paying excess fare on e-tickets isn't supported properly

[yorkie]

my response to LNER：

“That's not acceptable.

I understand that a mobile ticket has the same validity as an equivalent paper ticket. Booking offices including yours can create a standard orange paper excess ticket using a dummy “only valid with ticket number 12345“ to resolve the impasse that the mobile ticket doesn't have a number you can put in the system.

Your booking office gets stuck at the impasse.

Other booking offices work around it using the same method you use for paper tickets.

It's shocking that you recommend refund rebook which doubles the cost when the original fare can be excessed.

This falls below the quality of service customers expect.

I note that the LNER app is happy to sell mobile tickets but nowhere at the point of sale is the customer made aware of the potential difficulty excessing the fare. This doesn't comply with

“A Code of Practice on retail information
for rail tickets and services”

which describes the principle that customers will be told what they need to know to make an informed decision before purchase.

Please let me know when you're able to cope normally with excessing mobile tickets.

As you're aware I've already written to Rail Delivery Group to highlight this.”

LNER are talking nonsense and I am not surprised.

Poor customer service is endemic in the rail industry.

 

[robbeech]

It’s just not worth it.
The results are neutral at the very worst, but in most cases fall in favour of the railway financially. There’s no point them trying to change this.

Person A, decides to not bother with the excess, they hang around for 2 hours and get their original train. No loss to the railway.

Person B, accepts the lies and buys a new ticket because they really want to be home. This is a win for the railway, often for a substantial amount. They MAY try and get a refund, they may not, if they do, there’s a VERY good chance it’ll be rejected initially or at best, they’ll still be charged an admin fee. This provides a further chance for them to give up.

Person C, is unhappy with their response and decides to get on the train and speak to the guard. The guard issues an excess without problems, the railway gains financially.

Person D is very unhappy and fails the attitude test. A guard reports them for prosecution and the railway makes £800.

In order to improve the customer service here you would need to spend money improving the technology, you’d need to pay to train staff to use it with the results being lower revenue overall. Unless made to do this by a regulatory body (who are funded by the very revenue we are threatening to reduce) there is very little chance of this sort of idea being entertained.

 

[Haywain]

It’s just not worth it.
The results are neutral at the very worst, but in most cases fall in favour of the railway financially. There’s no point them trying to change this.

Person A, decides to not bother with the excess, they hang around for 2 hours and get their original train. No loss to the railway.

Person B, accepts the lies and buys a new ticket because they really want to be home. This is a win for the railway, often for a substantial amount. They MAY try and get a refund, they may not, if they do, there’s a VERY good chance it’ll be rejected initially or at best, they’ll still be charged an admin fee. This provides a further chance for them to give up.

Person C, is unhappy with their response and decides to get on the train and speak to the guard. The guard issues an excess without problems, the railway gains financially.

Person D is very unhappy and fails the attitude test. A guard reports them for prosecution and the railway makes £800.

In order to improve the customer service here you would need to spend money improving the technology, you’d need to pay to train staff to use it with the results being lower revenue overall. Unless made to do this by a regulatory body (who are funded by the very revenue we are threatening to reduce) there is very little chance of this sort of idea being entertained.

Isn’t this just a normal experience of trying to buy excess fares?

 

[allotments]

It’s just not worth it.
The results are neutral at the very worst, but in most cases fall in favour of the railway financially. There’s no point them trying to change this.

Person A, decides to not bother with the excess, they hang around for 2 hours and get their original train. No loss to the railway.

Person B, accepts the lies and buys a new ticket because they really want to be home. This is a win for the railway, often for a substantial amount. They MAY try and get a refund, they may not, if they do, there’s a VERY good chance it’ll be rejected initially or at best, they’ll still be charged an admin fee. This provides a further chance for them to give up.

Person C, is unhappy with their response and decides to get on the train and speak to the guard. The guard issues an excess without problems, the railway gains financially.

Person D is very unhappy and fails the attitude test. A guard reports them for prosecution and the railway makes £800.

In order to improve the customer service here you would need to spend money improving the technology, you’d need to pay to train staff to use it with the results being lower revenue overall. Unless made to do this by a regulatory body (who are funded by the very revenue we are threatening to reduce) there is very little chance of this sort of idea being entertained.

