Would you claim

[AlterEgo]

Explain the fraud? I don't see any difference to travelling A - B at 13:30 being 30 mins late as a journey on it's own, then travelling 14:30 from B - C as a separate journey. to staying on the train. If I'd bought A - C in full or as a split and it was late at B It would be a false claim. I paid to travel to B it was 30 mins late and was rammed.

Because they’re not separate journeys. It’s one journey made on multiple tickets. Delay repay is payable on your whole journey by rail. You may not pick and choose what your personal definition of a journey to justify a claim, nor may the TOC.

If a TOC argued you were on time at B but late only at C, and rejected your full A-B-C claim and only paid out on B-C, that would be equally wrong. As well as daft.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Can I just check that I have understood the OP's journey correctly? They seem to be saying that

- they got on a train at A
- when that train got to B it was over 30 minutes late
- they remained on that train to C
- when that train arrived at C, it was ' within delay repay time' (i.e. on most versions of Delay Repay no more than 15 minutes late) of the scheduled A-C journey

If this is what is meant, I agree with the majority view that there is no (legitimate) claim to Delay Repay. But this seems fairly remarkable performance by the train - to have recovered 15 minutes or so once it was running 30 minutes late.

Or have I misunderstood the journey? Was it

<as above>
- they got on a train at A
- when that train got to B it was over 30 minutes late
- they remained on that train to C
</end as above>
- when that train arrived at C, it was ' within delay repay time' (i.e. on most versions of Delay Repay no more than 15 minutes late) of a scheduled journey leaving B at the time the train actually left B

To try and explain my last point: timetable says train actually used should leave B at 1400 and arrive at C at 1500, and there is a later train scheduled to leave B at 1430 and arrive C at 1530. In the event, the train actually used leaves B at 1431 (31 minutes late) and arrives at C at 1544 (less than the Delay Repay threshold for the train scheduled to leave B at 1430, but 45 minutes late for passengers starting from A)

What I'm trying to say is that the fact that the journey is from A to C, regardless of how many tickets were used, cuts both ways. How late was the OP at C against the arrival time they expected when they started at A - not against when they changed their mind about where to go somewhere between A and B?

 

[Runningaround]

Can I just check that I have understood the OP's journey correctly? They seem to be saying that

- they got on a train at A
- when that train got to B it was over 30 minutes late
- they remained on that train to C
- when that train arrived at C, it was ' within delay repay time' (i.e. on most versions of Delay Repay no more than 15 minutes late) of the scheduled A-C journey

If this is what is meant, I agree with the majority view that there is no (legitimate) claim to Delay Repay. But this seems fairly remarkable performance by the train - to have recovered 15 minutes or so once it was running 30 minutes late.

Or have I misunderstood the journey? Was it

<as above>
- they got on a train at A
- when that train got to B it was over 30 minutes late
- they remained on that train to C
</end as above>
- when that train arrived at C, it was ' within delay repay time' (i.e. on most versions of Delay Repay no more than 15 minutes late) of a scheduled journey leaving B at the time the train actually left B

To try and explain my last point: timetable says train actually used should leave B at 1400 and arrive at C at 1500, and there is a later train scheduled to leave B at 1430 and arrive C at 1530. In the event, the train actually used leaves B at 1431 (31 minutes late) and arrives at C at 1544 (less than the Delay Repay threshold for the train scheduled to leave B at 1430, but 45 minutes late for passengers starting from A)

What I'm trying to say is that the fact that the journey is from A to C, regardless of how many tickets were used, cuts both ways. How late was the OP at C against the arrival time they expected when they started at A - not against when they changed their mind about where to go somewhere between A and B?

I've not made the claim I'm asking if it can be and would you?.
Original plan:
I bought ticket A - B, C wasn't in the plan at that point.
Altered Plan:
During the journey to B the event there was cancelled and it was too late to turn back. I altered my plan so traveled beyond B to C which the same train called at.
When the train called at B it was late and passed the Delay Repay threshold.(Due to the unit on the service being significantly slower at 75 mph instead of the 90 mph the usual train runs at and the number of passengers).
If the event at B hadn't been cancelled or i'd got off without knowing it had and left the station and gone home or then bought another ticket for a seperate journey I'd have been able to claim for delay repay for A - B.
At C the train was on time or at least within the delay repay threshold.

I cannot see how travelling onto C is the reason for not being allowed to claim for A - B.

