North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Much of the area the railway runs through doesn't have internet connection so although not the railways fault you have to download the T/T and I print it out.
It is often hard work visiting the railway, my main complaint is the one 5914 has made, which is the appalling time keeping and the in ability to inform passengers what is going on.

 

Local to where? I very much doubt the NYMR is hosting its website on a server in some dusty office in Pickering - rather more likely it resides in a big warehouse on the Slough Trading Estate …

Tom

 

Presumably @Brunswick Green 2 meant ‘local to them’ rather than ‘local to the NYMR’…

Simon

 

Correct

 

The NYMR Unofficial Forum appears to be down, too.
http://www.nymr.org.uk/unofficial/index.php

 

all stems go here in South Devon including webcam of Grosmont

A pleasing view of the railcar and, presumably, a trailer car leaving Grosmont. makes a welcome change from rakes of Mk. 1's.

 

Both seem to be back working now.

 

From other posts, I think you meant 'Lineisclear'? No hard feelings, but if you can edit your post it would be much appreciated

 

And they are introducing Delay Repay this season apparently! Could be costly!

 

My bad, and now sorted

 

Not true (in the sense that delay repay operates for TOCs on the national network.) However, NYMR terms and conditions have for some years provided for compensation and, in extreme cases refunds, in compliance with the terms of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

Now I would have never even considered even looking for T & C's for a Heritage Line.
Is the reference to an annual pass now out of date?
Interesting split in opinions though (SVR chosen at Random), although personally I would expect mammoth delays on the National Network
NYMR
Non Unlimited Annual Pass Tickets
Delay of up to 45 minutes: NIL
Delay of more than 45 minutes but less than 90 minutes: 50% of that portion of the Ticket price paid that relates to travel on the delayed service.
Delay of 90 minutes or more: 100% of the price of that portion of the Ticket price paid that relates to travel on the delayed service.
SVR
Refunds, changes and exchanges of tickets will not be considered.
The SVR operates heritage locomotives and coaching stock over elderly infrastructure using historic systems. Inherent in the delivery of that heritage experience is a degree of potential delay that might be unreasonable for a modern railway network. In determining whether or not the SVR has exercised reasonable care in the provision of services due account shall be taken that their primary purpose is the provision of a heritage travel experience and not transport to a precise Timetable.

 

The SVR terms and conditions are very similar to the NYMR’s. In effect they explain it’s a heritage service using elderly stock so don’t expect the same standards as would apply on a modern system. Nevertheless the Act obliges a service provider to offer compensation and refunds if the service provided is substantially below what can reasonably be expected.

 

Really? "Very similar"?

On the one hand you have a railway making no reference to heritage and simply giving a very explicit sliding scale relating refunds to minutes late.

On the other, you have a railway that clearly makes clear that the service they are offering is a heritage experience, not a timetabled journey.

Clearly both railways are subject to the same legislation, and both are making it clear how they will respond to failure to deliver their service - but there any similarity ends, because the definition of the service delivered is radically different.

Tom

 

I suggest you could only make the commment if you hadn't read the NYMR T and C's in full . Like the SVR' s they are explicit in stating that what's on offer is a heritage experience not a timetabled service. That helps to mitigate against liability but can't exclude it.

 

OK, fair point. The NYMR conditions have one paragraph (9.1) which is substantially identical to the SVR paragraph quoted (in particular, "In determining whether or not the NYMR has exercised reasonable care in the provision of services due account shall be taken that their primary purpose is the provision of a heritage travel experience and not transport to a precise Timetable." But from which, it then seems odd to go and nonetheless set out levels of compensation that seem to explicitly take no account of that primary purpose, and instead just relate compensation to minutes late! (Paragraphs 9.2 and 9.3).

If the primary purpose is "provision of a heritage travel experience and not transport to a precise Timetable" then why make an explicit connection between timetable and level of compensation?

The first part of the Ts&Cs on both railways are identical in wording - even to the point of having the same weird bit of capitalisation - such that I am sure they must have either derived from the same advice, or one has copied the other. But only the NYMR then goes on with the second part that sets out explicit levels of compensation based on how many minutes late those services run.

Tom

 

The 2015 Act includes the right to a price reduction and in extreme cases that can be a full refund. The judgement is whether it's better in terms of liability, and especially customer relations, to leave that to be settled by dispute or to treat passengers with the respect they deserve? The approach of any service provider to compensation in the event of sub standard performance speaks volumes about the organisation. Tough, we're not giving you anything is not only a breach of the Act but indicates disdain towards the clientele that organistion depends on.

 

What is the situation about running on Network Rail metals between Grosmont and Whitby?