Replying to the European Commission’s call for evidence on revision of Rail Passenger Rights

On 20th August the European Commission heavily promoted (Bluesky, LinkedIn, Mastodon) its public consultation on the revision of the Rail Passenger Rights Regulation. As a few people asked me what I thought of this process, here’s my response – part analysis of the problem, and part list of ideas of what needs to be fixed and how, and hence a kind of suggestion for what submissions make sense for the consultation.

Overall my starting point is the European Commission is determined and committed here. Right from von der Leyen’s political guidelines last year, and Tzitzikostas’s hearing in the EP, there has been increasing activity from DG MOVE of the Commission – on the Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation (SDBTR), and now also on passenger rights.

The introduction to the consultation about passenger rights sums up the sort of landing ground the European Commission is looking for. This is the crucial bit: “The Commission is considering an update to the Rail Passenger Rights Regulation to ensure that passengers can effectively exercise their rights when they miss a connection on a train journey involving multiple rail operators – provided the journey was purchased as part of a single transaction on a ticket platform.” These points are expanded more in the rationale in the Commission’s call for evidence.

At the moment many journeys cannot be bought in a single transaction (because railways don’t share data) so passengers have to assemble journeys involving multiple tickets booked on multiple sites, and they then end up with no rights. The idea in the future is that only a single transaction will be needed, and that then comes with rights (but if passengers still have to assemble their own trips rights won’t apply in those cases). IF – and it is a big IF! – data sharing is adequately fixed, one transaction to get passenger rights is a constraint I can live with.

Overall though I am confident the Commission understands the problems, and will propose good and far reaching legislation. The problem will come later, when rail companies bend the ears of national ministers, who water it all down in the Council. But for now, trust the Commission and trust the process.

The site for public feedback is here, and you need to verify your email address in order to submit. Somehow while drafting my submission it logged me out, so do keep a local copy of your text before you submit it!

Here is the text I submitted!

The core approach from the Commission is correct here. Railway tickets booked in one transaction should be accompanied with full passenger rights, regardless of how many rail operators are involved.

The precursor for this: it needs to be possible for a train ticket anywhere in the EU to be booked in one transaction, something that is not the case yet! So a revision of passenger rights legislation only makes sense if SDBTR is also agreed.

The way the Commission words its approach – essentially that multiple tickets booked in one transaction should de facto be considered as equivalent to a through ticket for the sake of passenger rights – is correct. Obliging railway operators to sell a single through ticket to anywhere is too complicated and should not be attempted, as this places too heavy a burden on the IT infrastructure of railway companies.

The important point is then: who is liable for the costs associated with the disruption to a passenger’s journey?

It is vital this falls on the railway operator that caused the problem in the first place – the operator whose train was delayed, disrupted or cancelled. These costs must not fall on the ticket sales platform, as margins for ticket (re-)sale are already very thin.

If railway operators are fearful this will increase their costs, the response must be this: allowing passengers to book cross border railway tickets without the fear of being out of pocket or stranded should result in more passengers, hence more income and more profit, at least outweighing a small additional cost for some compensation and accommodation for stranded customers.

The crux: it must be as easy to book, and as easy to have passenger rights, for a cross border railway journey in Europe as it is for a rail journey within one country. We must never lose sight of this!

The post Replying to the European Commission’s call for evidence on revision of Rail Passenger Rights appeared first on Jon Worth.