Should rail passengers have more rights?

[Haggisman]

I've just seen an article stating that rail fares are going to be increasing by 5.9% next year - this seems like an absolute **** take to me considering the service provided (or lack thereof) during the last few months.

Normally if a company consistently fails to provide the service you are paying for, then you would cancel it, but obviously in this case for many, transport is a necessity, and there aren't any realistic alternatives, so should customers have more rights to compensation in the case of delayed & cancelled journeys?

At the moment, the most you can claim back is the cost of your ticket, and that's only in the case of a 2 hour or more delay. For monthly season ticket holders, this is limited to 1/20th the ticket cost.

I don't feel this adequately compensates for the costs of alternative travel (e.g. 1/20 of my partner's train ticket is £3.20, for a return bus ticket it costs her £4, so she's down at least 80p every time). I had to drive her to work the other day as the bus didn't turn up either, which cost £12, so almost £9 down.

As far as I'm aware, it's basically up to the rail company whether to offer additional compensation for alternative travel in these circumstances, but this doesn't seem right to me; even ignoring the time cost and inconvenience caused, there are tangible and provable financial costs caused by their breach of contract, so should there not be legislation in place to cover claims for reasonable alternative travel?

I'd be happy to pay a bit more for a reliable service, but it doesn't seem the current model is fit for purpose - how would one go about trying to change this?

 

[Haggisman]

I'm not sure anything more than a proportionate refund of the ticket cost is justified - it's a service not a right...

While true, it's not unheard of for contracts to include clauses where failure to maintain a reasonable level of service results in compensation payments. If it was the odd occasion it wouldn't be so bad, but in this case the costs of alternative travel can be many multiples of the original ticket cost, and like I said that's ignoring the time and inconvenience it causes. These aren't isolated incidents, since June it's been almost 20% of journeys which have been severely delayed/cancelled, you're talking hours and hours of waiting around for trains which are never going to arrive, the stress of being late for work constantly, late home constantly, having to pay for buses and taxis, dragging our 2 year old out of bed at 11pm because there's no other way for her to get to/from work etc.

Edit: flight delay compensation is a good example, in most cases the compensation not only covers the ticket cost, but also reflects the disruption caused by the delay/cancellation.

You mention increased penalties for delayed & cancelled services, so surely increasing the level of compensation to passengers (e.g. Those actually affected by it) would be the most appropriate way for those penalties to be implemented?

Sadly I think you're right about needing a government with long term plans (or in fact any plans would be an improvement), but I thought we were trying to get people out of cars and discourage people from driving into city centres - e.g. Birmingham has a clean air zone which means it costs me £8 to drive in. That's all very well, but when there aren't viable and reliable alternatives, then what exactly are people supposed to do?

 

[Haggisman]

The recent strikes based on pay won't have helped, however by charging more they will in turn then have more money to be able to pay their employees.
That may help a little if used in that fashion

Therefore the increase you've referred to "should" will improve the reliability as in theory should be less strikes

Blue skies yeah

You and I both know that's not how it works in reality though

 

[Haggisman]

I can't see ir getting better. If it were me I'd just think of the ways I can avoid having to use public transport & invest my time/money in them:
Car
CBT test & cheap moped
E bike
E scooter
Etc

Yup, this is the plan - her goal for next year is to pass her test and get a cheap EV to drive in

Railway infrastructure and stock should be state owned.
Most countrys other than the UK can do it well.

Which is ironic considering we invented it

 

[Haggisman]

due to circumstances beyond anyones' reasonable control.

Big difference there.

You also don't pay directly to use the road (at least no more than anyone else who pays any kind of tax)

 

[Haggisman]

I pay to have the car, I pay to fuel it, tax it and insure it - I pay all that pretty directly.

Indeed, and a road being closed doesn't prevent you from having that car or driving it on your own property, but paying for your car is not the same as paying for the road. Of those only VED and tax on fuel are even remotely related to paying for the road, but really that just goes into general taxation. Going by that same logic my 10 year old also pays directly for the road whenever he spends his pocket money on something with VAT on it

You're right it's a bit of a slippery slope, and while I agree that unforeseen circumstances such as extreme weather or a suicide are a bit of a grey area, but months worth of (seemingly) endless strikes and staff shortages can be planned for and avoided.

You mention drivers not turning up or calling in sick, but tbh I don't see that as a valid excuse for cancellations. A delay while a replacement is sorted maybe, but I learned the concept of "redundacy" for critical systems when I was still in college...