-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!
Penalty Fare at Victoria (Southern vs Gat Ex)
- Thread starter derby
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Whereas Gatwick Airport station is on the main line, indeed the BML is liable to disruption if anything happens at Gatwick Airport.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It was, but then it merged with Southern. Also, it isn't even on dedicated tracks (HEx and even Southeastern's HS1 services).
transmanche
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,018
But it is listed as one in the NRCoC...
Go on then, what's the Company number? Do enlighten us!
As quoted in a previous thread (Gatwick Express - Private Eye Article) FOI Response
So, you disagree with the DfT, Southern, Companies House, us, and just about everyone apart from a handful of Southern revenue/gateline staff who pretend to work for this fictional Company.DfT said:
DaleCooper
Established Member
I've been following this thread but now it is just going round in circles, however I must say that I admire transmanche's persistence in the face of overwhelming odds. Either transmanche is wrong and very stubborn or there is some substance to her/his argument. I wonder if we'll ever know.
But isn't a company, and thus can't be a ToC
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,151
I gave you the reason why the mere fact that it is listed in Appendix C is not proof that it was done correctly way back in Post 78. Two and half pages later, we are still going around in circles and back to where we started.
I am not sure what else can be said.
transmanche
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,018
Irrelevant.
It matters not if it is officially/legally a TOC for licensing purposes. What matters for the purpose of interpreting the NRCoC it how that document defines a TOC. And as defined by the NRCoC (and solely for the purposes of the NRCoC), Gatwick Express is a TOC.
transmanche
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,018
TBH, I couldn't give a monkey's whether people using a Southern Only ticket on a GatEx service get PF'd or not.
What concerns me is the attitude of people on here who know full well what is intended by the ticket and are prepared to use partial and selective interpretations of the rules in order to convince themselves and others that they are right. (I won't say 'pedantic', because apparently that is not allowed.) And even worse, to apparently encourage others to use a 'Southern Only' ticket on a GatEx train.
What then disappoints me is the sarcasm, insults and vitriol directed at me just because I don't toe the party line. That's quite sad. There are some contributors to this forum who I previously respected and held their opinions in high regard. But not any more.
The DfT already answered that question years ago. See my post above yours!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
22 posts in a thread where someone wants help appealing a PF for using a Southern Only ticket on Southern's GatEx service suggests you do give a monkeys about the matter, and are very keen on the person who requests help not receiving it. Well, the OP is getting the help he deserves and the OP will be successful.
cjmillsnun
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 3,255
But they list Heathrow Connect and Stansted Express as separate as well, but FGW and AGA don't treat them as such.
For GatEX it's Southern Railway Limited (trading as Gatwick Express)
The important thing though is that the company is Southern Railway Limited. IE the same TOC as Southern.
SN could if it was legally easy do a slam dunk on this one as a byelaw prosecution. Then put up posters at Victoria and Gatwick. They don't. Yet they prosecute others who don't have valid tickets for other routes. So "can't be bothered" is not the reason.
Hold on a minute!
What about Southern's publicity that states that they operate the Gatwick Express, their own maps that to the uninitiated would indicate that a Southern ticket is valid on the Gatwick Express. Is that not encouraging passengers to use a 'Southern Only' ticket on a Gatwick Express train.
It isn't just members of this forum that are peddling confusion.
My personal view is that it isn't intended to be valid but such a hash was made of integrating the Gatwick Express franchise that Southern and the DfT are burying their heads in the sand, hoping it'll go away and that no-one will complain.
I suspect fares will be 'simplified' when it's all absorbed into TSGN although in this case 'simplified' is bound to mean an increase in fares.
I too am in admiration transmanche's persistence. In wondering what the substance to his/her argument is I think DaleCooper has hit the nail on the head.
I've tried to keep an open mind on this thread. Those who disagree with transmanche's stance have mobilised a wealth of supporting evidence to illustrate their various claims. I remain unconvinced by transmanche's arguments, which seem to resort at times to simply stubbonly repeating the same thing.
