Train Ticket That Can No Longer Be Used

[RichmondCommu]

G'day everyone,

One of my sisters was due to travel down to London for the weekend at the start of February but because of work commitments is no longer able to do so. She was due to travel with East Midlands Trains and as I understand it is unable to get a refund on her ticket. Is there anyway that the ticket could be sold on to a 3rd party rather than taking a hit on the ticket (around £40).

Any help / advice would be gratefully received!

Kind regards,

Richmond Commuter!

 

[221129]

G'day everyone,

One of my sisters was due to travel down to London for the weekend at the start of February but because of work commitments is no longer able to do so. She was due to travel with East Midlands Trains and as I understand it is unable to get a refund on her ticket. Is there anyway that the ticket could be sold on to a 3rd party rather than taking a hit on the ticket (around £40).

Any help / advice would be gratefully received!

Kind regards,

Richmond Commuter!

Officially no...

 

[yorkie]

It's not permitted to sell the ticket, no.

However if she can travel another day, she can pay a £10 admin fee (+ the difference in fares, if any) to change it, providing she does so before the train departs!

 

[RichmondCommu]

It's not permitted to sell the ticket, no.

However if she can travel another day, she can pay a £10 admin fee (+ the difference in fares, if any) to change it, providing she does so before the train departs!

OK many thanks for that Does that apply to advance tickets where travel is restricted to certain trains?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, it does indeed.

 

[Starmill]

She may want to investigate amending the ticket to a date and time that is more suitable for a £10 fee.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Does that apply to advance tickets where travel is restricted to certain trains?

Yes. The origin, destination and TOC have to remain the same, but the ticket can be changed to another train on another date, subject to a £10 admin fee and the difference in fares (if higher; no refund if lower).

 

[CaptainHaddock]

She may want to investigate amending the ticket to a date and time that is more suitable for a £10 fee.

I'm surprised someone of your status was considering it might be OK to sell a ticket.

Perhaps he could sell something like a piece of paper on ebay for £40 and offer to throw in a free train ticket for the winning bidder?

 

[yorkie]

Perhaps he could sell something like a piece of paper on ebay for £40 and offer to throw in a free train ticket for the winning bidder?

Nice try but still not allowed. There are some tickets that are transferable, but even then it would probably have to be given away rather than sold (selling a piece of paper with a free ticket wouldn't get around this), but it's made pretty clear that these tickets are not transferable, which is the default position for train tickets, unless specified otherwise.

There was a discussion regarding transferability in this thread Can you excess a ticket bought with a railcard? (although the question was about excessing, in that case the excess was not to correct a mistake but to allow the ticket to be transferred, which wouldn't be allowed normally except in that case it was allowed because the ticket was bought by/for an organisation)

 

[exile]

If transferring a ticket is not allowed what is the difference between

1. I buy a ticket for my own use. I find I can't use it: my wife uses it instead.

2. I buy a ticket for my wife to use.

 

[najaB]

If transferring a ticket is not allowed what is the difference between

1. I buy a ticket for my own use. I find I can't use it: my wife uses it instead.

2. I buy a ticket for my wife to use.

You are specifically allowed to buy a ticket for a second person, so #2 is perfectly fine. In the case of #1, technically it wouldn't be allowed but unless you and your wife have completely separate and distinct finances it would be impossible to show that the rules have been breached.

 

[bb21]

If transferring a ticket is not allowed what is the difference between

1. I buy a ticket for my own use. I find I can't use it: my wife uses it instead.

2. I buy a ticket for my wife to use.

I think you just answered your own question using your own words.

The question of enforceability is of course a completely separate one. There are mechanisms that can catch out transferred tickets but for obvious reasons I am not going to go into details.

Train companies are unlikely to take an interest in a single/return ticket being transferred between family members, but anyone doing so commercially should be warned.

 

[exile]

You are specifically allowed to buy a ticket for a second person, so #2 is perfectly fine. In the case of #1, technically it wouldn't be allowed but unless you and your wife have completely separate and distinct finances it would be impossible to show that the rules have been breached.

If the tickets were bought with cash, there would be no evidence.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You are specifically allowed to buy a ticket for a second person, so #2 is perfectly fine. In the case of #1, technically it wouldn't be allowed but unless you and your wife have completely separate and distinct finances it would be impossible to show that the rules have been breached.

I buy an advance ticket knowing myself or my wife (but not both) will be attending a funeral next week. Is this allowed?

 

[bb21]

If the tickets were bought with cash, there would be no evidence.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I buy an advance ticket knowing myself or my wife (but not both) will be attending a funeral next week. Is this allowed?

See my post above, which covers both of your questions. What you are asking about is the issue of "enforceability".

 

[yorkie]

Agreed, transferring tickets for free among friends & family - while not officially allowed - is undetectable and the Train Companies are not going to be bothered.

