What would you do?

[allticketspls]

Evening all

Thought I'd share an incident I had to deal with last night and see what you guys would have done in my place.

Gentleman approaches me off of an inbound train at Euston asking me how he can complete his journey. I ask to see his ticket and he presents me with an Off Peak Return from Crewe to Feltham routed via Kensington Olympia.

Be interesting to see what you guys come up with as a solution.

Regards

Les

 

[Mojo]

Cannot see in the current version of NFM that such a ticket exists. The route options for walk-up tickets are +LONDON and NOT LONDON. I presume you mean the customer held the latter?

If so, then I'd get my Avantix out to issue an excess, realise that NOT LONDON costs more than +LONDON and think "hmm, bonkers" and issue a zero excess to the +LONDON.

This would, however, depend on the time. The restriction on a +LONDON is before 07.20 or at or after 11.29. As you said "last night" however I take it this doesn't apply in this case.

 

[Anon Mouse]

Hmm, not my line but I would guess I would send him to Willesden Junction and change it Clapham Junction?

imagining that 'route Kensington Olympia' had an easement to allow passengers from the North to change for Willesden Junction at Euston

 

[Mike395]

I'd have excessed him to the +London/Any Permitted fare (although looking at it here, the +London appears to be cheaper than Not London rather bizarrely?)

 

[OwlMan]

As the "Not London" Ticket costs more than the "+London" version I would give him a zero chage of Route excess for the outbound portion and send him via LU to Waterloo.

Peter

 

[yorkie]

Agreed there is no such routeing for this particular flow (Crewe-Feltham), however if it is routed Not London then, as collybs says, a zero excess should be issued (assuming the ticket is a SVR - Off Peak Rtn; if the ticket type is different to that then an excess would be payable).

 

[Captain Chaos]

I will echo the above. Issue zero excess for change of route and send him on his way.

 

[Old Timer]

Based on my BR history.

If the ticket is not restricted via London, and based on the posts above which indictae that via London is cheaper (technically I wowld have expected it to be but that is another story) then because the passenger has paid to travel via the higher price route, then the ticket takes on validity via London without the need for an excess in this case. There was no justification as I recall to issue a nil excess unless the routing was different from the obvious.

Nil value excess tickets always required an explanation and the original tickets.

An excess cannot be issued via LUL (?) so therefore the passenger would have to pay on LUL.

The above assumes no restrictions on the ticket for the route/TOC used, and no specific requirement to travel on specified services.

On the face of it, an open and shut case - I wonder if there is a little more to come in the way of facts which may change things ?

 

[yorkie]

OT - I agree a change of route shouldn't be necessary and additionally if the passenger was able to complete their journey simply on authority of someone accepting a ticket on the basis that the correct (or higher!) fare has been paid, then I agree totally that the zero excess seems unnecessary.

However unless we have this common sense approach formalised by ATOC as an entitlement that a passenger has a right to expect this, then I believe a zero fare should be issued if the customer is either destined to, or likely to, encounter further staff along the route, as in this case.

 

[RJ]

Issue what excess? If a route specific fare is more expensive than other fares for the same flow, it's valid by any permitted route that is cheaper (TOC specific excluded). This is in the routeing guide and probably exists to avoid unnecessary zero fares being created. I let people through who carry similar tickets.

 

[allticketspls]

The ticket was an Off Peak Return and the routing stated Kensington Olympia. I must admit that I thought about retaining the gentlemans ticket as I believed it to be a forgery but consultation with our control room showed that the Kenny O route is legitimate on certain tickets.

 

[RJ]

No such fare exists in my TiS - routes London and Not London only.

 

[Mojo]

Issue what excess? If a route specific fare is more expensive than other fares for the same flow, it's valid by any permitted route that is cheaper (TOC specific excluded). This is in the routeing guide and probably exists to avoid unnecessary zero fares being created. I let people through who carry similar tickets.

I had initially thought this, but considered he may have problems using this ticket on the Tube, for example.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Are you sure it was definitely a ticket from Crewe to Feltham? Such a route has not existed for that flow since at least NFM01, possibly earlier.

Route Kensington Olympia does exist for certain other flows (eg. Birmingham Stns to Brighton), but not for this one.

Given the epidemic of fraudulent Travelcards issued on orange RSP stock, both genuine and fake (how many Toc staff are aware of this problem?) it wouldn't surprise me if more expensive tickets are also being faked.

 

[allticketspls]

Right, here we go with my solution to the problem.

I contacted our control and they advised to send the passenger back to MKC via our service and get the passenger to take the Southern service from there as per the routing of his ticket. Apparently the route he should have taken was CRE - MKC - CLJ - FEL thus going through Kenny O and validating his ticket.

The passenger told me that he asked at Crewe if the London bound service on the platform was the one he required and the platform staff said yes it was (Of course it was a CRE - EUS non stopper).

Anyway, my solution was to take the passenger down to the London Overground platforms and advise them of what had happened and to ask for their help. Imagine my surprise when they agreed to carry him FOC to Willesden and get him on the correct train from there to CLJ to resume his ticketed journey. Proof if ever it was needed that we can all work together for the good of the passenger.

 

[yorkie]

All I will say is I am pleased both for you bringing this to our attention, and also for the resolution offered. I'll make no further public comment (I'lll send you a PM!)

 

[Old Timer]

OT - I agree a change of route shouldn't be necessary and additionally if the passenger was able to complete their journey simply on authority of someone accepting a ticket on the basis that the correct (or higher!) fare has been paid, then I agree totally that the zero excess seems unnecessary.

However unless we have this common sense approach formalised by ATOC as an entitlement that a passenger has a right to expect this, then I believe a zero fare should be issued if the customer is either destined to, or likely to, encounter further staff along the route, as in this case.

