"Any Permitted route"

[HelloMello]

Hey long time readerr first time poster..

Basically tomorrow im going From Chertsey To Wimbledon..

I will be meeting my mate at Feltham and want to break my journey there for a little while...

Am i allowed to go via this route (Feltham/Clapham J) ? Or do i have to go via Weybridge (So instead id have to get a ticket to Feltham, then a new txt to Wimbledon?)

I tried having a look at that Routeing guide thing but i really cant understand it Any help would be appreciated

Many Thanks!

 

[yorkie]

The shortest route is always valid.

Direct trains are always valid.

To determine mapped routes use the Routeing Guide.

http://www.atoc.org/rsp/Routeing_Guide/routeing_point_identifier.pdf

Chertsey is associated with these routeing points:-
Ascot (Berks) Staines Surbiton Woking

Of these, Staines and Surbiton are valid routeing points (RPs) for a Chertsey to Wimbledon ticket as they pass the fares check rule.

Wimbledon is a RP.



http://www.atoc.org/rsp/Routeing_Guide/permitted_route_identifier.pdf

This shows that

Staines to Wimbledon is valid via maps:
LONDON
WX

Surbiton to Wimbledon is valid via maps:
WX

You can ignore the "LONDON" entry as all it allows is map WX to London and map WX back from London, but you are not allowed to "double back" between Clapham Jn and London anyway so it doesn't add anything.

Maps are here http://www.atoc.org/rsp/_downloads/Routeing_Guide/Maps.asp

The only relevant map is WX

http://www.atoc.org/rsp/_downloads/Routeing_Guide/Map%20WX.pdf

So it is valid to go via the shortest route (via Surbiton) and also valid to go via Staines & Clapham Jn on map WX


To learn more about the RG, I suggest you follow the examples here:

http://www.atoc.org/rsp/Routeing_Guide/nrg_detail.pdf

There are also topics in this forum you may find useful, examples include:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=399694&postcount=2

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=374036&highlight=routeing#post374036

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=395145&highlight=routeing#post395145

(and many more!)

You will get your head around it eventually, it takes time. It is certainly a very complex process. Staff who trivialise it by stating with certainty that routes are not valid without checking are bluffing/blagging it. There are numerous reports of such people on SWT, often people with limited intelligence and minimal training, they are more likely to be found at barriers than on board trains as the standards are higher for on board staff than on board staff. Know your rights and don't let them bully you.

 

[Lampshade]

That's the way I'd go, via Staines to Twickenham then on to Wimbledon via the Kingston Loop.

 

[HelloMello]

Ahh okay thats really helpful.. I shall start learning the guides haha.

Thank you!

 

[yorkie]

That's the way I'd go, via Staines to Twickenham then on to Wimbledon via the Kingston Loop.

I don't think that's valid. It's not the shortest route, there are no direct trains (a change at Twickenham is required) and it's not a mapped route.

It would almost certainly be accepted and logically it seems perfectly reasonable, but officially I can't see that it is a valid route.

Like the route described in the RG Qs topic (see posts 7 & 8 in particular) there are higher priced tickets than the Any Permitted. The RG gives conflicting information about impact this has on the Any Permitted (if any). In fact it could be interpreted that the Any Permitted is not valid via any route whatsoever if a strict anti-customer interpretation is made, as there is no mapped route that avoids Weybridge and Clapham Jn. Clearly such an interpretation would be against all consumer rights and a (strong - in my opinion) legal case could be mounted against SWT if they imposed such an interpretation. Would they really be able to argue in court that the contract is expressed in "plain , intelligible language" and that there is no "doubt about the meaning" of the term Any Permitted? Would they be able to justify the existence of an "Any Permitted" fare that is not permitted by any route, and routes that appear restrictive are actually less restrictive than Any Permitted? I'm not a lawyer but if they could prove that then I'd lose all faith in our courts, let's put it that way.

The fares are a farce, that's for sure.

Written contracts
7. - (1) A seller or supplier shall ensure that any written term of a contract is expressed in plain, intelligible language.
(2) If there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail but this rule shall not apply in proceedings brought under regulation 12.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1999/19992083.htm

The contradiction has to work in the consumers favour according to the law.

At Feltham the OP is unlikely to experience any query about the ticket, and after that no barrier will be used until Wimbledon. In theory he could be considered invalid via Kingston as it is not a permitted route and in theory he could be charged an excess of £0.65[1] (an act I would deem unlawful as described above) for being off route.

[1] Assuming no railcard held, excess from Route Any Permitted CDR (£8.70) to Route Clapham Jn CDR (£10.00) for one-way only = 50% of £1.30 = £0.65

 

[HelloMello]

Wow ticketing is so confusing im lost again.. I didnt know you could buy 3 different route tickets.. When i went last time im sure the machine only let u chose 1 route.. I cant remember..

Iv been having a little nose at the Routeing guide.. starting to understand it a little bit better i think!

All this has baffled me tho with the other fares available.
So it is be fine to use it with a break of journey at Feltham and if they question my route i should start mentioning the routeing guide or w.e lol?

