Conditions question: TOC Specific restrictions on GroupSave

[Ferret]

Ooooh, now this one has caught my eye, must admit I hadn't spotted this one at all! Quote from NRCoC lifted with my emphasis in bold:


These Conditions set out your rights and any restrictions to those rights. The Train Companies may give you more extensive rights than those set out in these Conditions and, if they do so, these may be found in each Train Company’s Passenger’s Charter or other publications. Details of where you can find this information will be available when you buy your ticket. The Train Companies may not give you less extensive rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect.

Now, would this little clause allow XC to bar Groupsave? I suspect it does!

Metro do have a badly-worded rule that says something about passengers using combinations, however it isn't clear to me what they mean, and I do not believe they have the right to exempt themselves from any part of the conditions of carriage except where the conditions of carriage states such an exemption may occur.

http://www.wymetro.com/NR/rdonlyres...7-9864DAB24758/0/CrossBoundaryinfoleaflet.pdf

Where a passenger holds two or more zonal tickets in combination or one is a rail season ticket and one is not, then the train does not need to call at the station where they change from one ticket to the other. Please note that these combinations of tickets do not apply to services operated by CrossCountry, East Midlands Trains or National Express

Hmmm, badly worded it may be, but it's clearly telling you that you can't use one of their Metro passes for cross boundary travel on XC/EMT or East Coast as it is now. What I can't get at is the SYPTE version - their website appears to be down for a start. I did have a hard copy of it somewhere but Gawd knows what I've done with that! Anyway, it's obvious WYPTE haven't put this out for the fun of it - they obviously believe this supercedes condition 19 and therefore they must believe their legal grounding is firm. All I can come up with as reasoning is to do with the initial formation of a contract. WYPTE make what is called an invitation to treat saying 'you can use this pass for this, this and this but not for cross boundary travel on XC'. Consumer makes an offer of whatever the ticket price is, WYPTE accept, saying that use of the ticket is subject to the NRCoC as well. Upon the formation of the contract, the customer in theory has been made aware of what the pass is for and so has agreed to the terms and conditions of that product.

Come to think of it, that's something else that supports XC with their position on Groupsave. The invitation to treat is the leaflet publicising Groupsave. Customer makes an offer based on what it tells him in that leaflet - 'yes, I will have one of those'. TOC accepts that offer and issues the tickets! Hmmmm!

 

[yorkie]

Ooooh, now this one has caught my eye, must admit I hadn't spotted this one at all! Quote from NRCoC lifted with my emphasis in bold:


These Conditions set out your rights and any restrictions to those rights. The Train Companies may give you more extensive rights than those set out in these Conditions and, if they do so, these may be found in each Train Company’s Passenger’s Charter or other publications. Details of where you can find this information will be available when you buy your ticket. The Train Companies may not give you less extensive rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect.

Now, would this little clause allow XC to bar Groupsave? I suspect it does!

There is a separate condition for dealing with TOC-specific tickets, which does indeed allow TOCs to refuse travel on such tickets, however any such prohibition must be written "on the ticket".

http://www.wymetro.com/NR/rdonlyres...7-9864DAB24758/0/CrossBoundaryinfoleaflet.pdf

Where a passenger holds two or more zonal tickets in combination or one is a rail season ticket and one is not, then the train does not need to call at the station where they change from one ticket to the other. Please note that these combinations of tickets do not apply to services operated by CrossCountry, East Midlands Trains or National Express

Hmmm, badly worded it may be, but it's clearly telling you that you can't use one of their Metro passes for cross boundary travel on XC/EMT or East Coast as it is now.

It doesn't specifically mention W Yorks tickets and appears to be making a general point about seasons & non-seasons and claims certain TOCs don't accept such combinations. However this is simply not true, as Condition 19 applies to all TOCs! I believe the person who wrote it is confused. In any case, they have to give us the basic rights in the Conditions of Carriage - they may not give us less. So they can't just make something up and say it overrules the Conditions of Carriage!

What I can't get at is the SYPTE version - their website appears to be down for a start. I did have a hard copy of it somewhere but Gawd knows what I've done with that! Anyway, it's obvious WYPTE haven't put this out for the fun of it - they obviously believe this supercedes condition 19 and therefore they must believe their legal grounding is firm.

It wouldn't surprise me if the person who wrote it has never read condition 19! They can't just overrule condition 19 like that anyway (except to give us more rights!).

All I can come up with as reasoning is to do with the initial formation of a contract. WYPTE make what is called an invitation to treat saying 'you can use this pass for this, this and this but not for cross boundary travel on XC'. Consumer makes an offer of whatever the ticket price is, WYPTE accept, saying that use of the ticket is subject to the NRCoC as well. Upon the formation of the contract, the customer in theory has been made aware of what the pass is for and so has agreed to the terms and conditions of that product.

You can word it how you like but the ticket is still bound by the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, which includes Condition 19, which cannot be overruled with less extensive rights.

Come to think of it, that's something else that supports XC with their position on Groupsave. The invitation to treat is the leaflet publicising Groupsave. Customer makes an offer based on what it tells him in that leaflet - 'yes, I will have one of those'. TOC accepts that offer and issues the tickets! Hmmmm!

But as indicated in the GroupSave thread, it isn't made clear at all, and in any case even if it says in a leaflet that you can't use XC, it is not printed on the ticket, therefore it must be accepted in accordance with the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.

If XC wish to refuse to accept GroupSave tickets, they must ensure that ATOC make arrangements for all GroupSave tickets (in applicable areas) to state "Not XC" or similar.

Anyway enough of XC trying to erode the minimum of rights we can expect, what about the York-Glasgow AP ticket combo?

 

[Ferret]

You can word it how you like but the ticket is still bound by the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, which includes Condition 19, which cannot be overruled with less extensive rights.

