Let’s take an unsentimental journey, back in time to what is euphemistically described as ‘the basic railway’.
Pick a rural station, perhaps one not that far from a main line. A simple shelter greets you, the original station building having either been bricked up or demolished. There is no information screen, and no announcements to give you any comfort that your train is running at all, let alone close to time. After dark, your way is marked by small pools of light, barely enough to shine on the station name boards carried on the lampposts. Unwelcoming would be one point of view - distinctly ‘off-putting’ would be another.
Four decades on, some things have changed, although sadly the basic railway is still alive and well in places, with the argument persisting that some form of line is better than none at all.
New technology now means even some small stations have digital display screens, remotely trigged announcements, and machines that can sell you a ticket even if you only have a card in your pocket. CCTV provides reassurance to passengers and security for these ‘distant’ outposts. The railway is much better than it used to be at introducing itself to passengers.
Just as well. In our pockets we all carry supercomputers. We can dial up our own information about how our trains are working, or turn passenger champion and direct our ire towards the railways when things don’t go as we want. Social media has made the act of complaining instant and public.
What’s more, the railways, like so many services we use on a daily basis, are now a private concern. Elsewhere we have become used to dispute resolution, refunds or simply feeling listened to. This, at a time when the proportion of the railways funded by the passenger compared with the taxpayer is increasing.
Hence, the stage has been set for the arrival of a substantial new player in Britain’s railways… an ombudsman.
In early August 2017, the Rail Delivery Group announced it was committed to introducing an independent ombudsman service, to investigate and rule on passenger complaints that were not resolved by the train operators themselves.
The idea has the backing of Rail Minister Paul Maynard, who said, “After my discussions with rail industry leaders I am delighted to see they are taking this vital step, which will help ensure that passengers get a fair deal. I am committed to putting passengers at the heart of everything we do and I want them to have a stronger voice.”
Momentum has clearly been building towards this point for some time. At the end of December 2015, Which? (the name by which the Consumers Association is better known) submitted a supercomplaint to the Office of Rail and Road calling for an investigation into refunds and compensation payments made when trains are delayed. It alleged the process was not clear or easy, and in a survey of 7,000 passengers it found only a third who might have been eligible to compensation for a delay had actually made a claim.
“Millions of passengers are left out of pocket each year, so train companies must do more to put their passengers first and make rail refunds easier,” said Which? Executive Director Richard Lloyd.
It also asked the ORR to do more, to ensure that train operators told passengers how to claim compensation and to be held to account if they didn’t.
The ORR had 90 days to respond and did so with its own research, including a mystery shopper exercise that found a high proportion of staff - either on trains or at stations - couldn’t provide basic or accurate information on making delay compensation claims.
A key recommendation was a new nationwide promotional scheme to raise passenger awareness of their rights, alongside enhanced staff training and clearer information on train operators’ websites. On October 1 2016, the Consumer Rights Act came into effect for the rail industry and the Government announced that the current Delay Repay would be gradually extended across franchises to cover delays of 15 minutes or more.
At the end of 2016, a year after the initial complaint, ORR followed up its research to ensure the recommendations had been accepted by the industry. Most train operating companies had “worked well and made changes”, but “progress on reaching a wide audience to help passengers claim was varied”.
In the Delay Repay scheme, passengers are entitled to a refund of a percentage of their ticket costs, with that percentage increasing with the length of the delay. However, searching online reveals a disparity in the ways train operators advertise it.
Some clearly flag it up, with large button-style links. In other cases it is much less visible - at the bottom of a page, as a plain text link. Follow those links, and the differences grow. From automatic repayments, to online forms, the information about when you can claim and how to do it is presented in a variety of ways - and some perhaps a little more obviously and friendly than others.
The ORR’s annual consumer report Measuring Up was published in July and digs into areas which are key to the passenger experience - ticket retailing, provision of information and how complaints are handled.
Stephanie Tobyn is the Deputy Director for Consumers at ORR, and led the response to the supercomplaint.
“What was the crunch point for us? Looking at the Measuring Up report, there is a lot of information and data in there on some new research we’d been doing on passenger satisfaction, with the outcome of their complaints and the complaint handling process. While there are quite big differences between the companies, overall satisfaction in this area is not good at all. There is something not working.
“In other sectors you can see the value an ombudsman can bring. I think that was the turning point. That research was around 30,000 actual passenger responses on the basis of their complaints with the train operating companies, so it is substantial robust research that has really helped to shape our thinking.”
Measuring Up will make challenging reading for train operators. Each company receives a very public ‘school report’ looking at their performance on provision of information to passengers, their actions to improve accessible travel, and how they handle complaints. The metrics are compared year on year, indicating performance trends.
“We’re trying to focus our attention on the areas where we think we can deliver the greatest value,” continues Tobyn.
“The supercomplaint did direct us towards that in quite a significant way, but complaint handling was a concern because we didn’t see all the TOCs consistently looking at satisfaction at the end of the process - so not reviewing how it went for the passenger. We felt that was an important area. Getting the TOCs to agree to the research, working with them on that, and it has built up over several months.”
ORR supports the move to set up an ombudsman scheme. Tobyn adds: “At the moment the current mechanism is not binding on TOCs, so the ombudsman would bring that element of finality to complaints. It’s a significant difference - it brings consistency to the process. An ombudsman will take a balanced view of what happened, and you need consistent review of the issues to throw out the right answer that can then be applied in other similar cases.”
The ORR has a consumer expert panel which offers guidance when regulatory policy is being formed. However, it is not the only organisation taking the long view for the passenger, nor is Measuring Up the only scorecard the industry receives.
Transport Focus’ National Rail Passenger Survey, which looks at the satisfaction levels of tens of thousands of travellers, is both keenly and anxiously awaited each year. The survey takes place in the spring, with the results published in the summer, and this year there were encouraging signs for the industry as a whole. No train company’s overall satisfaction declined, although individual satisfaction levels ranged between 72% and 97%. A period of seemingly stable performance led Transport Focus to talk of “green shoots” which are “fragile and need nurturing”.
Besides providing evidence of passenger sentiment around the network, the watchdog campaigns can also advocate for the passenger, taking up complaints about train operators in certain cases.
“In recent times, particularly the last 12-18 months, we’ve seen a large increase in the number of passengers turning to us for our help - mainly because of more transparent signposting by rail companies to us, so we can take on cases,” says TF Director David Sidebottom.
“It has also been caused by some poor complaint handling by TOCs. We saw our complaint numbers increase by about 60% for the year 2016-17 compared with previous years.”
The majority of people who use TF’s services say they are satisfied. However, it has no power to impose rulings or enforce settlements. Even so, Sidebottom is confident that the organisation will still have a role to play, even with an ombudsman in place.