Also i have a 16-25 railcard. When i randomly typed it through National Rail its given me the same fare if i put via Feltham then if i typed via Weybridge. But when i searched randomly via Twickenham its given me different prices so im guessing that means the ticket wouldnt be valid that way anyway. Its alot quicker to go via Clapham when I get back on at Feltham.

 

[Lampshade]

I don't think that's valid. It's not the shortest route, there are no direct trains (a change at Twickenham is required) and it's not a mapped route.

It would almost certainly be accepted and logically it seems perfectly reasonable, but officially I can't see that it is a valid route.

Quite bizarre but if that's the case then I'd play it safe and go via Clapham Junction, you know what SWT are like with penalty fares.

 

[yorkie]

Quite bizarre but if that's the case then I'd play it safe and go via Clapham Junction, you know what SWT are like with penalty fares.

I've not heard of penalty fares being issued incorrectly for being off-route, if anyone has been given a penalty fare for that then they should:-

1) Refuse to pay
2) Appeal
3) Let us know on this forum
4) Let the media know
5) Contact Passenger Focus, RailFareWatch, London Travelwatch (if in the London area)
6) Make a BIG deal about it.
7) Get the name of the inspector and report them.
8 ) Demand compensation for stress and inconvenience.

Surely even SWT would not stoop so low and break the rules? If so it would be scandalous and I'd not hold back in criticising them and pursuing them.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Once upon a time, you could travel by any reasonable route. Then they privatised the railways and it became any permitted route.

And yes, kick up a stick with SWT trains. Owned by the Stagecoach group, they are in dispute with DfT over franchise payments. Which probably means, SWT ain't making enough money and they want some money of the taxpayer.

 

[b0b]

You can ignore the "LONDON" entry as all it allows is map WX to London and map WX back from London, but you are not allowed to "double back" between Clapham Jn and London anyway so it doesn't add anything.

Easement 000058: Tickets routed via London may be used to double back between Clapham Junction and Waterloo.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Easement 000058: Tickets routed via London may be used to double back between Clapham Junction and Waterloo.

The ticket isn't routed via London so that easement doesn't apply, unfortunately.

On the subject of the Kingston loop, it was mapped in the paper version of the guide on map WX, I presume the line from Kingston to New Malden was omitted accidentally, or without proper thought, when the guide went online. As it stands the route is not officially valid, I would hope most guards would see sense and let people use the route.

 

[DJ737]

I tried having a look at that Routeing guide thing but i really cant understand it

I had a look at the routing guide, and my eyes glazed over, couldn't work it out. :roll:

For example, down here a valid route is, say from Ballan to Macedon, is via Sunshine (Train>Train), Ballarat (Train>Coach>Train at Castlemaine) or Daylesford (Coach>Coach>Train), V\line coaches (buses) operate in area's where branchlines have been closed.

See http://www.vline.com.au
for info.

Cheers
DJ737
Melbourne, Australia

 

[jopsuk]

The problem is that we have such a complex network- just imagine how much bigger the routing guide would be had Beeching not swung his axe!

 

[yorkie]

Easement 000058: Tickets routed via London may be used to double back between Clapham Junction and Waterloo.

Ok, this is complicated

The ticket is not routed London.

However, London is an entry in the 'permitted routes' for the journey on an Any Permitted ticket. What this means is all the maps from origin to London plus all the maps from destination to London, but without doubling back. However in this case the only maps that you can use involve doubling back.

I agree if it was routed London it would be valid to double back between Clapham Jn & Waterloo.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Will be travelling from London Victoria to Brighton and back. On return, the following day, would like to break journey in Lewes. Would like to buy an off peak return fits the bill.

According to the permitted routes
http://www.atoc.org/rsp/_downloads/Routeing_Guide/Map LB.pdf

travelling via Lewes is a permitted route.

Is that the case ?

 

[dan_atki]

travelling via Lewes is a permitted route.

Is that the case ?

Yes, London to Brighton (and vice versa) is permitted via Lewes. However, I'd certainly expect to be questioned if a ticket check took place between Brighton and Lewes or Lewes and Wivelsfield!

 

[clagmonster]

Saver returns from both London Terminals and London Victoria are restriction code 4B, which does not prevent break of journey. Strangely though, on the any permitted London Terminals is 10p cheaper then Victoria, even though London Terminals is valid at Victoria.
I fully agree that travel via Lewes to Victoria is permitted using map LB.

 

[b0b]

travelling via Lewes is a permitted route. Is that the case ?

Yes, if there is no common station on the Brighton-Lewes and Lewes to Three Bridges part....

 

[yorkie]

Yes, if there is no common station on the Brighton-Lewes and Lewes to Three Bridges part....

That would be difficult, given that they are different lines and the platforms at Lewes curve away from each other!

 

[b0b]

That would be difficult, given that they are different lines and the platforms at Lewes curve away from each other!

I just wanted the OP to realize that you have to check the intermediate stations after you've consulted the maps.

 

[yorkie]

I just wanted the OP to realize that you have to check the intermediate stations after you've consulted the maps.

ok, although doubling back is permitted within Group Stations so that would need to be checked too.