But as indicated in the GroupSave thread, it isn't made clear at all, and in any case even if it says in a leaflet that you can't use XC, it is not printed on the ticket, therefore it must be accepted in accordance with the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.

If XC wish to refuse to accept GroupSave tickets, they must ensure that ATOC make arrangements for all GroupSave tickets (in applicable areas) to state "Not XC" or similar.

Well, you know from another thread I was certainly in the camp that said Groupsave was valid on XC - this I'm sure you can imagine put me in a bit of a professional quandary! I need to get that contract law book out and have a jolly good read of it to be honest and see whether I'm on the right track with this idea of the initial negotiations having relevance, as it will doubtless make reference to old cases, the outcomes of which we're bound by of course - Doctrine of Judicial Precedent and all that!

For now, I've got that extract from the CoC which says 'Train Companies may not give you less extensive rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so' - Groupsave is a discounted ticket after all!

As an aside I must agree, the whole Groupsave issue could be clarified at the drop of a hat if the ticket said "Not XC". Why can't that be done? Anyone from ATOC reading this?!

 

[Mojo]

For now, I've got that extract from the CoC which says 'Train Companies may not give you less extensive rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so' - Groupsave is a discounted ticket after all!

But is it a "some types" of discounted ticket?

I would agree that the condition quoted above regarding PTE tickets is badly worded; I take it to read that they are defining their own zonal tickets as season tickets and all they are saying is condition 19 (because either presumably all Northern services call at the last station in the boundary area, or they have a special arrangement with Northern to provide an exemption for the requirement for trains to call).

 

[yorkie]

The issue of tickets restricted to, or prohibited from specific TOCs is dealt with here:-

B. VALIDITY OF TICKETS
10. Tickets valid only in trains of particular Train Companies
The validity of a ticket may:
a) be restricted to; or
b) prohibit
travel in the trains of a particular Train Company or Train Companies. Any such restriction or prohibition will be shown on the ticket. If you travel in a train with a ticket that is not valid, the relevant parts of Condition 2 or 4 will apply. If you are unable to use a ticket or any part of it, you may be able to claim a refund under Condition 26 or Condition 36.

As for the Metro wording, they cannot override the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, I believe Mojo is correct in that they are trying to put their own basic 'version' of it, and yes I have heard that you can catch fast Northern trains that don't call at places like Denby Dale or wherever, when combining such tickets. The wording is diabolical but it can't overrule the Conditions of Carriage Condition 19 given that the Conditions of Carriage sets the "minimum" rights except where provision is given for less rights, no such provision is in Condition 19 other than the restrictions already listed in Condition 19.

As I said before, if the intention is to disallow PTE products being combined both with non-seasons and seasons on fast trains, they could easily make that provision by re-wording part b of Condition 19.

As for Condition 10, they could add something like "It may not be shown on the ticket in some cases" if they wanted to allow for secret GroupSave restrictions. I would hope that such a move would be challenged by PF and not approved by the relevant bodies. A far easier solution is for the tickets to have the prohibition on them. If they are routed "Any Permitted" or similar then XC have to lump it and accept it!

If XC are not happy, they need to contact ATOC to get the tickets re-routed.

It wouldn't surprise me if XC are getting ORCATS revenue for them though.

 

[Ferret]

As for Condition 10, they could add something like "It may not be shown on the ticket in some cases" if they wanted to allow for secret GroupSave restrictions. I would hope that such a move would be challenged by PF and not approved by the relevant bodies. A far easier solution is for the tickets to have the prohibition on them. If they are routed "Any Permitted" or similar then XC have to lump it and accept it!

If XC are not happy, they need to contact ATOC to get the tickets re-routed.

It wouldn't surprise me if XC are getting ORCATS revenue for them though.

Well, in staff briefs they say they don't get ORCATS revenue - I suppose there's no way of confirming that though.

As for it being a secret restriction on Groupsave - that's a bizarre comment! Those groupsave leaflets aren't secret, it's not a secret when the ticket office staff (if they do as I'm told they are supposed to) say 'this ticket is not valid on XC' and it's not secret when it's plastered all over the CIS at stations operated by SWT! I'm beginning to accept I was wrong on this one and that Groupsave is indeed invalid on XC and here's why. If when you are negotiating a contract and you are told at that time what the contract allows you to do and what it doesn't and then you accept those terms and buy your ticket, you can't realistically expect at a later point to rely on a condition regarding what it says on the ticket, especially when there's a further condition regarding further restrictions that can be imposed regarding discounted tickets! It's a barely credible argument to say that the initial negotiations have no relevance to the contract which in effect is what I think you're saying!

 

[yorkie]

A combination of two things is not always the same as those same two things combined.

Is anyone saying it is?

If I wanted to paint my living room, I could use a combination of red and blue paint to create a nice patchwork effect. If I was to combine the red and the blue, I could end up with purple walls (or brown depending on mixing skills and the exact shade/tone of colours used) and that is clearly not the same result.

No, but no-one is going to stop you combining two colours to make one paint.

How would you combine two tickets with different conditions, say an advance and an anytime fare? Would you have an advance fare where you can break your journey and travel on any train? Or an anytime ticket valid only on a specific train and not valid for break of journey?

How would you do it? That's like asking how long is a piece of string. What matters is that you can.

Condition 19 says you MAY USE a combination of fares, it does not say you can combine them to make one.

It says you can combine them to make one journey.

It does not say you can ignore conditions specific to the ticket either (missing the first booked train, etc).

If you are delayed while travelling, you may use later trains to complete your journey.

On the subject of PTE rovers and such not being valid on certain TOC services, I have highlighted in the quote above, that TOCs (and PTEs) can restrict the use of a ticket on reduced price tickets, provided it is in the conditions of that ticket. Does this override the later condition that restrictions on the use of some TOCs must be noted on the ticket? Of course it does.

Which PTE passes are not valid on certain TOCs? I'm not aware of any. If you are referring to Metro, they are valid on CrossCountry and East Coast services.

