Well they'll just have to learn about the industry structure the hard way won't they. Ignorance of a rule does not provide an excuse to break that rule.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
£1000 bill for travelling on Virgin Trains on a 'LM only' ticket.
- Thread starter drbdrb
- Start date
- Status
Well they'll just have to learn about the industry structure the hard way won't they. Ignorance of a rule does not provide an excuse to break that rule.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Rail fare are too complicated but competition results in more complicated fares.
Consider London-Birmingham off-peak fares:
London Midland £28.00
via High Wycombe £50.00 (much more generous time restrictions compared to the Nay Permitted)
Any Permitted £50.50
Let's simplify the fares - guess which ones will go......
You can bet the Any Permitted won't be reduced in price. The two cheaper fares would go but of course it would all be okay as passengers have been asking for less complicated fares.
No different from coach travel!
If I buy a megacoach ticket can I use it on National Express coach?
No of course I cant so why do people buy the cheapest train tickets available but expect them to be the same as the more expensive tickets?
LateThanNever
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 1,027
Quite.
But would Megabus/coach or National Express allow you to board with the wrong ticket?
That's only because the coach is a lot smaller - say 50 passengers - so it's practical to check tickets at the door.
LateThanNever
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 1,027
Quite.
So why do the railway insist in providing tickets they are unable properly to control?
GatwickDepress
Established Member
I'm confused, what do you mean "by unable to control" in this specific case?
DelayRepay
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2011
- Messages
- 2,929
Every time I've used that line, there have been very clear announcements "Tickets marked London Midland Only are not valid on this service" on the platforms. It also shows on the screens. If people are incapable of following instructions, then that is not the train company's fault.
The London Midland Only tickets provide a much cheaper alternative so I hope you are not arguing for them to be withdrawn from sale?
So, if writing 'london Midland Trains only' on the ticket and announcing the train as 'Virgin West Coast service' isnt enough what do you propose as an alternative to make it 'simpler'?
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,162
What do you propose?
Make all trains reservation compulsory? Checks at every door at every station?
A train is very different to a bus. You do realise that right?
LateThanNever
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 1,027
Fair enough - for once I agree!
PermitToTravel
Established Member
Also announce something like "Tickets marked 'London Midland Only' are not valid on this service".... oh.
Yes you are correct, they do that as well!
hear it at Basingstoke that 'groupsave tickets are not valid' when they are announcing a Cross Country service.
causton
Established Member
Trains should only have one door next to the driver, that way they can check all the tickets of people entering and leaving!
At least that is what I think they are trying to propose to "control" tickets!
At least that is what I think they are trying to propose to "control" tickets!
No of course I wasnt. But there is still no doubt in my mind that a group travelling that large would not have known what they were doing - especially as a group leader.
Nothing posted after this will make me change my mind on this either.
What about tickets marked 'AP LDN MID ONLY'? And in inconspicuous writing.
Everyone keeps saying this, but I've never seen any ticket marked 'LONDON MIDLAND ONLY'.
Last edited:
theblackwatch
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2006
- Messages
- 10,781
I do find it odd how people think they should be let off for an 'honest mistake' on the railways. Would they argue that in a similar way if they were, for example, caught speeding at 40 mph in a 30 mph zone because they thought the speed limit on that road was actually 40?
PermitToTravel
Established Member
The closest they get is "LDN MIDLAND ONLY", which I think is obvious enough. "AP LDN MID ONLY" I agree is a problem - those could all quite easily be changed to "LDN MIDLAND ONLY" too (indeed I think they should be - isn't "AP TOC" non-standard?)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Wait, what do new tickets for that route say? "Only valid for travel on London Midland services"?
Can't be sure unless someone has actually collected one. I had one to London Terminals that would have been routed 'AP SWT ONLY' that came out something like "Valid on the service below and appropriate connecting South West Trains services" - which I think was related to being able to take another service to Vauxhall if one were to change at Clapham Junction, which the routing 'AP SWT ONLY' does not prevent, but the wording 'valid on this train only' does. No idea (and, frankly, don't care, before anyone gets all pedantic about it) whether going to Vauxhall instead on an Exeter to London Terminals Advance is actually permitted.
In Short: Maybe, we can't be sure, weird things sometimes print there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
This is being very obviously irresponsible though. I don't call it irresponsible to get on the wrong train, if you believe you are on the right one.
No you are quite right , I dont think anybody would board a train Knowing that they were in line to be hit by £1000 fine or charge or whatever it is .
However I would be willing to bet people do board trains thinking that they wont get caught holding an incorrect ticket ,Im sure some think that they can convince the conductor they made an "honest mistake" and have never ever done anything like this before , or the conductor wont pick up on their ticket being wrong. Or that the conductor wont even come round
It just so happens this time the Virgin TM did pick up on it , and did ensure that they held the correct ticket . If this was a genuine Mistake Then in future these people will check their ticket restrictions before traveling in future .
I'm sure that due to you being "surcharged" by Virgin if you ever do travel with them again or when you travel with any other TOC for that matter you will also ensure you are aware of the restrictions effecting your ticket and the train you intend to travel on .
