Train companies persist in skirting the law on consequential loss, says Which?
|
Train companies are continuing to provide misleading advice to
passengers about their rights to claim for consequential loss,
despite the change to the industry terms and conditions, a
Which? investigation has revealed. After over a year of pressure
from Which?, operators agreed changes to the National Rail
Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) in March - removing the term that
suggested travellers were not entitled to claim for reasonable
costs incurred when...Request free
trial
Train companies are continuing to provide misleading advice to
passengers about their rights to claim for consequential loss,
despite the change to the industry terms and conditions, a
Which? investigation has revealed.
After over a year of pressure from Which?, operators agreed changes to the National Rail Conditions of Travel (NRCoT) in March - removing the term that suggested travellers were not entitled to claim for reasonable costs incurred when services are disrupted and it is the train company’s fault. Under the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) and common law, passengers are entitled to claim for losses when a service is not delivered with reasonable care and skill - for example, having to pay for a taxi when a train breaks down and is cancelled and there is no other way to get home. But when Which? scrutinised current practices, it found that some train companies were still thumbing their noses at passengers and the regulator - and potentially breaching consumer law - by responding with blanket refusals to consider consequential loss claims. Passengers could be losing out on significant sums of money when forced to make alternative arrangements, despite their legal rights to claim these back from the train company in appropriate circumstances. The consumer champion made "mystery shop" phone calls to 26 operators, asking if an elderly friend or relative was eligible for compensation when their train - the last of the night - was cancelled and they were forced to pay for a cab. Almost half (12 out of 26) provided incorrect or inconsistent advice, with the six worst offenders - Cross Country, Grand Central, Greater Anglia, Heathrow Express, ScotRail and Stansted Express - all wrongly telling our secret shoppers they could not make a claim on every call. The failures by two of the airport link operators (Heathrow Express and Stansted Express) are concerning - they have different terms and conditions to the NRCoT but these Ts&Cs are subject to consumer law and their advice is in stark contrast with another airport link operator, Gatwick Express, whose Passenger Charter states that they will consider any reasonable claim for additional costs incurred because of a delay to one of their services. When we put our various findings to these companies ScotRail, Greater Anglia and Grand Central said that they do cover consequential losses, which suggests that their individual staff members are not articulating company policy correctly. Cross Country, Stansted Express and Heathrow Express did not respond to our requests for comment. There were six companies which were inconsistent - Arriva Wales, Chiltern, Southeastern, Thameslink/Great Northern, Virgin West Coast and West Midlands fared slightly better than the worst offenders, but while the advice was not always inaccurate, it was inconsistent and articulated poorly. There was some positive news, as Which? found 13 out of 26 train companies were giving good advice over the phone, an improvement on a similar survey carried out before the (NRCoT) changes that found only five giving the correct information. Which? also analysed 26 train company websites and found 18 out of 26 failing to provide good enough information to customers about their rights to claim for consequential loss, with most simply failing to provide any information about when they would consider a claim. Only 8 out of 26 train companies were showing elements of good practice on their websites, using phrases like "we will consider any reasonable claim for additional costs" or “we will consider each claim made to us on its merits”. We found that five of them - East Midlands, Great Western Railway, Heathrow Express, Hull Trains and Stansted Express - were still providing misleading advice about consequential loss to customers on their websites or passenger charters by making blanket statements that they were not liable for consequential loss, or that any consequential losses should be claimed on passengers’ travel insurance . While Merseyrail, Southwestern and Southeastern also demonstrated bad practice by saying that claims would only be considered “under exceptional circumstances”. Great Western and East Midlands have now updated their online information as a result of our investigation and Hull Trains have said they are reviewing their Passengers' Charter. Amid the current timetable scandal, the findings are another indictment against train companies failing to act in the best interests of their customers - even after reaching an agreement with the regulator on their terms and conditions to clean up their act. The rail regulator (the Office of Road and Rail) must now step in and take enforcement action against companies that persist in misleading customers on consequential loss - and train operating companies must start to advise and process passengers’ claims fairly. Which? is also asking for evidence from passengers who have been let down by their train service - whether by struggling to claim compensation or having their lives turned upside down by chaotic timetable changes and driver shortages. To share a story with Which? please visit www.which.co.uk/trainpain. Alex Hayman, Which? Managing Director of Public Markets, said: "This is the latest in a catalogue of examples of train companiestreating their passengers with breathtaking disregard. They have been warned time and again about their duties to ensure their passengers are getting the money they are owed when they fail to deliver, yet they fail to act until forced.