If in the conditions of the ticket it says "NOT FOR USE ON CROSS COUNTRY SERVICES", it is a restriction in the conditions of the ticket, it is therefore part of the contract and in the introduction to the NCoC it says this is fine.

NCoC says that tickets may be restricted to, or prohibited from, the use on train companies, where such a condition is in place it will be shown on the ticket.

If, however, no mention is made in the conditions of the ticket, on advance fares for example, it would have to be noted on the ticket.

TOC restrictions are shown on the ticket.

 

[clagmonster]

I've been reading this, but until now have chosen not to join in.
Ferret used the sentance in the Introduction to the Conditions of Carriage:
"The Train Companies may not give you less extensive
rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where
the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the
minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect."
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/system/galleries/download/misc/NRCOC.pdf

The word 'condition' is defined in Appendix A, a list of definitions as follows:
"(c) “Condition(s)” means these National Rail Conditions of Carriage"
So I disagree with Ferret's interpretation that an individual ticket's restrictions can override the conditions of carriage, instead I believe that that this sentence in the introduction merely means that some individual conditions within the conditions of carriage may have clauses which allow them to be relaxed. For example, break of journey is prohibited on advance tickets and condition 16 has this clause which allows this additional restriction:
"However, these rights may not apply to
some types of tickets for which a break of journey is prohibited, in which case the relevant
Train Companies will make this clear in their notices and other publications."

In the case of split tickets, condition 19 has one clause allowing companies to provide less rights than the condition, which is:
"You must comply with any restriction shown on the tickets relating to travel in the trains of
a particular Train Company or Train Companies (see Condition 10)."
This is essentially reitterating cluase 10, which would of course have to be followed by both passenger and company anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In the case of combining advance tickets, the advance ticket conditions state:
"You must be at the departure station shown on your ticket in good time to catch the train. If you miss the first train on which you are booked for any reason, a new ticket must be purchased.
If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey."
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/advance_conditions.html

In order to be "at the departure station shown on your ticket in good time to catch the train", if we are changing trains at the point at which we split tickets, we must allow at least the minimum connection allowence between arrival and departure at that station.

Now, using a combination of tickets, as is allowed by the conditions of carriage, the first train on which we are booked is surely the first train we intend to travel on with the first ticket. Therefore, we must travel on this train. In the event that this train is delayed or cancelled such that we miss a later train on our journey, delays have occured "while travelling", so we "will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

 

[Ferret]

I've been reading this, but until now have chosen not to join in.
Ferret used the sentance in the Introduction to the Conditions of Carriage:
"The Train Companies may not give you less extensive
rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where
the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the
minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect."
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/system/galleries/download/misc/NRCOC.pdf

The word 'condition' is defined in Appendix A, a list of definitions as follows:
"(c) “Condition(s)” means these National Rail Conditions of Carriage"
So I disagree with Ferret's interpretation that an individual ticket's restrictions can override the conditions of carriage, instead I believe that that this sentence in the introduction merely means that some individual conditions within the conditions of carriage may have clauses which allow them to be relaxed. For example, break of journey is prohibited on advance tickets and condition 16 has this clause which allows this additional restriction:
"However, these rights may not apply to
some types of tickets for which a break of journey is prohibited, in which case the relevant
Train Companies will make this clear in their notices and other publications."

In the case of operator specific tickets, there is no such clause allowing companies to give less extensive rights, hence the condition must be followed in its entirity. Therefore, for a Groupsave ticket to be barred from Cross Country trains, the ticket must have the "not XC" or similar routeing shown on the ticket. This is the case on some EMT priced Group Save tickets, such as Nottingham-Derby, which is routed "EMidsTrains.Only". On this flow, the only operators are Cross Country and EMT so this is effecively a "not XC" restriction.

There's a bit more to it than that though. There's the advertised restrictions of the ticket type itself - ie, which train company's trains you can use. As I've said before, in the initial negotiation of the contract, if you are told that it is not for use on XC then I cannot see how you can possibly hope to rely on that condition you quote from the CoC.

Further to this, I've an idea that it says on the tickets - 'validity - see restrictions'. Of course, we all know what those advertised restrictions are - it tells you whose trains you can use them on. My suspicion is that the legal advice to TOCs is that this is sufficient. Yorkie/anyone else - have you asked ATOC and/or PF their view on this? I'd sure be interested to hear what they have to say.

So, I'm sorry guys but the upshot is that until somebody manages to successfully challenge XC on this in a Court of Law, I will remain of the opinion that Groupsave is not valid on XC services. And I think that's extremely unlikely given that to be successful, you'd have to argue that initial negotiations prior to the formation of a contract are completely irrelevant. How on earth you'd approach that I don't know!

 

[clagmonster]

The advertised restrictions on the National Rail website state:
"Train companies.c2c, Chiltern Railways, East Midlands Trains, First Capital Connect, First Great Western, National Express East Anglia, London Midland, London Overground, Southeastern, Southern, ScotRail, South West Trains, National Rail"
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/promotions/pr354fdc0a0400020101fea1769fbf60/details.html

Surely, as National Rail is a trade name for the Association of Train Operation Companies (ATOC), of which Cross Country is a member, Cross Country come under National Rail in this list. This is then further restricted by:
"GroupSave is NOT available for travel on Stansted Express services." which obviously does not affect Cross Country.

There is nothing in the validity or conditions fields to prevent travel on Cross Country services.

 

[yorkie]

I agree with Clagmonster's post above.

As for the 'initial negotiation'; what if you book online ?

The validity restrictions apply to times, which don't have to be detailed on the ticket.

 

[Ferret]

Surely, as National Rail is a trade name for the Association of Train Operation Companies (ATOC), of which Cross Country is a member, Cross Country come under National Rail in this list. This is then further restricted by:

A quite ridiculous suggestion! Why on earth does it mention other TOCs by name? I think we can dismiss that idea Clagmonster!

