "reasonable" and can automate, because one rule won't fit every case.

In this case lots is said on here about the contract made by purchasing a ticket, and changing 08:32 to 08:31 undoubtedly changes the contract - nobody will test in court whether it's significant or insignificant or beneficial or deleterious to the consumer (it's obvious that it's insignificant and marginally beneficial!) but the railway hasn't just assumed it's fine and has offered to amend or cancel. They could put something in the T&Cs to allow tiny beneficial changes but it's very hard to word this clearly and without unintended consequences. Not worth the legal time and would be a silly little clause, really.

If you're going to have an automated standard process this seems a fairly reasonable and customer friendly blanket policy.

 

[The exile]

This is the issue - 10 minutes might mean a missed bus connection rendering the journey useless, for instance.

This rule makes sense, there will only be a small number of people who will get refunds "under false pretences" as the OP looks likely to do (simply because most people who buy a ticket intend to use it). You don't have to deal with every single use case, it's better customer service just to have a simple blanket rule.

Can't see any reason (other than simplicity) why a "same departure time but arrival 60 seconds earlier than scheduled" should trigger a refund offer. Departure a minute earlier than originally planned might of course be a different matter - though would suggest that the cut-off should be the minimum connection time for the station concerned - on the assumption that if moving your departure a minute earlier means you can't make the train then you're cutting it too fine. There would be an argument for refunding an off-peak ticket if a departure time were revised from 09.30 to 09.29, but obviously the railway wouldn't know who to contact....

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can't see any reason (other than simplicity) why a "same departure time but arrival 60 seconds earlier than scheduled" should trigger a refund offer. Departure a minute earlier than originally planned might of course be a different matter - though would suggest that the cut-off should be the minimum connection time for the station concerned - on the assumption that if moving your departure a minute earlier means you can't make the train then you're cutting it too fine. There would be an argument for refunding an off-peak ticket if a departure time were revised from 09.30 to 09.29, but obviously the railway wouldn't know who to contact....

Or just don't complicate things and allow it for any change. The revenue loss will be small.

 

[The exile]

Or just don't complicate things and allow it for any change. The revenue loss will be small.

True!

 

[CyrusWuff]

I appreciate it would be difficult to set a cutoff, but I’d have thought the rules / software would judge a change by one minute (early) to be irrelevant. However, as I said, I really not that fussed about the trip now so getting my money back is an easy get out.

I think Avanti may be being overly cautious if it's a journey with no onward connection. Either that or they're interpreting Condition 30.1 of the NRCoT literally.

The most recent guidance for triggers that I've seen is:

• Full or part cancellation
• Departure time changing by +/- 1 minute
• Arrival time changing by +/- 5 minutes unless an onward connection is affected (e.g. causing it to drop below the Minimum Connection Time.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Arguably if you were writing guidelines, departure getting later or arrival getting earlier shouldn't trigger it - neither is likely to be a major problem.

But I think the generous interpretation is just easier (and is very customer friendly).

 

[Starmill]

Can't see any reason (other than simplicity) why a "same departure time but arrival 60 seconds earlier than scheduled" should trigger a refund offer. Departure a minute earlier than originally planned might of course be a different matter - though would suggest that the cut-off should be the minimum connection time for the station concerned - on the assumption that if moving your departure a minute earlier means you can't make the train then you're cutting it too fine. There would be an argument for refunding an off-peak ticket if a departure time were revised from 09.30 to 09.29, but obviously the railway wouldn't know who to contact....

Given the refunds can only be paid for unused tickets (i.e. no travel, or travel started but not completed and returned back to the origin) the number of people this could possibly effect would be tiny. Hardly anyone buys an Advance ticket not thinking they'd be going to use it. The only people who would be affected would be people who've changed their mind, or people who've bought two or more very cheap Advance tickets to give themselves the option, and only ever intended to use one. This is such a small number of people and low value of tickets it's just not worth worrying about it.

 

[Skymonster]

I fully agree with the preceding. In my case I bought the ticket quite some time ago and fully intended to use it. However with one day to go I am not feeling on top form right now so I was thinking of not going. Being offered my money back makes it a much easier decision - and I give the railway enough of my money anyway, so I have no qualms about the morality of claiming this “legal” refund.