Perhaps the negative publicity from threads like this documenting otherwise hidden problems with ticketing will help motivate the railway to improve？ ～ all well indexed by Google now ～

 

[RPI]

I actually excessed one today, lady joined from an unstaffed branch station and wanted to travel earlier for her reserved part of the journey, to about 45 seconds (which included the £10 fee), scanned the original ticket "accept with excess fare", not sure why some staff find it difficult

 

[alistairlees]

I actually excessed one today, lady joined from an unstaffed branch station and wanted to travel earlier for her reserved part of the journey, to about 45 seconds (which included the £10 fee), scanned the original ticket "accept with excess fare", not sure why some staff find it difficult

Good to know. What were you excessing from and to? Given it’s a Sunday I would not have thought there were many opportunities for excessing, other than for change of route.

 

[RPI]

Good to know. What were you excessing from and to? Given it’s a Sunday I would not have thought there were many opportunities for excessing, other than for change of route.

Advance ticket wanting to travel early, boarded from unstaffed station so a legitimate excess

 

[robbeech]

Isn’t this just a normal experience of trying to buy excess fares?

With a paper ticket I’ve had a >75% success rate at obtaining an excess fare. And a >50% success rate in getting the correct one (most issues here are refusal / insufficient knowledge when it comes to charging half the difference for one leg).

i’ve only ever been able to excess an e-ticket at a ticket office once, although only out of a very small number of tries, maybe 5 or 6. Rather amusingly linking to this thread, it was at either Retford or Doncaster, I can’t remember which. Consistency really is The Railway’s worst enemy.

not sure why some staff find it difficult

I suspect they don’t find it ‘difficult’. Many will either find it too much hassle, or they’ll prefer to sell a higher priced new ticket for obvious reasons. This latter attitude may even be taught.

 

[Haywain]

I suspect they don’t find it ‘difficult’. Many will either find it too much hassle, or they’ll prefer to sell a higher priced new ticket for obvious reasons. This latter attitude may even be taught

What are the obvious reasons? It isn’t commission at ticket offices.

 

[robbeech]

What are the obvious reasons? It isn’t commission at ticket offices.

For the reason in the last sentence. These things can even be taught. I’ve discussed training methods with some operators, they’ll all be very different, but there’s a definite focus on ‘new ticket’ and ‘reject’ if in any doubt amongst some.

 

[northken]

A few weeks ago Paddington ticket office excessed a screenshot of my friend's e-ticket; she had accidentally bought a day return instead of period return. The lovely ticket clerk did the “12345” trick without an ounce of bother.

It really doesn’t have to be a painful experience.

 

[robbeech]

Once again, it seems providing good customer service is restricted to those with a keen interest in doing so.

 

[RPI]

With a paper ticket I’ve had a >75% success rate at obtaining an excess fare. And a >50% success rate in getting the correct one (most issues here are refusal / insufficient knowledge when it comes to charging half the difference for one leg).

i’ve only ever been able to excess an e-ticket at a ticket office once, although only out of a very small number of tries, maybe 5 or 6. Rather amusingly linking to this thread, it was at either Retford or Doncaster, I can’t remember which. Consistency really is The Railway’s worst enemy.


I suspect they don’t find it ‘difficult’. Many will either find it too much hassle, or they’ll prefer to sell a higher priced new ticket for obvious reasons. This latter attitude may even be taught.

Not sure what the "obvious" reasons are?

 

[allotments]

https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/our-services/rdg-accreditation/ticketing-settlement.html 2021 version details what booking offices MUST sell e.g. permanent fares and also states what MAY be sold, including excess fares.

LNER have now confirmed to me that Kings Cross booking office will not sell an excess fare for an e-ticket e.g. super off peak to off peak for one of their own trains departing Kings Cross.

However LNER have already confirmed that it's no problem to excess a paper ticket.

LNER claim that "Mobile tickets in the form of eTickets... are easier to change". I've demonstrated the opposite. See attachment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are no excesses "entitled", then? I thought some were and some weren't?

 

[robbeech]

Not sure what the "obvious" reasons are?

As mentioned before, due to the sentence afterwards, because this sort of thing is taught at some operators.

https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/our-services/rdg-accreditation/ticketing-settlement.html 2021 version details what booking offices MUST sell e.g. permanent fares and also states what MAY be sold, including excess fares.

LNER have now confirmed to me that Kings Cross booking office will not sell an excess fare for an e-ticket e.g. super off peak to off peak for one of their own trains departing Kings Cross.

However LNER have already confirmed that it's no problem to excess a paper ticket.

LNER claim that "Mobile tickets in the form of eTickets... are easier to change". I've demonstrated the opposite. See attachment.