As for the 'initial negotiation'; what if you book online ?

This is a far more interesting point and well worth exploring! I've just randomly looked at FGW's site for Groupsave.

They say "GroupSave allows groups of three or four adults and children to travel off-peak for the price of two adults. One adult must be part of the group. Up to four additional children can travel for £1 each return. GroupSave can be purchased from your local station or from our Telesales on 08457 000 125. Terms and conditions apply for GroupSave tickets and tickets are not available for travel on certain dates. Please enquire at time of booking".

So, they aren't keen to sell online then!

SWT's website will sell you Groupsave but they categorically state this 'GroupSave is available for journeys involving c2c, Chiltern Railways, East Midlands Trains, First Capital Connect, First Great Western, National Express East Anglia (not Stansted Express), London Midland, London Overground, Southeastern and Southern'

FCC's website says this - "c2c, Chiltern Railways, First Capital Connect, First Great Western, "one", Silverlink, South Eastern, South West Trains, and Southern."

Yorkie, can you show me any website that doesn't state categorically where you can use a GPS-3/GPS-4 ticket and we'll explore further.....? I've just found two that are quite clear, and presumably FGW's telesales team are told to state that Groupsave is not valid on XC so we're arguably up to three.

 

[clagmonster]

Conversely, why is National Rail mentioned? To the best of my knowledge, it has no other definition than essentially the whole of BR, as I concluded above, so what definition does it have which excludes Cross Country?

As for the other operators being listed, I assume they are the operators which set Group Save fares, ie the lead operators. That is not to say that such tickets are not accepted by other operators, which is demonstrated by the inclusion of National Rail.

 

[Ferret]

Conversely, why is National Rail mentioned? To the best of my knowledge, it has no other definition than essentially the whole of BR, as I concluded above, so what definition does it have which excludes Cross Country?

As for the other operators being listed, I assume they are the operators which set Group Save fares, ie the lead operators. That is not to say that such tickets are not accepted by other operators, which is demonstrated by the inclusion of National Rail.

It's a red herring, nothing more.

Here's another thought to throw in the mix with regard to XC and Groupsave. From what I can see, the Groupsave leaflet and 2 websites I looked at earlier make it clear that XC aren't among the TOCs who participate in Groupsave. So when you buy a Groupsave ticket you don't have a contract with XC at all. You then get on an XC train and are charged for new tickets. You attempt to sue XC for breach of contract. However, you held no contract with XC until you bought new tickets from the Guard. XC honoured that contract so there was no breach. The Groupsave tickets were sold to you by an agent. Could you successfully sue that agent for misrepresentation? Maybe *if they did not make clear that the tickets were not valid on XC*. Now, I must emphasise that the above is only a line of thought - I have studied Law so have some idea but the above does not constitute legal advice in anyway, merely a thought that occured to me.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Here's another thought to throw in the mix with regard to XC and Groupsave.

. . .

Could you successfully sue that agent for misrepresentation? Maybe *if they did not make clear that the tickets were not valid on XC*.

The questions which arise are:
For who were they performing the duties of an agent?
Did they (in this case) perform those duties, and did they do so as per their Contract of Agency?

If (and I think this is what you're getting at) they were not acting for XC then either, they were acting for another TOC (or an ill defined sub-group of TOCs), or they were acting on their own authority, which is presumably the TOC which operates that station's ticket office (in which case they have responsibilities in their own right.).

 

[yorkie]

It's a red herring, nothing more.

Here's another thought to throw in the mix with regard to XC and Groupsave. From what I can see, the Groupsave leaflet and 2 websites I looked at earlier make it clear that XC aren't among the TOCs who participate in Groupsave. So when you buy a Groupsave ticket you don't have a contract with XC at all. You then get on an XC train and are charged for new tickets. You attempt to sue XC for breach of contract. However, you held no contract with XC until you bought new tickets from the Guard. XC honoured that contract so there was no breach. The Groupsave tickets were sold to you by an agent. Could you successfully sue that agent for misrepresentation? Maybe *if they did not make clear that the tickets were not valid on XC*. Now, I must emphasise that the above is only a line of thought - I have studied Law so have some idea but the above does not constitute legal advice in anyway, merely a thought that occured to me.

It would be up to XC to consider whether or not to sue the customer if the customer didn't pay because they held a ticket that appears valid in accordance with NCoC. I would hope XC would not pursue such a course.

 

[clagmonster]

Sorry I've been away from the discussion for a few days.
Ferret, you say that the inclusion of National Rail on the list is a red herring. If that is the case for the purposes of this discussion, please could you explain why that is included and how you would interpret it. I don't believe for a minute that it is there without purpose, as it would be if the only companies relevent were the others listed. I certainly hope it is there as a deliberate red herring.

The only detailed advertising I have seen of group save tickets is said page on the National Rail website, which to me for the reason I have already stated does not make it clear, to me at least, that such tickets are not valid on Cross Country services. To do that, it would have to remove National Rail from the list and change the heading of the list to "Valid only on these operators' trains".

My thinking of the legal position was that the advertising was essentially a summary of what the product offers, and that the final contract, which in this case includes the conditions of carriage, has the full terms set out in a clear, non-contradictory way. In this case, condition 10 is included, and I see nothing to say that it should be ignored. Again, I must state that I have no legal training.

Also, if we assume for a minute that such tickets are not intended to be valid on Cross Country, Cross Country are a signatory of the conditions of carriage, and hence condition 10, through Appendix C. Whether this could involve Cross Country in any legal cases I don't know.

I would be most interested to see the result if this were taken to court. As Yorkie has said, this would probably have to be on the part of Cross Country, or maybe another operator, seeking non-payment of an excess charged when a group save was used.

