York Yuletide Express - 7/12/17

As in "put a leg out of bed"?

 

just ' one of those days' for hundreds of people, things happen.

 

46100 returning through Grantham

https://www.flickr.com/photos/10257146@N05/27123665169/in/dateposted/

 

Let us know his roster for next year, with his luck we'll know what trips to avoid

 

There's still a few trips to go this year......................

Steven

 

Despite the delays I captured three shots. The second shot just spells photographers luck with a full soaking in seconds! But the unfortunate delays allowed more time to set up at Newark and resulted in a hurried A4 putting on a fine show!

 

I was on the train and noticed you standing in the field as the heavens opened! Top marks for fortitude and thanks for posting.

 

What makes the delay to this tour different to any other delay suffered that day? Or for that matter the severe delays on the WCML on Tuesday? For me it is the unusual situation peculiar to rail tours in that a fully booked train is taking a return journey thus everyone on the train is affected in both directions. It is an issue for passengers. Again, it seems time that Charter TOCS worked out how to access Delay Repay for their clients when the delays are the fault of another TOC or NR.

 

Well, at least today's signal failure between East Croydon and Gatwick happened today rather than next Tuesday when we've got some rare steam down here in Sussex. (You may find the picture used in the article mildly amusing - the last time the Gatwick Express service was loco-hauled was 13 years ago!)

 

So with the on-going suggestion from some for delay repay I thought I would look at SWR terms and conditions. Partly because it is my local TOC but also because it is the most recently commenced franchise and I would assume that the Dft would have required the most stringent terms based on all the debacle post Southern delays.

This is the relevant extract

If you hold an Anytime, Off Peak, Super Off Peak, Advance or a Weekly Season ticket, we offer compensation for delays of 60 minutes or more which were within our control.


 For single tickets: The full cost of a single ticket for your journey on our services.

 For return tickets: Half the cost of a return ticket for your journey on our services.

 Weekly season tickets: The full cost of a single ticket (i.e. one-tenth of the price paid) for your journey on our services.

We are not always able to offer compensation, and we won’t be able to compensate you in the following circumstances:

 If we informed you of a delay or cancellation before you purchased your ticket.

 If we have published an amended timetable or introduce an emergency timetable. (Any claims for compensation will be based on the amended or emergency timetable.)

 For delays beyond our control. This includes security alerts, poor weather conditions, fatality or suicide, or vandalism.

 Any consequential losses due to a delay or cancellation of our services.

 If your ticket expired more than 28 days ago.


So I am guessing all three incidents in the past week would certainly come under the heading of "delays beyond our control" and they also exclude understandably consequential losses.

If a major TOC is not going to pay you are probably "pushing water up hill" hoping a charter operator will.

 

Absolutely wonderful - thank you! I'm sat at work at the moment on a break - what a way to pass the time

 

Probably not for this thread but still related. If a delay is caused by a failed loco or damage by another TOC, the claim is submitted to NR who claim the compensation from the offending TOC. If the delay is down to infrastructure ie signal/points failure the TOC reclaims from NR. The TOC running the delayed service is not out of pocket. I have been on many trains with these types of delay and been compensated. The best was a Class 90 on lease to Virgin that damaged the overhead cables near Wembley. Caused chaos and delays. Those on Virgin services claimed Delay Repay and in the end it was paid by Virgin.

This Charter was delayed due to the failure of another TOCs train. Every other service delayed by this train failure would have been entitled to Delay Repay compensation. The Charter passengers, just as badly affected were not.

Where the blame lies with another TOC or NR, charter TOCs should be able to reclaim and refund. If its the charter TOC, well we all know and accept the risk.

 

If there was no cap on charter operators' liability for delays to other tocs they cause, I would agree. But with a cap I don't agree. And I suspect we on NP are all better off with a cap than without.

 

I'm not sure where you read that as South Western Railways now operate under delay repay detailed here https://www.southwesternrailway.com/contact-and-help/refunds-and-compensation/delay-repay . Your exert sounds like the old rules.

 

I just copy and pasted it off their website just before I posted it. Mind you I seem remember someone posting on a different forum that they produced a load of timetables with maps showing incorrect locations, so maybe it is just to put potential claimers off.

 

To be honest that looks unfair. Whether there is a cap or not it means that if a charter is the cause of the delay there is a claim against that TOC but where the charter is delayed by another TOC or NR then there is no recourse. When a charter experiences severe delays due to third parties then their should be some compensation. Charters are part of the process but passengers get none of the benefits. And how often does a charter cause a delay of more than 30 minutes?

 

It seems to me there are diametrically opposed views as to whether charter operators should be bound to pay compensation when things go wrong, just like any standard TOC.
From what I read a significant proportion seem to think customers should bear all the risk because charters would not be viable if the providers had to compensate for sub standard service. I may be wrong to infer this but appears a lot of folk think charters ought to be effectively exempt from basic consumer protection? Caveat emptor, a true heritage choice

 

I think there is a compromise. Given the age and relative fragility of heritage tours, we all accept the risk of failure and don't expect compensation. However, like the other TOCs, compensation should be paid when NR or another TOC create the problem. That compensation is charged back to NR and reclaimed from the offending TOC.

 

There is no reason why properly maintained vintage locomotives and rolling stock should be fragile.

 

Totally agree that the enthusiast passenger will be generally tolerant of breakdowns etc related to the heritage aspect of the train, but we know that is proportionately fewer people these days. I would suggest that the ordinary purchaser is reasonably likely to believe normal means of redress would apply if the service differed significantly from expectation. My perception is charter operators are not equipped to cater for this in the hope few folk will complain but I have my doubts that will be a sustainable strategy as the customer base continues to evolve with market changes.