"The regulator must now start showing some teeth and take immediate enforcement action or the Government has no choice but to step in and stand up for passengers and their rights.” Notes to editors
Not conclusive Hull Trains - the mystery shopper was told that the company didn’t operate on that route, despite another member of staff helping a different mystery shopper with this.
Heathrow Express
Southwestern
TFL Rail Cross Country Grand Central
Southern Transpennine
Virgin West Coast Right of replies South Western Railway A South Western Railway spokesperson said: "We are pleased that our customer service agents gave the Which? mystery shoppers the correct information, which we would expect. We have reviewed the wording on our website in relation to CRA, and have made changes which will be clearer for our customers." East Midlands
Thank you for your email, I was pleased to see the
positive feedback about our contact centre staff. Our
website FAQ now provides some information on consequential loss
- see below: Great Western Railway Thanks for this email, and flagging the pages on our website that had not been updated. We’ve now updated them following your email. Greater Anglia
As a general rule, we would not cancel a last train.
However, if we did, we would organise buses and taxis to make
sure that all customers were able to complete their journeys
without any further expense to themselves. We would also
recompense any customer who organised their own
taxi.
“Merseyrail staff were trained on the guidelines for compensation claims from the outset, enabling us to deliver a consistently high standard of information and assistance to passengers who may have experienced disruption. We are pleased to see this reflected in the findings from Which?. Merseyrail also offers comprehensive advice for passengers on our website, using information which has been agreed with industry bodies against the Consumer Rights Act.” Grand Central
In the event a Grand Central service is cancelled, we
have comprehensive provision in place to ensure all customers
reach their destination, by arranging alternative rail travel
and providing coach or taxi transport where necessary, at Grand
Central’s expense. In the most extreme cases, where onward
transport is not possible, hotel accommodation will be
arranged.
A ScotRail spokesperson said:
A spokeswoman for Govia Thameslink Railway
said: Chiltern
Alan Riley, Customer Services Director at Chiltern
Railways said: “We appreciate hearing feedback like
this because we aspire to give world-class customer service.
Compensation can be very complex and we have tried to make it
as simple as possible for customers across our network.
We regularly review and monitor the information we give
customers through our own customer research and we have already
made changes to improve clarity since this mystery shop took
place" Hull Trains “At Hull Trains, we welcome any feedback and it was particularly good to hear that our team responded well to the first call made. We are currently reviewing our Passengers’ Charter and will make amends to this very shortly to confirm that this is in line with existing legislation.“We employ a dedicated and award-winning customer service team that operates on one route between Hull and London King’s Cross. It is perhaps one of the most straightforward routes and we are one of the smallest and most personable train operators on Britain’s railways. “Although, like other rail companies, we publish information that outlines our policies on claiming refunds for delays and other matters, including consequential loss, our onboard teams and back office staff will always look at the individual circumstances of every single case to make sure that we do the right thing. There are many examples of us covering the costs of taxis and hotels on the rare occasions that a customer has not been able to complete their journey. We believe that everyone’s journey is personal to them and that is why we regularly go above and beyond the basic transaction. "In 2016, Hull Trains was voted the UK’s best train operator at the UK National Transport Awards. Delivering good and consistent customer service, not rigid and obstructive policies and procedures, is the way we do business. We’d be happy for Which?’s researchers to travel with us to experience our people in action as opposed to undertaking research of this nature which does not give a true reflection of how things work in practice.” |