As for your quote from the South Yorkshire conditions, I think it clears up any confusion and could do with going in the West Yorkhsire conditions as well. However, I do think that it should appear as part of the introduction. I wonder where it leaves Northern and EMT though, using this line from the Conditions of Carriage:
"It is a condition of the Passenger Licence granted to each Train Company by the Office
of Rail Regulation that these Conditions apply to tickets sold for journeys involving its
services and those of other Train Companies."

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Can you buy groupsave on the National Rail website?

If not, the conditions listed on that site, regardless of them being correct or not, is not part of your contract. They are neither the agent (the ticket seller), nor the service provider (the TOCs you have a right to use).

 

[clagmonster]

The National Rail website is published by ATOC which the relevent companies are members of and is used as a form of advertising. The companies must provide at least the services they advertise, which in this case is Group save tickets being accepted on National Rail, except Stansted Express, services.
In using the National Rail website, I am merely arguing on Ferret's basis of the "initial negotiation of the contract", ie the advertising of the ticket having a bearing on the contract and the validity. I would be interested to see links to other website with detailed advertising of Groupsave and indeed the leaflet which Ferret has mentioned.

Also, going back to condition 10, Ferret has suggested that the appearance of the words "Validity: as advertised" or "validity: see restrictions" may be sufficient to satisfy printing the restriction on the ticket, which I don't agree with but I am prepared to go along with unless it can be proved either way. What happens in the case of either a groupsave discounted day return or day single, or in the case of a groupsave day return. I have one of these in my possession which I admit could only be used on one operator's service because of the route it is for, but on it it says "valid: on date shown". Would this be the case on all group save discounted say singles/returns and groupsave day returns? If so, there is nothing to satisfy condition 10 to suggest that they might not be valid on Cross Country.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The National Rail website is published by ATOC which the relevent companies are members of and is used as a form of advertising. The companies must provide at least the services they advertise, which in this case is Group save tickets being accepted on National Rail, except Stansted Express, services.
In using the National Rail website, I am merely arguing on Ferret's basis of the "initial negotiation of the contract", ie the advertising of the ticket having a bearing on the contract and the validity. I would be interested to see links to other website with detailed advertising of Groupsave and indeed the leaflet which Ferret has mentioned....

But each member of ATOC has no direct control over what is printed on the website, it is, in effect, a third party. If you are the member of a union, who represent your interests, you are a part of that union, but that doesn't mean you are that union.

....Also, going back to condition 10, Ferret has suggested that the appearance of the words "Validity: as advertised" or "validity: see restrictions" may be sufficient to satisfy printing the restriction on the ticket, which I don't agree with but I am prepared to go along with unless it can be proved either way. What happens in the case of either a groupsave discounted day return or day single, or in the case of a groupsave day return. I have one of these in my possession which I admit could only be used on one operator's service because of the route it is for, but on it it says "valid: on date shown". Would this be the case on all group save discounted say singles/returns and groupsave day returns? If so, there is nothing to satisfy condition 10 to suggest that they might not be valid on Cross Country.

I was going through the NCoC to pick out where certain allowances for restrictions are, because otherwise time restrictions, etc, could be on dodgy ground, anyway, I found this.....

1. Your contract

A ticket that has been issued to you is evidence of a contract between you and each Train Company whose trains you have the right to use. Where the company selling you the ticket is not one of the Train Companies on whose services you are travelling, the seller is acting as agent for the Train Company or Companies in whose trains you are entitled to travel.

If a ticket entitles you to any goods or services from another person (including the right to travel in another person’s transport services), it is also evidence of a contract between you and that person.

Tickets remain the property of the relevant Train Company. Each ticket is issued subject to:

(a) these Conditions;

(b) the applicable byelaws;

(c) the conditions which apply to Electronic Tickets, Smartcards, other
devices used for storing Electronic Tickets and certain types of reduced
and discounted fare tickets as set out in the notices and other publications
issued by the Train Companies whose trains you are entitled to use; and

(d) the conditions set out in the notices and other publications issued by
another person if the ticket enables you to use any of their goods or
services.

Details of how to get copies of the relevant Train Company’s notices and other publications relevant to your journey will be available when you buy a ticket. If the ticket entitles you to obtain goods or services from another person, then you can get copies of relevant notices and publications from that person.

If a Train Company’s special conditions apply to the use of a ticket, the seller will make these clear to you. In the case of electronic tickets and tickets issued on Oyster cards,
see Condition 9.

In another thread you made a post in which was a picture of a conditions card attached to a ticket, an Advance if I remember rightly, and both these things got me thinking....

Those who set the fare, set the conditions, they print leaflets and advertise it on their website. The seller tells you about those restrictions and conditions and can either provide you with those leaflets or inform you of how to get them. Where have I mentioned ATOC or National Rail in that?

 

[clagmonster]

Hairy Handed Fool, I quite agree that ATOC are not each individual company as such, but when publishing the website they are representing each company, especially when referring to them by name. I am sure that if any one of the companies was unhappy with, or disagreed with any of the information about their products as published by ATOC they would surely kick up a fuss, just like you presumably would if your union advertised the fact that you were willing to work four hours for the price of two when you in fact weren't.

raising the point of clause 1, I will deal with that first.
The ticket is subject to the conditions of carriage. Surely that means that both parties have to adhere to the conditions of carriage, including condition 10. Therefore, any restrictions relating to who's trains the ticket is valid on must be "shown on the ticket".

Tickets with a groupsave discount are clearly discouted tickets, so part c is also relevent. Does the National Rail website not count as a publication of the companies (note the plural) as it is published by an association formed by them, essentially the companies have colaborated to produce the website.

