SWR Delay Repay Appeal.

[Mark J]

I've had issues with SWR rejecting a delay repay claim, which will now involve an appeal.

My ticket was from Earley to Acton Central, on 7th September.

The journey up to Acton involved a RRB at Gunnersbury to Acton Central.

On the way back was when the District Line strike was on. I arrived back at Gunnersbury, only to find gates locked. So had to make alternative arrangements back to Richmond, for my connection.

I arrived back in Richmond to make the 22:59 train to Reading, which was running late - Departed 23:18.

Further delays occured around Staines Station, caused by train movements back to the depot - the official excuse was 'trespassers on the line', however the Guard stated different!

I arrived back at my final destination (Earley) 45 minutes late.

I inputted my Delay Repay claim from Acton Central to Earley, however it did include the late running 22:59 train.

The Delay Repay claim was rejected, with an explanation stating I had to apply to TFL for a refund.

However TFL were not responsible for the late running SWR service that got me back to my home station 45 minutes late!

Should I appeal the claim, ommiting the TFL part of the journey and just put the claim in for the SWR Richmond to SWR Earley station part?

Also what reasoning would I use to justify the appeal, saw a reason along the lines of 'Wrong TOC at fault.'

Would this be the correct justification?

 

[Belperpete]

You say you made alternative arrangements to get to Richmond, did you use your ticket for this? If not, then the journey that you used your ticket for was from Richmond to Earley, and this is what you should claim for. I suggest that you appeal on the basis that you entered the journey details incorrectly.

This assumes that your ticket permits break of journey, and therefore permits starting at a station en-route.

 

[Mark J]

You say you made alternative arrangements to get to Richmond, did you use your ticket for this? If not, then the journey that you used your ticket for was from Richmond to Earley, and this is what you should claim for. I suggest that you appeal on the basis that you entered the journey details incorrectly.

This assumes that your ticket permits break of journey, and therefore permits starting at a station en-route.

It was a Sunday Out return ticket, that does permit a break in journey.

I thought I had to input the journey that matched the ticket.

Even then, what was inputted did include the delayed SWR train. So surprised it was rejected, when whoever was doing the claim could quite easily see the SWR service that got me back to my home station late.

 

[AlterEgo]

It was a Sunday Out return ticket, that does permit a break in journey.

I thought I had to input the journey that matched the ticket.

Even then, what was inputted did include the delayed SWR train. So surprised it was rejected, when whoever was doing the claim could quite easily see the SWR service that got me back to my home station late.

Your journey according to what you claimed for involved a delay with TfL who were on strike, so according to those details TfL are responsible. (They would have declined any claim anyway as it was due to a strike)

 

[Belperpete]

It was a Sunday Out return ticket, that does permit a break in journey.

I thought I had to input the journey that matched the ticket.

If you have a ticket that permits break of journey, then that permits you to start or finish your journey short. You are not required to travel to and from the origin and destination stations shown on the ticket.

For the delay repay claim you are required to enter the journey you intended to make. If you intended to start or finish short, that is what you should enter, not the stations shown on the ticket. In this case, my understanding is that due to the strike, you made your own way to Richmond, and so you changed your intended journey covered by your ticket to be one from Richmond to Earley. In which case, your DR claim should be for the journey Richmond to Earley, made with your Acton to Earley ticket.

I have made many DR claims where the start or finish of my journey doesn't match the origin of destination station on the ticket. A few times I have had to remind the TOC of the allowance for starting or finishing short, but most times it is approved without question.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Oct 2025 ==

Your journey according to what you claimed for involved a delay with TfL who were on strike, so according to those details TfL are responsible. (They would have declined any claim anyway as it was due to a strike)

And importantly it is the first company that disrupts the journey that is liable. So from the details originally provided by the OP, SWR deemed that TfL were the first to disrupt the journey, absolving SWR of liability for their subsequent delay to the OP's journey.

 

[Mark J]

And importantly it is the first company that disrupts the journey that is liable. So from the details originally provided by the OP, SWR deemed that TfL were the first to disrupt the journey, absolving SWR of liability for their subsequent delay to the OP's journey.

That is ridiculous.