 

[Starmill]

I think Avanti may be being overly cautious if it's a journey with no onward connection. Either that or they're interpreting Condition 30.1 of the NRCoT literally.

The most recent guidance for triggers that I've seen is:

• Full or part cancellation
• Departure time changing by +/- 1 minute
• Arrival time changing by +/- 5 minutes unless an onward connection is affected (e.g. causing it to drop below the Minimum Connection Time.)

I suspect that while it's perfectly fine to apply those to a refund being accepted manually, at a ticket office or by a person at customer service, online journey planners will probably struggle to apply them. As such coding for any change to allow a refund without a fee is what some retailers have done.

For example, you may actually find that no changes have taken place at all from a consumer perspective, and the only thing that's changed is the retail ID, and that is enough to trigger the process. Most customers won't ask for or accept a refund in these cases so it's unlikely to be picked up as an issue.

 

[redreni]

BA has rescheduled flights after I booked them by 20 minutes with no entitlement to a refund. I think the threshold in their T&Cs is half an hour.

As mentioned, these changes can be significant. I've taken early morning flights before which have involved taking the first train or first bus of the day to get to the airport, where a 20 minute earlier flight departure would have made the journey nerve-wracking at best or impossible at worst. Taxi from South East London to Stansted, anyone?

Perhaps I shouldn't have posted this. "There can be no possible negative consequences to treating passengers badly if airlines also do it" appears to be a winning argument in the rail industry at present...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2024 ==

I think Avanti may be being overly cautious if it's a journey with no onward connection. Either that or they're interpreting Condition 30.1 of the NRCoT literally.

The most recent guidance for triggers that I've seen is:

• Full or part cancellation
• Departure time changing by +/- 1 minute
• Arrival time changing by +/- 5 minutes unless an onward connection is affected (e.g. causing it to drop below the Minimum Connection Time.)

I suppose if you're automating, it might be easier to offer the refund for any change than to do the coding required to identify when a change of arrival time of 1-4 minutes triggers an offer of a refund and when not?

 

[BongoStar]

You are only looking at arrival at final destination. It could be arriving earlier (or later) at intermediate stations by a longer duration. The email possibly went to all who purchased the ticket rather than those to final destination only.

In theory, someone planning to get on at Rugby could potentially miss the train due to the difference.

I have missed a connection at Wolverhampton once due to train leaving a minute earlier.

 

[74A]

If that's the way the system is programmed then it will offer a refund. Much simpler to do it that way. Computer says yes !

 

[skyhigh]

It's good customer service and a customer friendly policy. I don't see any reason to call it stupid or complain about it...

 

[LickeyIncliner]

I agree with the policy of offering a free change or refund if there is any change in the schedule of a booked trip. But I think the email (or whatever) making the offer should explain exactly what the change is. The OP is clearly familiar with sites like RTT but still wasn't entirely certain what was happening - a significant proportion of people would not know how to check and might make wholly unnecessary changes to their travel plans in this kind of situation.

 

[Royston Vasey]

You are only looking at arrival at final destination. It could be arriving earlier (or later) at intermediate stations by a longer duration. The email possibly went to all who purchased the ticket rather than those to final destination only.

In theory, someone planning to get on at Rugby could potentially miss the train due to the difference.

I have missed a connection at Wolverhampton once due to train leaving a minute earlier.

I had a look earlier, there's no change at all to the OP's itinerary or intermediate stops, arrival times of departure times, other than arrival at Euston at 0831 instead of 0832. Everything else unchanged. In principle though you're right.

 

[IanXC]

Really the answer to this is that the GBTT time should have been left the same, with only the WTT having been adjusted. That would avoid the need to notify people of the change, triggering doubt about the reliability of the product they have purchased, and avoid the administration costs inevitably attached.

 

[OscarH]

You are only looking at arrival at final destination. It could be arriving earlier (or later) at intermediate stations by a longer duration. The email possibly went to all who purchased the ticket rather than those to final destination only.

In theory, someone planning to get on at Rugby could potentially miss the train due to the difference.

I have missed a connection at Wolverhampton once due to train leaving a minute earlier.

The intention of the spec on this is that emails are only supposed to go out to affected passengers, not just anyone on the service, (with passengers determined to be affected based on the rules from CyrusWuff)