When attempting to buy a Grimsby-Nottingham groupsave day ticket from the East Midlands trains website, there is a box to tick stating that you accept the conditions of carriage and the website conditions, so they are perfectly clear but do not mention such a restriction. There is a link to ticket restriction details hidden on a piece of text, as if it were a subheading rather than a link, which given the context it could quite easily be. The text of this restriction details a Scotrail ticket valid on the Glasgow-Edinburgh route, which is clearly the incorrect restriction. Therefore in this case it is not at all clear from the ticket buying procedure how to access any information telling me that the ticket is not valid on Cross Country services.
I would imagine that a booking clerk who knew of the restriction would probably make it clear when selling the ticket that it was not valid on certain operators' services, but I doubt that all booking clerks would know. I would be interested to see what the station booking systems have to say about the restrictions on such tickets.
Similarly, I would be interested to see information about ticket conditions a TVM would provide. Of course, when the TVM spits out the ticket it will detail on the back how to get hold of the conditions of carriage, which is a relevent publication but I doubt it will give anything else.

 

[yorkie]

Tickets have various pieces of info, e.g. Class, Ticket type, From, To, Route, Validity, etc..

Under Route is for route restrictions go, this includes geographical routes and also specific TOCs. e.g. Any Permitted, +London, Burnley, EC & Connections, Grand Central Only, etc etc...

Under Validity is for details of time restrictions. e.g. One Month, Five Days, On Date shown, Bookedtrainonly. These are all self explanatory. That leaves As Advertised which means there is a restriction code (e.g. 8X, B1 etc) but the text is far too long to go on the ticket. Perhaps it should say B1 Restriction or similar, and then perhaps customers can request a printout of what that restriction means, but as it is it just says As Advertised. That does not mean they can put ROUTE restrictions here! Route restrictions go under Route.

The idea that you can say a ticket is valid via any permitted route and then under the time restrictions heading claim actually it isn't valid via any permitted route is utterly absurd, and totally bonkers, not to mention totally and utterly illogical.

I rest my case!

 

[yorkie]

Well, in staff briefs they say they don't get ORCATS revenue - I suppose there's no way of confirming that though.

I wonder if they think they get more by selling new tickets on board to unsuspecting passengers than they would under ORCATS. Yes, there's no way to confirm it either way.

As for it being a secret restriction on Groupsave - that's a bizarre comment! Those groupsave leaflets aren't secret, it's not a secret when the ticket office staff (if they do as I'm told they are supposed to) say 'this ticket is not valid on XC' and it's not secret when it's plastered all over the CIS at stations operated by SWT!

If I book online, look on Avantix, etc it really isn't clear to me. When the ticket arrives, it says "Any Permitted" and the Conditions of Carriage indicate me there is no TOC restriction therefore.

I'm beginning to accept I was wrong on this one and that Groupsave is indeed invalid on XC and here's why. If when you are negotiating a contract and you are told at that time what the contract allows you to do and what it doesn't and then you accept those terms and buy your ticket, you can't realistically expect at a later point to rely on a condition regarding what it says on the ticket, especially when there's a further condition regarding further restrictions that can be imposed regarding discounted tickets!

Well, if what you are saying is that the ticket appears valid and it's only deemed invalid if looking up 'further conditions' which is unfair, then, yes I agree.

It's a barely credible argument to say that the initial negotiations have no relevance to the contract which in effect is what I think you're saying!

Not really, I am saying it is not enforceable in the Conditions of Carriage, given that the claim by XC is that it is effectively a "Not XC" ticket, and the Conditions of Carriage say that TOCs can impose such restrictions but where they do it will be written on the ticket, if it then isn't written on the ticket I do not believe it is enforceable. However, it could be argued that if someone bought from a ticket office who then wrote 'Not XC' on the ticket or stamped 'Valid as advised' or similar that the customer may not easily be able to deny knowledge of being told it wasn't valid on XC. But on the other side of the coin, a customer could book online and never see any indication whatsoever that it isn't valid on XC, and be quite shocked when told it's a "Not XC" ticket, as there is nothing to say it isn't valid on XC.

 

[clagmonster]

I've been reading this, but until now have chosen not to join in.
Ferret used the sentance in the Introduction to the Conditions of Carriage:
"The Train Companies may not give you less extensive
rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where
the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the
minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect."
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/system/galleries/download/misc/NRCOC.pdf

The word 'condition' is defined in Appendix A, a list of definitions as follows:
"(c) “Condition(s)” means these National Rail Conditions of Carriage"
So I disagree with Ferret's interpretation that an individual ticket's restrictions can override the conditions of carriage, instead I believe that that this sentence in the introduction merely means that some individual conditions within the conditions of carriage may have clauses which allow them to be relaxed. For example, break of journey is prohibited on advance tickets and condition 16 has this clause which allows this additional restriction:
"However, these rights may not apply to
some types of tickets for which a break of journey is prohibited, in which case the relevant
Train Companies will make this clear in their notices and other publications."

In the case of operator specific tickets, there is no such clause allowing companies to give less extensive rights, hence the condition must be followed in its entirity. Therefore, for a Groupsave ticket to be barred from Cross Country trains, the ticket must have the "not XC" or similar routeing shown on the ticket. This is the case on some EMT priced Group Save tickets, such as Nottingham-Derby, which is routed "EMidsTrains.Only". On this flow, the only operators are Cross Country and EMT so this is effecively a "not XC" restriction.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In the case of the West Yorkshire tickets, to me it seems that there are two parts to the contract, the Conditions of Carriage and the individual ticket restrictions. In this case, the two parts contradict each other and as, as far as I can see, neither part trumps the other, one part needs to be rewritten. Yorkie has already suggested a way to rewrite the Conditions of Carriage, alternatively the ticket could be rewritten as follows:
Where a passenger holds two or more zonal tickets in combination or one is a rail season ticket and one is not, then the train does not need to call at the station where they change from one ticket to the other." Where a passenger holds two or more zonal tickets in combination or one is a rail season ticket and one is not, then the train does not need to call at the station where they change from one ticket to the other.