Perhaps if he or she has tangible, robust and substantive evidence which can be used to support a clearly articulated and reasoned argument then I might be swayed. Perhaps transmanche has such evidence and a reasoned argument to make, but has yet to reveal it (although for the life of me I have no idea why), or perhaps hasn't articulated it in a clear way for me to understand. Perhaps transmanche has no such evidence or convincing argument to actually present.
Either way as DaleCooper points out are going round in circles.
transmanche
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,018
No it's because it seems that some people are so unwilling to even consider the possibility that they could wrong, and thus resort to "sarcasm, insults and vitriol directed at me just because I don't toe the party line".
I think this is very unfair. This has been an interesting and enlightening (if at times heated) debate with arguments on both sides presented.
To suggest you have faced sarcasm, insults and vitriol is quite frankly unsustainable. No insults have been made, and from what I can see the most vociferous and hostile poster to this thread appears to be you, although maybe I'm confusing this with your passion to present your case.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I couldn't agree more.
I have great respect for all the contibutors to this forum, a number of them have encouraged my search for novel money saving ticket solutions, but I admit to never being brave enough to try the Southern only ticket on a clapped out 442.
And whilst I admire transmanche's robust presentation of one interpretation of the situation, I feel that if Southern back down when challenged and won't defend their position in court, then it would appear even they don't support that point of view. That could be because they're incompetent idiots (as I've concluded from every interaction I've had with the company) or they really don't think they have a leg to stand on.
Of course, if the service ran from Gatwick to London with rolling stock suitable for passengers with massive suitcases, perhaps the premium would represent value for money and be worth paying. As it stands, tourists get ripped off for travelling on a train that's not fit for purpose.
And whilst I admire transmanche's robust presentation of one interpretation of the situation, I feel that if Southern back down when challenged and won't defend their position in court, then it would appear even they don't support that point of view. That could be because they're incompetent idiots (as I've concluded from every interaction I've had with the company) or they really don't think they have a leg to stand on.
Of course, if the service ran from Gatwick to London with rolling stock suitable for passengers with massive suitcases, perhaps the premium would represent value for money and be worth paying. As it stands, tourists get ripped off for travelling on a train that's not fit for purpose.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Is there any chance that you could be confusing the message with the messenger?
You might recall that I shared your conclusion that 'Southern only' tickets would permit travel on Gatwick Express services, and I'd presented some reasoning for my conclusion. But whether the definitive answer can be found by reasoning, evidence, or a straw-poll of the agencies you identify, we have to accept that there is still no definitive answer and this unsatisfactory situation continues, inconveniencing staff and passengers alike.
While I remain inclined towards the view that 'Southern only' tickets ought to be accepted on GatEx services, I'm grateful to transmanche for reminding me of the phrasing in one of the Conditions of Carriage, and have to say that my inclination has been undermined by the evidence (whether I like it or not!).
I share your dissapointment. There appears to be a number of regular posters who will direct their passionate dislike for a policy or practice towards ther person who reports it - it appears to me that you are being attacked for exactly that error. [Shakespeare repeatedly tried to illustrate the folly and the temptation of confusing the messenger with the message, but despite the exceptional position that Shakespeare occupies in the nation's education, we still seem to struggle to separate the two correctly].
Southern knows full well what the position is. Just as private companies issue unenforceable parking tickets, but see (apparently) approximately 60% of them being paid, you can understand why Southern will continue to sell these tickets and trust that the vast majority of people will pay, and most will be happy too - as it's quite common and usual to take an airport express train into a city centre.
Those who kick up a fuss get sorted quietly, no doubt always as a goodwill gesture or without prejudice, and life goes on.
Until the whole thing gets fixed one way or another, I suspect this is how it will continue to be. Nothing is ever going to be tested to clarify once and for all. Just having the uncertainty enables Southern to be pretty sure that very few people will stumble upon threads like this and decide to try it. They won't want the hassle. Just as many people don't split tickets or dare sit in first class when no first class is advertised.
Given I use Thameslink to get to/from Gatwick, I'm not even someone who would try this out myself.
Those who kick up a fuss get sorted quietly, no doubt always as a goodwill gesture or without prejudice, and life goes on.