A valid point and one which I cannot comment on, however if the rules ares till the same, there is no need to issue a nil excess for a ticket that entitles a shorter route.

Any nil excess requires to be backed up with a TIR (whatever is the equivalent these days) and/or the original tickets. This was to prevent misuse by station/on train staff rather than TTIs

 

[yorkie]

A valid point and one which I cannot comment on, however if the rules ares till the same, there is no need to issue a nil excess for a ticket that entitles a shorter route.

No problem; if we can get ATOC to provide some instructions that can be issued to all staff, and quoted by customers where appropriate, then I would feel confident using a more expensive "Not anytown" ticket via "anytown" without obtaining a zero excess.

It is, after all, in the interests of ATOC and its members to issue such an instruction if this saves zero fares being issued, and the hassle that goes with them.

Anyone fancy contacting ATOC regarding this?

 

[bnm]

Sorry, am I missing something here?

What about the very important point that no such fare appears to exist - CREWE-FELTHAM (route: KENSNGTN OLYMPIA)?

 

[bb21]

Sorry, am I missing something here?

What about the very important point that no such fare appears to exist - CREWE-FELTHAM (route: KENSNGTN OLYMPIA)?

I think it's already been highlighted

 

[Asian Demon]

Personally I would have retained the ticket. The fact that the fare doesn't exist makes me think forgery.

 

[Anon Mouse]

Right, here we go with my solution to the problem.

I contacted our control and they advised to send the passenger back to MKC via our service and get the passenger to take the Southern service from there as per the routing of his ticket. Apparently the route he should have taken was CRE - MKC - CLJ - FEL thus going through Kenny O and validating his ticket.

The passenger told me that he asked at Crewe if the London bound service on the platform was the one he required and the platform staff said yes it was (Of course it was a CRE - EUS non stopper).

Anyway, my solution was to take the passenger down to the London Overground platforms and advise them of what had happened and to ask for their help. Imagine my surprise when they agreed to carry him FOC to Willesden and get him on the correct train from there to CLJ to resume his ticketed journey. Proof if ever it was needed that we can all work together for the good of the passenger.

I thought that would have been the best solution in any case, seems a bit harsh to send him all the way back to Milkton Keynes

 

[yorkie]

It is wrong to send the customer anywhere other than on LU to Waterloo and on to Feltham from there (remember, they were going to Feltham and needed to get to/via Clapham Jn, Kenny O wasn't the destination) with a zero excess. While is wrong for any deviation to be required, it is good that VirginRPO kept the deviation to a minimum, given that the instructions were to send the customer doubling back.

Some people here may recall the passenger travelling from Winchester to Lancaster on a Route Banbury ticket, who was denied an excess by both the barrier staff and ticket office staff at Euston, in contravention of the Retail Standards Guide. The customer was told to buy a new ticket, when the correct excess was £0.00 (or alternatively, as OT says, simply allow travel). Despite receiving appalling advice by staff at Euston (for which I blame management) the customer has received a full refund and compensation. Further inspections and mystery shopping will now be carried out at Euston to ensure that the rules are now being adhered to, and if incorrect advice/charges are made in future, then we will have to take the matter further. (Anyone who is willing & able to assist in this, please PM me).

 

[RPI]

you dont need to retain the original tickets for a change of route or over distance zero fare, you can't anyway as the excess is only valid with the original ticket, only time ticket needs to be retained is when completeing a TIR/MG11 or PF.

 

[strange6]

you dont need to retain the original tickets for a change of route or over distance zero fare, you can't anyway as the excess is only valid with the original ticket, only time ticket needs to be retained is when completeing a TIR/MG11 or PF.

One thing this thread does prove is how (unnecessarily?) complex the ticketing system is.

 

[barrykas]

No problem; if we can get ATOC to provide some instructions that can be issued to all staff, and quoted by customers where appropriate, then I would feel confident using a more expensive "Not anytown" ticket via "anytown" without obtaining a zero excess.

Whilst I agree that the excess shouldn't be needed, doing so SHOULD avoid an argument with LU staff when you present them a ticket with no Maltese Cross and not routed via London...

Cheers,

Barry

 

[Daniel]

Whilst I agree that the excess shouldn't be needed, doing so SHOULD avoid an argument with LU staff when you present them a ticket with no Maltese Cross and not routed via London...

Which, considering the recent discussion elsewhere about LU staff not knowing ticket types, I'd gamble that a hell of a lot of "NOT LONDON"'s would be denied access at LU's gateliens...

 

[clagmonster]

I must admit that I thought about retaining the gentlemans ticket as I believed it to be a forgery but consultation with our control room showed that the Kenny O route is legitimate on certain tickets.

In that case, assuming you had one, would a swipe on the Avantix not be useful as it would be a lot harder to forge the coding on the magnetic strip that to forge the face of the ticket. If Avantix doesn't like the ticket, then it may well be time for a TIR.

 

[Nick W]

Wouldn't the sensible and logical thing to do be to ensure that in every case, the most expensive routed ticket is marked as Any Permitted?

 

[dzug2]

Hmm, not my line but I would guess I would send him to Willesden Junction and change it Clapham Junction?

imagining that 'route Kensington Olympia' had an easement to allow passengers from the North to change for Willesden Junction at Euston

Well sort of, but only on tickets with a cross London marker, that is route London tickets

(No 85)

Sonds like Crewe station screwed up on issung it - or it was fake. And then gave him duff advice on which train to take. I think if it was fake the guy would have been savvy enough to take the correct route

 

[island]

Wouldn't the sensible and logical thing to do be to ensure that in every case, the most expensive routed ticket is marked as Any Permitted?

What, then, do you do if you want to allow passengers to use an additional route that isn't mapped?