I was at Richmond around 20 minutes before my intended train. Plus had to wait extra because the SWR train was late. Nothing to do with TFL, however due to clear loopholes in the system, SWR can get away with rejecting a claim for their delayed service.

My argument with SWR is what time I arrived back to Earley - 45 minutes late. Not what time I got back to Richmond.

Even if TFL was running, and was 15 minutes late, I would of still made the late running SWR service, even if it was on time.

The question is, if I now resubmit claim doing just Richmond to Earley, will they then likely reject the claim again due to my previous entry, or suspect me of fraud for changing the details.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Oct 2025 ==

Screen prints of the train in question.

 

[Snow1964]

The question is, if I now resubmit claim doing just Richmond to Earley, will they then likely reject the claim again due to my previous entry, or suspect me of fraud for changing the details.

You shouldn't submit a second claim with amended details. What you should now do is use the appeal which has a free text box for explanation and say that although you originally bought tickets to Acton, you altered your route to start at Richmond as line was closed beyond that. Make it clear it was the train from Richmond which was delayed.

 

[Mark J]

You shouldn't submit a second claim with amended details. What you should now do is use the appeal which has a free text box for explanation and say that although you originally bought tickets to Acton, you altered your route to start at Richmond as line was closed beyond that. Make it clear it was the train from Richmond which was delayed.

Thanks, I'll be doing just that.

It is actually an appeal I'll be doing.

The travel date is now past the 28 day window.

 

[Haywain]

Thanks, I'll be doing just that.

It is actually an appeal I'll be doing.

The travel date is now past the 28 day window.

I don't think you're going to have any luck with this, as it looks as though you are changing what your journey was to 'validate' the claim and that is unlikely to be accepted.

 

[AlterEgo]

That is ridiculous.

I was at Richmond around 20 minutes before my intended train. Plus had to wait extra because the SWR train was late. Nothing to do with TFL, however due to clear loopholes in the system, SWR can get away with rejecting a claim for their delayed service.

It's not really a loophole, you've said where you started your journey from and they've looked at it and saw TfL were on strike and were the proximal cause of the delay to you. That is how delay repay works. As @Haywain says, changing your journey at this stage to produce the most favourable outcome to you might not be accepted. If anyone is using a loophole here it's you.

 

[Belperpete]

The travel date is now past the 28 day window.

That doesn't matter if you are appealing. It would matter if you were to make a fresh claim.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Oct 2025 ==

I don't think you're going to have any luck with this, as it looks as though you are changing what your journey was to 'validate' the claim and that is unlikely to be accepted.

Regardless of what it might look like, he is amending it to reflect the journey that he actually made with his ticket.

 

[Haywain]

he is amending it to reflect the journey that he actually made with his ticket.

That just isn’t true.

 

[Belperpete]

That just isn’t true.

It would help if you explained why you think it isn't true, otherwise we just get into a "oh yes it is, oh no it isn't".

The OP stated that he made alternative arrangements to get to Richmond. Therefore the journey for which his train ticket was valid started at Richmond. Amending the claim to show that the journey started at Richmond is therefore just reflecting the truth.

 

[AlterEgo]

It would help if you explained why you think it isn't true, otherwise we just get into a "oh yes it is, oh no it isn't".

The OP stated that he made alternative arrangements to get to Richmond.

Because of the failure of the train service. They were in fact there and were confronted by the fact there were no trains due to the strike. It is at that point there is a failure of service.

 

[Haywain]

It would help if you explained why you think it isn't true,

In simple terms, and as already covered above, you can’t claim for a journey and then change your mind about what the journey was when the claim has been rejected. It’s taking the Michael. The journey the OP made was never from Richmond to Earley.

 

[Belperpete]

In simple terms, and as already covered above, you can’t claim for a journey and then change your mind about what the journey was when the claim has been rejected. It’s taking the Michael.

Yes you can. I have several times had a DR claim rejected, and when I have checked it was because I had mistakenly entered the journey incorrectly. It is what the "journey details incorrectly entered" option is for.

The journey the OP made was never from Richmond to Earley.

The OP has clearly stated that he made a journey from Richmond to Earley. Agreed that it was part of a journey from Acton to Earley, but he used alternative means for the Acton to Richmond portion, and therefore the portion of the journey for which he used his ticket was Richmond to Earley.