All I have done here is to remove the sentence: "Please note that these combinations of tickets do not apply to services operated by CrossCountry, East Midlands Trains or National Express". Either rewriting would clarify the point, as it is it is muddled and I honestly can't say what the legal interpretation would be.

As it stands, National Express have been superseded so the clause would be unenforceable on East Coast services from Leeds to Doncaster, York, Skipton and Harrogate.

 

[Ferret]

I've been reading this, but until now have chosen not to join in.
Ferret used the sentance in the Introduction to the Conditions of Carriage:
"The Train Companies may not give you less extensive
rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where
the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the
minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect."
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/system/galleries/download/misc/NRCOC.pdf

The word 'condition' is defined in Appendix A, a list of definitions as follows:
"(c) “Condition(s)” means these National Rail Conditions of Carriage"
So I disagree with Ferret's interpretation that an individual ticket's restrictions can override the conditions of carriage, instead I believe that that this sentence in the introduction merely means that some individual conditions within the conditions of carriage may have clauses which allow them to be relaxed. For example, break of journey is prohibited on advance tickets and condition 16 has this clause which allows this additional restriction:
"However, these rights may not apply to
some types of tickets for which a break of journey is prohibited, in which case the relevant
Train Companies will make this clear in their notices and other publications."

In the case of operator specific tickets, there is no such clause allowing companies to give less extensive rights, hence the condition must be followed in its entirity. Therefore, for a Groupsave ticket to be barred from Cross Country trains, the ticket must have the "not XC" or similar routeing shown on the ticket. This is the case on some EMT priced Group Save tickets, such as Nottingham-Derby, which is routed "EMidsTrains.Only". On this flow, the only operators are Cross Country and EMT so this is effecively a "not XC" restriction.

There's a bit more to it than that though. There's the advertised restrictions of the ticket type itself - ie, which train company's trains you can use. As I've said before, in the initial negotiation of the contract, if you are told that it is not for use on XC then I cannot see how you can possibly hope to rely on that condition you quote from the CoC.

Further to this, I've an idea that it says on the tickets - 'validity - see restrictions'. Of course, we all know what those advertised restrictions are - it tells you whose trains you can use them on. My suspicion is that the legal advice to TOCs is that this is sufficient. Yorkie/anyone else - have you asked ATOC and/or PF their view on this? I'd sure be interested to hear what they have to say.

So, I'm sorry guys but the upshot is that until somebody manages to successfully challenge XC on this in a Court of Law, I will remain of the opinion that Groupsave is not valid on XC services. And I think that's extremely unlikely given that to be successful, you'd have to argue that initial negotiations prior to the formation of a contract are completely irrelevant. How on earth you'd approach that I don't know!

 

[Ferret]

I rest my case!

Thank God for that! Lol!!!! (Just kidding Yorkie)

Interesting point by HHF supporting my view that the CoC are not the sole terms and conditions of your contract - and that any restrictions applying to a type of ticket are also relevant.

Also of note was the point about TVMs and Groupsave. I suspect I know the answer to whether it mentions the lack of validity on XC trains. If somebody is in a position to confirm my suspicions then that would be handy, but I'd wager that no mention is made at all. Seeing as ticket office staff have been reminded to mention that Groupsave is not valid on XC it's very bad if TVMs don't convey the same info.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Hairy Handed Fool, I quite agree that ATOC are not each individual company as such, but when publishing the website they are representing each company, especially when referring to them by name. I am sure that if any one of the companies was unhappy with, or disagreed with any of the information about their products as published by ATOC they would surely kick up a fuss, just like you presumably would if your union advertised the fact that you were willing to work four hours for the price of two when you in fact weren't....

I don't think that is entirely the same thing, however I would point out to all parties concerned the correct position and ask the union to withdraw the comment. I couldn't actually remove it myself!!

.... raising the point of clause 1, I will deal with that first.
The ticket is subject to the conditions of carriage. Surely that means that both parties have to adhere to the conditions of carriage, including condition 10. Therefore, any restrictions relating to who's trains the ticket is valid on must be "shown on the ticket"....

Ah, condition 10 again...

May I point you in the direction of the Introduction to the NCoC and Condition 1 again. The TOC may give you less rights than printed in in the NCoC and may restrict the ticket if the restriction is in their literature.

.... Tickets with a groupsave discount are clearly discouted tickets, so part c is also relevent. Does the National Rail website not count as a publication of the companies (note the plural) as it is published by an association formed by them, essentially the companies have colaborated to produce the website....

Did the TOC put the 'advert' in place?........No, ATOC did, so I don't see how it could be considered part of their advertising, unless it can be proved that they asked for it to be put there????.

....When attempting to buy a Grimsby-Nottingham groupsave day ticket from the East Midlands trains website, there is a box to tick stating that you accept the conditions of carriage and the website conditions, so they are perfectly clear but do not mention such a restriction. There is a link to ticket restriction details hidden on a piece of text, as if it were a subheading rather than a link, which given the context it could quite easily be. The text of this restriction details a Scotrail ticket valid on the Glasgow-Edinburgh route, which is clearly the incorrect restriction. Therefore in this case it is not at all clear from the ticket buying procedure how to access any information telling me that the ticket is not valid on Cross Country services.

I would imagine that a booking clerk who knew of the restriction would probably make it clear when selling the ticket that it was not valid on certain operators' services, but I doubt that all booking clerks would know....

Condition 1 clearly states that the party selling the ticket makes the conditoins and restrictions clear, if you feel that has/will not happen(ed), you should report it to the relevant company, or failing that, Passenger Focus.

.... I would be interested to see what the station booking systems have to say about the restrictions on such tickets.

Similarly, I would be interested to see information about ticket conditions a TVM would provide. Of course, when the TVM spits out the ticket it will detail on the back how to get hold of the conditions of carriage, which is a relevent publication but I doubt it will give anything else.