Would you like £15 or £30? You can pick, there are no consequences of choosing the higher value. Which do you want?
Who would pick £15? Do they work in a ticket office and if so is it in the companies interest to keep them?

 

[infobleep]

https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/our-services/rdg-accreditation/ticketing-settlement.html 2021 version details what booking offices MUST sell e.g. permanent fares and also states what MAY be sold, including excess fares.

LNER have now confirmed to me that Kings Cross booking office will not sell an excess fare for an e-ticket e.g. super off peak to off peak for one of their own trains departing Kings Cross.

However LNER have already confirmed that it's no problem to excess a paper ticket.

LNER claim that "Mobile tickets in the form of eTickets... are easier to change". I've demonstrated the opposite. See attachment.

Have you quoted their FAQ back at them?

 

[Djminisite06]

I excessed an eticket yesterday (at a different operators station) and although it was a very back and forth process as we stepped through it, it seemed to be achieved by:

• Scanning the original ticket
• Taking the ticket number from the scanner readout (which appears to be the last 5 digits of the number on the information screen on Apple Wallet)
• Using that number to issue the excess on a paper ticket

It appears to be down to training / willingness at this point

 

[allotments]

LNER have now told me that they don't issue any excess fares on trains whatever the ticket format electronic or paper

So I'm continuing to raise this issue with both LNER and asking advice from Rail Delivery Group

Email to LNER today:

"My undertanding is that when I purchase a UK rail ticket the National Rail Conditions of Travel form a contract between the railway and the passenger...

...and I'm expecting the following excerpt to apply：

"9.5. Where you are using a time-restricted Ticket (such as an ‘off-peak’ or ‘super-
off-peak’ Ticket) that is correctly dated but:
9.5.1. invalid for the service on which you are travelling; or
9.5.2. you are using a route for which your Ticket is not valid; or
9.5.3. you break your journey when you are not permitted to do so,
you will be charged the difference between the fare that you have paid
and the lowest price Ticket that is valid for the train you are using."

What you're telling me is that LNER isn't doing this.

Customers will have the inconvenience of having to request a refund, lose £10 admin fee and have to buy a new ticket. That's always going to be much more expensive than an excess fare.

It won't be possible to get a full refund if the outward journey of a return ticket has already been made and in that case probably no refund will be due. A new ticket would likely be an expensive single, doubling the cost of a return journey.

How many customers have LNER overcharged in this way so far?

Why is LNER not complying with the National Rail Conditions of Travel?

Can you raise this issue with LNER senior management and treat this as a complaint?"

 

[Watershed]

LNER have now told me that they don't issue any excess fares on trains whatever the ticket format electronic or paper

So I'm continuing to raise this issue with both LNER and asking advice from Rail Delivery Group

Email to LNER today:

"My undertanding is that when I purchase a UK rail ticket the National Rail Conditions of Travel form a contract between the railway and the passenger...

...and I'm expecting the following excerpt to apply：

"9.5. Where you are using a time-restricted Ticket (such as an ‘off-peak’ or ‘super-
off-peak’ Ticket) that is correctly dated but:
9.5.1. invalid for the service on which you are travelling; or
9.5.2. you are using a route for which your Ticket is not valid; or
9.5.3. you break your journey when you are not permitted to do so,
you will be charged the difference between the fare that you have paid
and the lowest price Ticket that is valid for the train you are using."

What you're telling me is that LNER isn't doing this.

Customers will have the inconvenience of having to request a refund, lose £10 admin fee and have to buy a new ticket. That's always going to be much more expensive than an excess fare.

It won't be possible to get a full refund if the outward journey of a return ticket has already been made and in that case probably no refund will be due. A new ticket would likely be an expensive single, doubling the cost of a return journey.

How many customers have LNER overcharged in this way so far?

Why is LNER not complying with the National Rail Conditions of Travel?

Can you raise this issue with LNER senior management and treat this as a complaint?"

If they really don't have the facility to excess tickets (which I severely doubt), they cannot simply overcharge. They have to charge the correct fare or nothing at all!

I think this issue hasn't yet reached anyone who has an idea of what they're talking about.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they really don't have the facility to excess tickets (which I severely doubt), they cannot simply overcharge. They have to charge the correct fare or nothing at all!

I think this issue hasn't yet reached anyone who has an idea of what they're talking about.

I know some excesses are "entitled" and some are not.

Which is which? Is a ticket type excess an "entitled" one? What about a route excess?