Until the whole thing gets fixed one way or another, I suspect this is how it will continue to be. Nothing is ever going to be tested to clarify once and for all. Just having the uncertainty enables Southern to be pretty sure that very few people will stumble upon threads like this and decide to try it. They won't want the hassle. Just as many people don't split tickets or dare sit in first class when no first class is advertised.
Given I use Thameslink to get to/from Gatwick, I'm not even someone who would try this out myself.
Last edited:
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,151
I don't think I need to reiterate the request that such matters need to be reported.
If a report is regarding the conduct of a member of forum staff, this will be reviewed by someone different.
Hang on a sec.
If Southern is trying to enforce a "rule" that is has no right to enforce, then the pendantry is right. What you should be outraged about is one of the "big boys" (ie- a registered company) is pushing around the little guys (ie - us) to milk them for money which they have no right to.
Given Southern's communications to others in the past, it strikes me they know they're in the wrong on this, but simply do not care.
In any case I've sent them a message asking bluntly if its valid or not.
Last edited:
The answer you get will depend on how you ask the question, and who you ask. I know of several people who were told it wasn't valid but as soon as they produced the Southern route map were "let off". This is only about the 4th or 5th case I know of where someone was actually charged. You're also more likely to be told yes if you're boarding at Brighton compared to Gatwick Airport.
Having looked at this thread several times I have come to the conclusion that Southern are definitely "at it" by deliberately exploiting the aforementioned ambiguities re validity of "Southern Only" tickets on GE. The fact that when challenged they seem to relent in all cases only reinforces this. Has anyone tried taking them to task by reporting them to Passenger Focus?
DaleCooper
Established Member
Is there any evidence that they relent in all cases or do we only hear about it when a passenger's challenge is successful? I'm not taking sides here but it does seem that the evidence at the moment is anecdotal.
At the risk of going off-topic, recent judgments suggest that private parking tickets are indeed enforceable.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I'd mostly agree, but there is no moral case for it to have no right to enforce. It's a technicality - precisely the kind of thing that people get outraged at Starbucks and the likes when they exploit it to reduce their tax take.
There is no intention whatsoever for Southern Only tickets to be valid on GatEx. It is a loophole in the NRCoC that they arguably are.
While my view is that GatEx should not be a premium service because air passengers with luggage are better on it (indeed I'd force them onto it by judicious use of "u" and "s" in the timetable, and make the fare the same as the regular one), that's a separate question of policy, and a policy that does not apply at the present time.
IMO they have every moral right to, the intention is absolutely clear and was never anything other than that. What is the case is that there is a bit of a loophole in the NRCoC, which is probably there simply because no other TOC has ever[1] tried to restrict a ticket type from *some* of their trains, because most other TOCs don't have that kind of service structure.
[1] Actually fGW have and do, by making Off Peak tickets valid in the evening peak on Turbo services but not HSTs.
I do believe the issue of parking tickets is indeed off topic and not of relevance to this situation and discussion.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
No, passengers are "at it" by exploiting an unintentional loophole which no doubt will be plugged in due course.
I see no reason why a TOC morally should not have a routed ticket valid on only some of their trains. Indeed, in a number of cases I can see a benefit to it. It's just that there hasn't been a need for one in that form before.
Let's say the WCML gets refranchised as a whole, containing both Virgin West Coast and the present LM. If the present LM had overcapacity on London-Birmingham I would have no moral issue with a "no InterCity trains" routed ticket that would act just like the present LM Only one.
All that needs to happen here is a tweak to the NRCoC to permit what is clearly the intention and remove the loophole. Provided it is made clear to passengers when they purchase what restriction is in place, and there's no way clearer than writing it on the ticket, what's the problem in passengers accepting a restriction in return for a lower fare?
If it's indeed a loop hole, would it not be reasonable to expect said loop hole to be closed once it has been discovered to prevent its 'abuse'? From what I've been reading Southern know this is an issue, yet choose to do nothing to close the 'loop hole', nor indeed pursue those who some perceive to be abusing the system, or, put another way, strictly adhere the terms and conditions they agreed to when they bought the ticket in question as passengers are necessarily required to do at all times.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
You can't change the NRCoC at a whim, and that's what needs changing to "legitimise" it. The routeings may well be changed before it's worth it.
- Status