My journey from work includes walking to the station, taking the train, and then walking to the office. My train ticket only covers part of that journey, and that is the portion of the journey for which I claim delay repay. Likewise the OP should only have claimed delay repay for the portion of his journey covered by his ticket.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Oct 2025 ==

Because of the failure of the train service. They were in fact there and were confronted by the fact there were no trains due to the strike. It is at that point there is a failure of service.

Agreed that the OP arrived at the station, and found that there was a failure of service. If the OP had travelled on say a RRB that was covered by his ticket, then his journey would have started from there. However, the OP held a flexible ticket, that allowed him to change his itinerary, and to start his journey short. He was therefore perfectly entitled to change his itinerary, and that is what he did. He made his own way to Richmond, and started his journey from there instead.

 

[redreni]

In simple terms, and as already covered above, you can’t claim for a journey and then change your mind about what the journey was when the claim has been rejected. It’s taking the Michael. The journey the OP made was never from Richmond to Earley.

I'm confused - you're not denying that the OP's journey was delayed, are you? What you seem to be saying is if the passenger misunderstands what the form is asking for and assumes the origin and destination details are expected to match the ticket, then they forfeit the compensation rights to which they are entitled under the contract? Is that correct?

If so, I think you're wrong.

I might be more inclined to agree with you if the OP had claimed against both TfL and SWR, or had claimed first against TfL, been refused and then claimed against SWR. Although even then, there's nothing inherently dodgy about a passenger knowing they've been delayed and that they have a claim against somebody, but not being sure who, so having to try more than one avenue in pursuit of that compensation. Not everybody understands the intricacies or even the general principles of delay repay. I really don't think having more than one bite of the cherry is in itself a problem, though obviously claiming more than you genuinely believe you're entitled to would be.

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm confused - you're not denying that the OP's journey was delayed, are you? What you seem to be saying is if the passenger misunderstands what the form is asking for and assumes the origin and destination details are expected to match the ticket, then they forfeit the compensation rights to which they are entitled under the contract? Is that correct?

If so, I think you're wrong.

I might be more inclined to agree with you if the OP had claimed against both TfL and SWR, or had claimed first against TfL, been refused and then claimed against SWR. Although even then, there's nothing inherently dodgy about a passenger knowing they've been delayed and that they have a claim against somebody, but not being sure who

Their claim is against TfL here, this is the point. It is TfL's lack of service which was the first cause of the delay and the problems they encountered.

They did the right thing in the first instance by laying out their journey, and it was rejected by SWR, correctly, who stated their claim is with TfL for a service delay refund. "Ah well you see I broke my journey actually" is eating one's cake and having it too, as if the flexibility of the ticket here gives one the right to declare their own journey details for the purpose of claiming delay repay. Don't tell me that if it was an Advance the advice would be any different here.

 

[redreni]

Their claim is against TfL here, this is the point. It is TfL's lack of service which was the first cause of the delay and the problems they encountered.

They did the right thing in the first instance by laying out their journey, and it was rejected by SWR, correctly, who stated their claim is with TfL for a service delay refund.

Not according to what the OP has told us on this thread. They intended to start short at Gunnersbury but we're unable because the gates were locked, and they made their own way to Richmond. But they entered Acton Central as the origin on the delay repay form.

It is not correct, therefore, to say that the OP's original claim was correct, for two reasons. First, the intended origin station was wrong. Second, there is no suggestion in what the OP has told us that they suffered a material delay between Gunnersbury and Richmond. They made their own way. According to Google Maps the journey from Gunnersbury station to Richmond station takes 10 minutes by rail or 12 minutes by road. If the OP suffered no material delay on that leg then TfL can't be liable for a service delay refund. They may be liable for a partial refund for not providing a service at all, but not for a delay that never happened.

If I were the OP I would do as @Snow1964 and @Belperpete have suggested.

 

[blimmo]

It is TfL's lack of service which was the first cause of the delay and the problems they encountered.

Is this because this was a (theoretical) train service? Would you use this interpretation for a bus service too? Suppose I plan to take the bus to the station and then use a flexible ticket. The bus is delayed so I miss the (on time) train I originally intended to travel on. The next train is late. Do I have a delay repay claim? What if I drove and was delayed by a traffic incident?

