Woodsford backs collective claim against Govia Thameslink Railway

A collective claim against Govia Thameslink Railway (“GTR”) – the operator of the Great Northern, Southern, Gatwick Express and Thameslink lines – was filed on Wednesday 24th November with London’s specialist competition court, the Competition Appeal Tribunal.

The claim revolves around the lack of access to so-called ‘boundary fares’ – where travellers holding a London Travelcard should be offered discounted fares taking them from the boundary of any zone covered by the card to their destination.

GTR is alleged to have not made ‘boundary fares’ sufficiently available for Travelcard holders to purchase, nor making passengers aware of their existence, in breach of UK’s competition rules. The rail company’s failure has left customers with little option but to buy a higher fare than was necessary because their travelcard already entitled them to travel part of their journey. It is calculated that 240 million journeys since November 2015 could have benefited from Boundary Fares if travellers had been aware of them.

The claim is estimated to be worth up to £77 million. It was filed by Mr Justin Gutmann, a consumer rail campaigner.

Mr Guttman is represented by the law firms Hausfeld and Charles Lyndon and barristers from Monckton Chambers.

Read more.

Keep Reading

New Fundings

Woodsford backs claim against Australian banking giant ANZ

Woodsford Litigation Funding is backing an Australian class action against banking giant ANZ on behalf of credit card holders who were charged interest by ANZ from 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2018. The class action, filed in the Federal Court of Australia, alleges that ANZ’s “interest-free” credit card contracts contained unfair terms and that ANZ engaged in unconscionable conduct causing loss and damage to ANZ credit card holders. The claim alleges that, during the eight-year period, ANZ charged interest to customers retrospectively on credit card purchases that previously had the benefit of an interest-free period, also known as Retrospective Interest. The claim further alleges that ANZ did not provide transparent instructions to its interest-free credit card customers of the method in which it charged Retrospective Interest and that customers had no way to determine the amount of Retrospective Interest they would pay.

Before You Go

Never miss a thing in the litigation finance market.