Each Ticket machine works differently so I cannot give you a thorough answer to the question. Fastis gives the route and a one line restriction, if it is not possible to print the restriction in one line it says, "Restrictions apply Validity Code 2N" or what have you.

TVM can't issue advance fares, but I imagine there has to be a link somewhere to the restriction of other tickets, it's been a while since I used one and buying Priv all the time doesn't really give me the opportunity to do so, but if you are collecting a TOD, you should already be aware of the restrictions.

Tickets have various pieces of info, e.g. Class, Ticket type, From, To, Route, Validity, etc..

Under Route is for route restrictions go, this includes geographical routes and also specific TOCs. e.g. Any Permitted, +London, Burnley, EC & Connections, Grand Central Only, etc etc...

Under Validity is for details of time restrictions. e.g. One Month, Five Days, On Date shown, Bookedtrainonly. These are all self explanatory. That leaves As Advertised which means there is a restriction code (e.g. 8X, B1 etc) but the text is far too long to go on the ticket. Perhaps it should say B1 Restriction or similar, and then perhaps customers can request a printout of what that restriction means, but as it is it just says As Advertised. That does not mean they can put ROUTE restrictions here! Route restrictions go under Route.

The idea that you can say a ticket is valid via any permitted route and then under the time restrictions heading claim actually it isn't valid via any permitted route is utterly absurd, and totally bonkers, not to mention totally and utterly illogical.

I rest my case!

Any PERMITTED route

Seriously though, does it say in the NCoC where the restriction must be printed on the ticket?

 

[clagmonster]

Onto the groupsave issue. As far as I aware, there is nothing to say that an operator restriction must appear in the route field, only that it must appear as per condition 10.
The introduction of the conditions of carriage does indeed state that they may give less rights than stated in the conditions of carriage, so long as the "relevent condition(s) allow them to do so". The word condition(s) is then defined in appendix A as meaning the conditions of carriage, ie not the individual ticket conditions and restrictions. Condition 10 does not have any provison for a company to give less rights, it is clear cut that any restriction concerning who's trains the ticket is valid on is shown on the ticket. Not a mention that such a ticket exists, but the restriction itself will be shown on the ticket.
I completely agree that the publsihed restrictions should be followed. However, they are no more, or less, important than the conditions of carriage. If there is an operator restriction which is not shown on the ticket, than that restriction and clause 10 directly contradict each other as individual contract terms. Surely that is wrong and unfair.
In any case, I have yet to see any operator restriction on a group save ticket, other than the Derby-Nottingham case which is clearly routed on the ticket "route East Mids Trains only", and the Scotrail Edinburgh-Glasgow case for which the restriction is clearly shown on the internet booking engine. I have not yet had chance to check what restriction would be shown on such a ticket, but I will do and report back.
If anyone knows of any other published operator restrictions on a group save ticket then I would be most interested to see them. Also, out of interest, what do the booking office TIS and guards' Avantix machines say regarding validity of, say, a Grimsby-Nottingham groupsave day return and Bounemouth-Southampton groupsave discounted day return. Is there any operator restriction published anywhere in any part of the restriction text? When I get a chance, I will check the TVM at my local station to see what it has to say.

 

[Ferret]

Let's take each ticket to be a contract then, but each 'contract' has a condition that states that it can be combined with more than one 'contract' (ticket) to make "one journey"
It specifically uses the word "journey". So we have to look up whether or not a "journey" is limited to one ticket (or 'contract') or whether two or more tickets (or 'contracts') can be used for "one journey". NCoC Condition 19 determines that.

I agree it is correct to allow travel.

But would you allow travel on the basis of Condition 19 allowing more than one ticket to form one journey, or on the basis of "letting the customer get away with it"?

If letting them get away with it constitutes good customer service then the latter. As a ticket examiner, can you go out on a limb without being 100% sure of your ground? I don't think you can.

Here's another thought that's just occured to me. Do specific conditions attached to a ticket override the CoC? I ask because we've noticed many people using a combination of a West Yorkshire all zones weekly pass (ie, issued by a PTE) and a Micklefield-York 7 day season to travel on direct trains to York. Now, read condition 19 of the CoC. If one is a season ticket and one is not then it's valid. It goes on to state that a pass issued by a PTE does not count as a season ticket. Now to me, that satisfies condition 19! However, the conditions of the West Yorkshire pass state that this combination of tickets does not apply to services operated by XC, EC, possibly TPE too - which I presume is because they don't stop at Micklefield. Now, I'm posting this from a Blackberry so I can't get hold of the exact quote, but I think SYPTE say something similar about their PTE season ticket too, but also that this condition supercedes anything in the CoC regarding combinations of tickets. So, if specific terms and conditions of a ticket/contract override the CoC, does that mean that the specific conditions that apply to advance fares override condition 19 as well, meaning that in your example, from Newcastle is arguably invalid as he wasn't at the departure station at the time listed on his ticket? Discuss!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

NCoC says it will be "shown on the ticket" if such a restriction applies....

NCoC says it will be shown on the ticket....

I hardly think that the condition specifically relating to TOC specific tickets can be over-ridden by a general introduction that doesn't mention any specifics!....

Yes, the introduction says there may be some limitations, the Conditions then go into detail on various points, one of which is is that TOCs may restrict the use of certain tickets in terms of which company you may travel on, and it makes it clear that such restrictions will be "shown on the ticket". I don't see how an introduction can over-rule the detail

Why not? It is there in black and white, they may give you more restrictive rights than in the NCoC if it is a condition of the ticket.

No, it has to be shown on the ticket. In the case of Advance fares specifically, this is always noted on the ticket as far as I am aware. When do you believe it isn't?

There are no TOC specific conditions for the advance fares, so any restriction is printed on the ticket, this complies with the NCoC.

If there is a something in the conditions of a ticket which does not allow travel on a particular TOC, it doesn't need to be on the ticket because it is a condition of the ticket, not a restriction.