I think the real question here is when the "intended itinerary" that delay repay asks for is fixed. Is it when you plan the trip? When you arrive at the station? When you look up the train times?

 

[AlterEgo]

Is this because this was a (theoretical) train service? Would you use this interpretation for a bus service too?

No, because buses aren't covered under delay repay.

Suppose I plan to take the bus to the station and then use a flexible ticket. The bus is delayed so I miss the (on time) train I originally intended to travel on. The next train is late. Do I have a delay repay claim? What if I drove and was delayed by a traffic incident?

None of that is relevant. None of those are trains or covered by the NRCoT.

I think the real question here is when the "intended itinerary" that delay repay asks for is fixed. Is it when you plan the trip? When you arrive at the station? When you look up the train times?

To some members it is whenever it is most convenient for extracting compensation. It's very clear the proximal failure here was due to TfL, and the fact that they cannot extract compensation from TfL for this has led to advice to fudge their itinerary for the purposes of making a claim. I don't think it's very smart advice given the fact SWR will obviously read the forum and given the fact thay relatively recently we had a train company pursue hundreds of fraud claims against people for less, but if you want to take that sort of risk to obtain the price of one pint of beer be my guest.

 

[blimmo]

Ok suppose I pay for the tube with PAYG to travel to Euston. I plan to travel on the next train to Coventry and I have an off peak return EUS-COV. Suppose problems on the tube mean I miss the original (on time) train I could've got from Euston and instead I end up on a delayed train. Do I get delay repay from Avanti? Does my delay repay entitlement change based on whether I have looked at the timetable beforehand? Is the tube the one method of getting to the station that loses me the entitlement to delay repay?

I think the real question here is when the "intended itinerary" that delay repay asks for is fixed.

This was a real question. Is there a specific time or are we just saying it's whenever is reasonable? When travelling on advances this seems like it should be the time of sale (although supposedly is actually 10pm the day before) but surely the whole point of a flexible ticket is that you can choose your itinerary later.

 

[Snow1964]

I don't know the wording on SWR delay repay (and can't check it unless I create an account). Maybe there is inconsistency between operators, but if you click on the question mark which is by the from and to box on GWR delay repay you get.

Enter your complete journey as stated in your ticket, not just the GWR portion which was delayed.

If you ended up catching a different train because of the disruption, please entered the scheduled departure time of the original train you planned to catch.

Thats what Op did, entered the complete journey, involving 3 trains. They managed (by taking an alternative) to be in sufficient time for second train (the SWR one) and that was the one that was delayed, causing them to miss the third train (another SWR one)

The system sort of falls over when line is closed and can't get train 1, but customer reroutes and still catches train 2 per the itinerary. Which is what happened here. It's not as if 3 trains is rare scenario, a local connection each end with main longer journey in middle (not everyone lives by a main station), and it makes a mockery of delay repay if the main train is late but can't claim because a local train didn't operate.

 

[blimmo]

please entered the scheduled departure time of the original train you planned to catch.

My problem with this is when this is "whichever the next train to Coventry is when I get there" which in my experience is a pretty common thing to do. My view before reading this thread was that I would just enter the train that was scheduled to depart after the time I arrived at the (national rail) station however I arrived there. Obviously this can lead to some problems with major disruption where you see the train is delayed and so only actually pass through the ticket gates after the originally scheduled departure time. But here there seems to be the suggestion that tube services count as part of the journey that should be entered into the delay repay systems.

 

[redreni]

It's very clear the proximal failure here was due to TfL,

No it isn't.

and the fact that they cannot extract compensation from TfL for this has led to advice to fudge their itinerary for the purposes of making a claim.

No it hasn't. No claim against TfL has been attempted. And the advice isn't to fudge anything, it is to claim for the delay to the journey actually undertaken by rail, based on the OP's intentions once they had decided to make their own way to Richmond and start short there.

I don't think it's very smart advice given the fact SWR will obviously read the forum and given the fact thay relatively recently we had a train company pursue hundreds of fraud claims against people for less.

I very much doubt that. If true, this would be scandalous.