But start openly touting tickets and they will be bothered and can, and will, enforce the rules.

exile - Did you see any of the recent threads where this was discussed?

 

[exile]

See my post above, which covers both of your questions. What you are asking about is the issue of "enforceability".

Indeed. Unless one is asked "who is this ticket for?" at the point of sale, and that fact is recorded, it is not enforceable at all.

I understand about TOCs not pursuing cases of transfers between family members, and I also remember reading that tickets bought by a company for a business trip may be transferred if the original traveller can't travel, that this doesn't cause any issues either (although it's still a breach of the bylaw)

I wonder what the purpose of this bylaw is? One can see that it may be aimed at someone selling unused tickets down the pub but surely that's catered for by 21(1).

 

[najaB]

Indeed. Unless one is asked "who is this ticket for?" at the point of sale, and that fact is recorded, it is not enforceable at all.

For tickets bought cash, you have a point but this already happens with tickets bought online. I would say about 1/3 of the tickets I buy online for work have my surname printed on them - it wouldn't be hard to detect if I transferred one to someone else.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For tickets bought cash, you have a point but this already happens with tickets bought online. I would say about 1/3 of the tickets I buy online for work have my surname printed on them - it wouldn't be hard to detect if I transferred one to someone else.

It is the purchaser's surname and has no bearing on who can use it.

 

[island]

It is the purchaser's surname and has no bearing on who can use it.

Indeed, and whilst we still have a few civil liberties left it's worth remembering that most people are not obliged to carry ID in this country.

 

[crehld]

For tickets bought cash, you have a point but this already happens with tickets bought online. I would say about 1/3 of the tickets I buy online for work have my surname printed on them - it wouldn't be hard to detect if I transferred one to someone else.

The name printed on tickets you refer to is the name of the person who bought it, not the name of the person who is entitled to use it.

 

[deltic]

What is the view about tickets brought for business travel. We had a debate in the office once where a meeting was cancelled and a train ticket was offered to anyone else who happen to be travelling that day. Some one was going to a different business meeting and used it. The argument was that as it was the business that ultimately brought the ticket and therefore could decide who travelled on its behalf and hence transfer was allowed.

 

[island]

Whilst not strictly allowed by the letter of the rules, the intent of the prohibition is to block resale amongst strangers and/or for profit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whilst not strictly allowed by the letter of the rules, the intent of the prohibition is to block resale amongst strangers and/or for profit.

Indeed. The main risk that needs blocking is a business block-buying all the Advance fares on a given service and flogging them on at a profit - ticket touting, basically.

If the railway was *that* bothered about casual passing-on and resale among friends and family, they'd ask for the passenger's name at the time of booking and print it on the ticket.

 

[najaB]

It is the purchaser's surname and has no bearing on who can use it.

I know that. I posted that in response to exile saying

Unless one is asked "who is this ticket for?" at the point of sale, and that fact is recorded, it is not enforceable at all.

The point being that they already have that information for tickets that are bought online - even if it's not printed on the ticket. Hence in situations where the TOC is trying to

block resale amongst strangers and/or for profit.

they have the information that they need to detect it.

If the railway was *that* bothered about casual passing-on and resale among friends and family, they'd ask for the passenger's name at the time of booking and print it on the ticket.

Which, as we've established they already do for some tickets that are bought online. I believe it's primarily ones that are bought using business accounts in order to stop

a business block-buying all the Advance fares on a given service and flogging them on at a profit - ticket touting, basically.

I agree that

while still have a few civil liberties left it's worth remembering that most people are not obliged to carry ID in this country.

The idea not being that passenger ID is matched to names on tickets, but that if there are twenty people on a train all carrying tickets bought by "A Smith", a question that the TOC can ask is "What is your relationship to 'A Smith'?" if they believe that "A Smith" has been reselling tickets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which, as we've established they already do for some tickets that are bought online.

I have never encountered an orange ticket with a *user's* name on it, and even if there was such a thing there is no requirement for anyone to carry ID on a rail journey using an orange ticket so no enforcement mechanism exists.

They do do it for print at home (/work), but that's to stop someone photocopying half a train's worth of them.

 

[najaB]

I have never encountered an orange ticket with a *user's* name on it...

Yes you have - when the purchaser is the user.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes you have - when the purchaser is the user.

OK, OK, I get your point, but mine is that there is no mechanism within policy to verify that.

 

[Haydn1971]

I have never encountered an orange ticket with a *user's* name on it,

like this you mean ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

like this you mean ?

We aren't talking about season tickets here. Perhaps missed the fact that they are now orange and not grey/green any more

 

[cmovcc]

in the UK there is no concept of legal name, you can call yourself whatever you want, so all those ideas are dead in the water