I seem to recall that ticket type and change of route are "entitled" (i.e. if they are due the TOC must issue them), but overdistance is not? (i.e. TOCs can issue these but don't have to, they can insist on refund-and-replace instead)?

 

[Watershed]

I know some excesses are "entitled" and some are not.

Which is which? Is a ticket type excess an "entitled" one? What about a route excess?

I seem to recall that ticket type and change of route are "entitled" (i.e. if they are due the TOC must issue them), but overdistance is not? (i.e. TOCs can issue these but don't have to, they can insist on refund-and-replace instead)?

A ticket type excess is an entitled excess, as is a route excess. OP quotes the relevant NRCoT sections above.

You're correct an overdistance excess isn't entitled, although in this case I don't think anyone is suggesting that there is a distinction between entitled and non-entitled excesses.

 

[allotments]

maybe LNER picked on the wrong passenger to refuse sale of an excess fare...

...in my youth 40 years ago I worked as a British Rail booking office clerk for a year

in those days we didn't have different TOCs doing their own thing leaving passengers confused

Today an Avanti West Coast train manager confirmed to me that he can issue excess fares on board using the NRCoT method.

Last week 2 Southeastern booking office clerks said they couldn't issue an excess fare but when I suggested the 12345 method here both found a way to do it on their system

Bring back British Rail！

 

[robbeech]

They absolutely do have the facilities to excess tickets on board, and have done for years, unless of course they’ve taken a massive backwards step recently. This is the railway afterall. I have had excesses on board from LNER although not from an electronic ticket.
The person is fobbing you off by making up nonsense which is fully expected, i am pretty convinced they spend more time being trained this sort of technique than the actual rules.
Of course with no regulation there’s nobody to stop them doing what they want.

 

[jonnyfan]

The two tickets I've been taught not to excess as a Conductor are TOC specific tickets (e.g. TPE only to Any Permitted, a new ticket is required) and Advance tickets (again a new ticket).
No reason e-tickets can't be excessed, I believe there is a specific option on the inspection app that we use (though I've not had to excess an e-ticket since we started using the electronic inspection software) to indicate a ticket is being excessed and then carry out on the mobile ticket machine to issue the excess fare.

 

[Hadders]

Bring back British Rail！

LNER is nationalised so I doubt it would make any difference.

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNER is nationalised so I doubt it would make any difference.

At least BR would have a national policy, even if it was not to offer excesses (there is an element of "be careful what you wish for").

To be fair, with single-fare pricing, if you removed the fee for refunding the original ticket you could basically do away with excesses. It's return fares that really require them.

 

[ta-toget]

At least BR would have a national policy, even if it was not to offer excesses (there is an element of "be careful what you wish for").

To be fair, with single-fare pricing, if you removed the fee for refunding the original ticket you could basically do away with excesses. It's return fares that really require them.

I'm sure the £10.00 for refunds/changes could be reduced: I'd think that nowadays with the automation we have, the costs incurred of administering the refund do not come anywhere near £10.00, although if you have to post a ticket off it will obviously be higher. If we move to e-Tickets, the costs for refunding will be negligible.

 

[jamiearmley]

Just a thought : is it possible that LNER don't issue excesses on board because all their stations are staffed with ticket offices, and the customer should have sorted prior to travel and boarded with a ticket , the validity of which has already been corrected? I don't know if that's covered in the NrCOT , but I can follow the logic. (In my neck of the woods, if revenue get on, you will get a penalty fare for off peak in peak, wrong route and advance on wrong train. )

Secondly, I'm a commercial guard, and I issue excesses constantly for route, over distance and peak/off peak in line with NRCOT for both paper and electronic tickets. I don't understand why there is an issue. There really shouldn't be.

 

[RPI]

Just a thought : is it possible that LNER don't issue excesses on board because all their stations are staffed with ticket offices, and the customer should have sorted prior to travel and boarded with a ticket , the validity of which has already been corrected? I don't know if that's covered in the NrCOT , but I can follow the logic. (In my neck of the woods, if revenue get on, you will get a penalty fare for off peak in peak, wrong route and advance on wrong train. )

Secondly, I'm a commercial guard, and I issue excesses constantly for route, over distance and peak/off peak in line with NRCOT for both paper and electronic tickets. I don't understand why there is an issue. There really shouldn't be.

If your Revenue Inspectors are issuing anything other than an excess for an Off-Peak during peak then they need urgent retraining!

Likewise wrong route and to a degree Advance on wrong train (there are certain scenarios where a PF can be issued for the latter), but a restricted ticket or wrong route is really basic stuff!