O L Leigh
Established Member
Ignorance of the law is never considered an acceptable defence in law, and the same applies to contracts too. If you enter into a contract you are bound by the terms of that contract whether you choose to familiarise yourself with them or not.
Buying a ticket for rail travel means that you are entering into a contract with the rail companies, which includes agreeing to abide by ticketing restrictions. I see no reason why ignorance should be considered an acceptable defence. If you buy a ticket that has restrictions, whether they be time, route or operator specific, it is the customer's responsibility to understand what those restrictions mean and how they affect their travel plans. I really can't see the complication anywhere in that.
With regard to the incident under discussion, whether it was an error of omission or a deliberate attempt to defraud the system by obtaining a service they hadn't paid for, I think they were dealt with very fairly indeed. It appears that they were charged the correct fare for the journey that they actually made. Where's the complaint in that.
O L Leigh
Buying a ticket for rail travel means that you are entering into a contract with the rail companies, which includes agreeing to abide by ticketing restrictions. I see no reason why ignorance should be considered an acceptable defence. If you buy a ticket that has restrictions, whether they be time, route or operator specific, it is the customer's responsibility to understand what those restrictions mean and how they affect their travel plans. I really can't see the complication anywhere in that.
With regard to the incident under discussion, whether it was an error of omission or a deliberate attempt to defraud the system by obtaining a service they hadn't paid for, I think they were dealt with very fairly indeed. It appears that they were charged the correct fare for the journey that they actually made. Where's the complaint in that.
O L Leigh
NSEFAN
Established Member
Because £1000 is a lot of money, and charging that (even though it is the correct amount) is somehow poor customer service. Afterall, Mr Branson is a family man, don't you know? :roll:O L Leigh said:
In reality they were charged potentially as little as a third of the correct fare, as I mentioned above.
It sounds like they were excessed up to the correct fare, so overall paid the amount of money that the journey should have cost them, which sounds fair.
Yes, it would have been technically correct to make no allowance of the fare already paid and charge them whole new tickets, on a technicality because the rail industry doesn't allow TOC-specific tickets to be excessed, unlike route-specific tickets. It is proportionate and sensible for staff to show discretion and charge an excess, as happened in the case in question.
Yes, it would have been technically correct to make no allowance of the fare already paid and charge them whole new tickets, on a technicality because the rail industry doesn't allow TOC-specific tickets to be excessed, unlike route-specific tickets. It is proportionate and sensible for staff to show discretion and charge an excess, as happened in the case in question.
Shimbleshanks
Member
Virgin can call it by any name they like - whatever it was, I got clobbered. Personally, I prefer the term 'mugging'.No worries!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It wasn't a fine. It was a charge made up of the difference between the fare paid, and the fare due. As mentioned earlier in the thread, this is more lenient than the rules allow for.
The trouble is people won't take responsibilities for their own actions, everything that goes wrong for them is someone else's fault.
It's common place now that ticketing on the railways is a lot more complex than it used to be and when people buy a ticket that is ridiculously cheap compared to other fares on that route the onus on them is to check the restrictions and abide by them especially with online bookings where they tick a box to say they've understood this.
It's common place now that ticketing on the railways is a lot more complex than it used to be and when people buy a ticket that is ridiculously cheap compared to other fares on that route the onus on them is to check the restrictions and abide by them especially with online bookings where they tick a box to say they've understood this.
Shimbleshanks
Member
No worries!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
it sounds to me, based on very limited information, that you held an Off Peak Return, and were instead of being excessed to an Anytime Return, charged a new Anytime Single because that was cheaper, leaving you to use the return portion of your Off Peak Return on a subsequent trip (if you wished to make another trip within the validity period).
That is the correct charge for a mistake, where the excess would cost more than a new ticket. The problem is not the actions of the staff, but the cost of the fares in the first place - and that high fare will be charged to anyone who used that train (and didn't already have an Advance or pass) - irrespective of whether or not a mistake was made.
Well next time you made the journey, if it had been within a month, you'd have only needed a single to London. If after a month, then it's understandable you'd use a much cheaper operator, and I agree that if Virgin's fares are considered too high, people will understandably boycott them, which is your right and I'll support you in that.
However the charge in the case described in the article was - in my opinion - fair, proportional, and less than the theoretical 'correct' fare.
Yes it was an off-peak return, actually one purchased from a station in South London. I make the journey at approximately 6-week intervals, so anything I'd bought wouldn't have been valid subsequently.
If there had been barrier checks at Euston, I would presumably been told the ticket wasn't valid and would have postponed my journey to the evening (which I would have been quite happy to do). Arguably, I should have checked the validity of the off-peak return, but I'm a busy person, and getting such information online isn't exactly easy.
Sometimes there are barrier checks at Euston, sometimes not. Very often, you don't get an on board ticket inspection; on this occasion I did. How many other 'violations' have I perpetrated in the past, blissfully unaware?
Again, it's the railways' old problem of inconsistency, coupled with often very complex ticketing rules. Even finding out the terms and conditions for the London Midland ticket took me an hour so of online research, and I do know a little bit about the subject - pity the layman.
What would have been your expectation in that situation?
extendedpaul
Member
Have to say that it would not cross my mind that a train departing London just after 3 pm would be anything but an Off Peak service ....
- Status