The GB rail industry routinely overpays delay repay claims, including asking the customer what length of delay they are claiming for, ignoring the customer's answer and paying for a longer delay that didn't occur and that the customer never claimed for. So there are obvious things that could be done if anyone is concerned to safeguard the public funds involved in delay repay, before adding to court backlogs with a load of fraud prosecutions. And before worrying too much about claims and appeals like this one, I would suggest.

 

[AlterEgo]

I very much doubt that. If true, this would be scandalous.

Oh I was making that up was I? Were you not here for the Greater Anglia delay repay fraud episode? 45 pages of dozens of people often caught doing less than what is suggested here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/advice-only-for-greater-anglia-delay-repay-fraud.213418/

They got tens of thousands of pounds off passengers who ranged from guilty as hell to just mistaken to entirely confused about what they should be claiming, if anything. Some people had claimed delay repay when they should have gone for the abandoned journey protocol - that is how frankly blunt the investigations were.

 

[Watershed]

No, because buses aren't covered under delay repay.


None of that is relevant. None of those are trains or covered by the NRCoT.


To some members it is whenever it is most convenient for extracting compensation. It's very clear the proximal failure here was due to TfL, and the fact that they cannot extract compensation from TfL for this has led to advice to fudge their itinerary for the purposes of making a claim. I don't think it's very smart advice given the fact SWR will obviously read the forum and given the fact thay relatively recently we had a train company pursue hundreds of fraud claims against people for less, but if you want to take that sort of risk to obtain the price of one pint of beer be my guest.

I think a point that everyone has missed - unless I am misunderstanding what happened - is that the overall delay in arriving at Earley was at least 60 mins (compared to the timetabled arrival time).

As a result, a minimum entitlement of delay compensation (25% of the OP's return ticket) is due under the NRCoT even if not under any operator's Charter (or equivalent). In this instance I would imagine it's London Overground (i.e. TfL) that might owe that sum, but it might also be SWR.

Regardless, by making a claim to SWR within 28 days of travel, the OP has done what they need to under the NRCoT. SWR are responsible for forwarding the OP's claim if they think they are not the liable TOC.

 

[AlterEgo]

Regardless, by making a claim to SWR within 28 days of travel, the OP has done what they need to under the NRCoT. SWR are responsible for forwarding the OP's claim if they think they are not the liable TOC.

Indeed, on this we can all be agreed.

 

[Watershed]

Oh I was making that up was I? Were you not here for the Greater Anglia delay repay fraud episode? 45 pages of dozens of people often caught doing less than what is suggested here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/advice-only-for-greater-anglia-delay-repay-fraud.213418/

They got tens of thousands of pounds off passengers who ranged from guilty as hell to just mistaken to entirely confused about what they should be claiming, if anything. Some people had claimed delay repay when they should have gone for the abandoned journey protocol - that is how frankly blunt the investigations were.

As you allude to, the fact that people paid up does not mean that they were necessarily guilty. Yes of course it's stressful if you are threatened with prosecution, but as always - you are free to refuse to pay any settlement offer. If you have genuinely done nothing wrong then you should have confidence in the legal system.

 

[redreni]

Oh I was making that up was I? Were you not here for the Greater Anglia delay repay fraud episode? 45 pages of dozens of people often caught doing less than what is suggested here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/advice-only-for-greater-anglia-delay-repay-fraud.213418/

They got tens of thousands of pounds off passengers who ranged from guilty as hell to just mistaken to entirely confused about what they should be claiming, if anything. Some people had claimed delay repay when they should have gone for the abandoned journey protocol - that is how frankly blunt the investigations were.

I never suspected or intended to suggest you were making it up. Since we disagree over the propriety of what some of us have suggested the OP should do, logically we are likely to disagree on whether any of the cases documented in the other thread for which people have been harassed by a TOC or prosecuted are less or more egregious.

I will take a closer look at that thread tomorrow. If there are any cases where somebody was prosecuted or pursued for an out-of-court settlement (as distinct from just receiving a snotty letter) for something *less* than amending on appeal the details of a claim that had initially been rejected, in circumstances where there was no evidence of dishonesty, then I will be astonished and will regard that as a scandal.