 

[Haywain]

I've not made the claim I'm asking if it can be and would you?.
Original plan:
I bought ticket A - B, C wasn't in the plan at that point.
Altered Plan:
During the journey to B the event there was cancelled and it was too late to turn back. I altered my plan so traveled beyond B to C which the same train called at.
When the train called at B it was late and passed the Delay Repay threshold.(Due to the unit on the service being significantly slower at 75 mph instead of the 90 mph the usual train runs at and the number of passengers).
If the event at B hadn't been cancelled or i'd got off without knowing it had and left the station and gone home or then bought another ticket for a seperate journey I'd have been able to claim for delay repay for A - B.
At C the train was on time or at least within the delay repay threshold.

I cannot see how travelling onto C is the reason for not being allowed to claim for A - B.

If the train you were on was scheduled to go from A to C, and it was over 30 minutes late at B, how late was it against its original schedule when it arrived at C?

 

[Runningaround]

If the train you were on was scheduled to go from A to C, and it was over 30 minutes late at B, how late was it against its original schedule when it arrived at C?

10

 

[WesternLancer]

10

so there would be no payment made AFAIK anyway....assuming that is 10 mins late at B - not say 10 hours late.

Since D-R, IIRC, is std across the different train companies - for example Northern says:

Our Delay Repay scheme provides compensation to customers who arrive at their destination station 15 minutes or more later than they should have done because a Northern train was delayed or cancelled.

and states here the amounts by minutes late for the different tiers of delay:

https://help.northernrailway.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/360006092698-Delay-Repay

Pretty sure each train company sets out the policy clearly on their website - don't think you have mentioned which route / train company you were on, so apols if it is different.

Or was it more than 15 mins late at B ? But made that up so as to be only 10 mins late at C.

 

[MikeWh]

I wonder if B is a station where the train is scheduled to wait for an extended time such that a 20 minute late arrival can turn into a 5 minute late departure?

 

[FenMan]

Simply making the point that the railway does not revolve around football fixtures.

Perhaps you need to inform Chiltern when there's a big game at Wembley, or Southern when Brighton are playing at home. Both may raise eyebrows in response to your assertion.

 

[Starmill]

Perhaps you need to inform Chiltern when there's a big game at Wembley, or Southern when Brighton are playing at home. Both may raise eyebrows in response to your assertion.

The fact that additional services are commonly run hardly disproves the point Haywain was making. All operators will consider requests regarding major events, including sporting ones such as football matches. If there's scope for changes, as there plainly is at Falmer and Wembley Stadium on match days, or Uttoxeter on race days, or Skegness on summer Saturdays or whatever it may be, these are frequently put in place. All Haywain is explaining is that, if there's not the scope for changes, there's nothing much anyone can do about it.

 

[FenMan]

The fact that additional services are commonly run hardly disproves the point Haywain was making. All operators will consider requests regarding major events, including sporting ones such as football matches. If there's scope for changes, as there plainly is at Falmer and Wembley Stadium on match days, or Uttoxeter on race days, or Skegness on summer Saturdays or whatever it may be, these are frequently put in place. All Haywain is explaining is that, if there's not the scope for changes, there's nothing much anyone can do about it.

So you agree the railway does work to accommodate increased demand for football matches and other big events (Glastonbury being a good example) when it can. It would appear we are in wild agreement. The railway does revolve around trying to accommodate extra demand if the resources are available (I recall GWR running frequent specials through North Camp in the days when the Farnborough Air Show was a big thing), so Haywain's comment is off the mark.

 

[Starmill]

The railway does revolve around trying to accommodate extra demand if the resources are available (I recall GWR running frequent specials through North Camp in the days when the Farnborough Air Show was a big thing), so Haywain's comment is off the mark.

I don't agree. Apparently neither does the OP, hence their complaint. Fundamentally public transport provision in this country is always destined to leave many people who use it, or attempt to use it, dissatisfied.

There are plentiful examples where amendments are made for the benefit of major, one-off events, which result in uproar from stakeholders. For example, the Lincoln Christmas Market last year saw services between Gainsborough and Cleethorpes via Brigg withdrawn and replaced with buses. Cue fury from some locals. There was also a large debate recently about whether it was improper for EMR to provide any additional capacity whatsoever for the Midland Grand National on the grounds that doing so worsens an existing serious deficit of capacity elsewhere, for the benefit of only a once annual event. Another example was SWR withdrawing services to Dorking in order to provide extra capacity for people going to Windsor for the Royal Wedding. Some people in Dorking were deeply unhappy. When resources are so painfully scarce, whatever decision is made will cause someone to become very angry. Interestingly they generally don't follow that through to asking why there are so few resources in the first place.

 

[Cowley]

And on that note, the question has pretty much been answered now.
Thanks everyone.