Specified train & connections meaning

[yorkie]

... I was uneasy having only seven minutes at Cambridge to get from my GA train, terminating in one of the south-facing bays, to my XC, at the north end of the through platform, so I got to Bishop's Stortford early. The chap on the barrier wouldn't let me in, telling me I needed to wait for the specific train in my itinerary...

If you were connecting from GTR onto GA at Cambridge, you would be officially allowed to get an earlier train; the fact that some operators do not officially allow this common-sense approach is nonsensical.

However, until the rules can be changed to be more customer friendly (admittedly, I don't hold out much hope of that actually happening), anyone who wants additional interchange time, can do so, by booking with us. Choose advanced options, then specify the change location, and any additional time required (which is added on to the minimum connection time).

Alternatively, if your arrival time at your final destination is not critical, just take the tighter connection, and if a delay results in a missed connection, claim Delay Repay! It is odd that some staff members object to passengers minimising their employer's Delay Repay liabilities; people who lack common sense wouldn't cut it in many customer-facing roles, but the railway is more than happy to employ people with such attitudes, and even seems to encourage it.

... In the brave new world of Advance and Flex, if I want the option of a few minutes extra at Leeds for my London connection I will have to pay extra for the Flex.

If you want to specify additional minutes, you can book with us, but if you want it to be an option on the day, it would be cheaper to "split" at Leeds than pay £20 extra for Flex. However, it is worth looking at booking Flex for the 'wrong' train, as this can reduce the overall price, while giving you flexibility, given that the new Flex system means booking the wrong train can be cheaper than booking the train you want to get. If that sounds odd, well it is, but it's perfectly aligned with LNER's definition of fares being "simple", which doesn't mean it actually is simple.

Please don't waste your money. Just specify a longer connection at Leeds when booking, or book as two separate tickets. As long as you observe the minimum connection time, any combination of tickets counts as a through journey - important for delay repay and NRCoT rights.

True, but I would always advise booking this as one transaction (ideally as one through itinerary, with extra time allowed).

It can be very problematic if one (or more) of the trains are retimed or deleted from the timetable; if this happens when each of the legs are on separate bookings, it can cause hassle with staff who don't understand the rules and/or the concept of a contract being formed at the time of purchase.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I know of one passenger making the exact journey, but in reverse from Skipton to kings cross, a few weeks back whose advance ticket was £73.80. She was 2 hours late for her train and was trying to buy a whole new ticket when I came across her. I stopped her doing this and excessed her advance - and this cost her 80 pence to turn her ticket into the flexible single (£74.60).

This is great service, but if you've missed your train a new ticket is indeed the correct remedy. The excess is only an option before departure of the first booked train.

 

[Haywain]

But if LNER get their way the Off Peak Single will be abolished leaving just Advance Fares, 70-Minute Flex and Anytime.

The fact that something might happen in the future is not a good reason to not look for the Off Peak fare now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

More typical at short notice is the £15 difference shown upthread.

Meanwhile, "Offpeak Single" and "LNER" are uneasy bedfellows ATM. In the brave new world of Advance and Flex, if I want the option of a few minutes extra at Leeds for my London connection I will have to pay extra for the Flex.

Or split, and then for usually very little more (sometimes less) you get extra stuff like break of journey.

In some cases you can force the splitting engine to do this where you have reservable and non reservable trains. For me, for instance, "must call at Cheddington" is a handy way to force the leg to London to be split as a flexible single even if the rest is an Advance.

 

[jamiearmley]

This is great service, but if you've missed your train a new ticket is indeed the correct remedy. The excess is only an option before departure of the first booked train.

Absolutely true. And yes, if you present me a single from Skipton to Leeds two hours late at a cost of £2, or indeed a Skipton to London at £20 - then I will charge a new ticket.

Present me a ticket at £73, which cost pennies less than the flexible, and I will always excess you up - without the £10 charge - Advance tickets should not be available at prices which are essentially the flexible price, and I will not, in such a situation, ask someone to give up their hard earned money because they have fallen foul of a toxic, anti-passenger system.

(Caveat always being that if you start screaming and shouting at me then the rules will be applied to the letter.)

 

[Haywain]

She was 2 hours late for her train and was trying to buy a whole new ticket when I came across her. I stopped her doing this and excessed her advance - and this cost her 80 pence to turn her ticket into the flexible single (£74.60).

A new ticket was the correct approach. Great customer service but you create the wrong expectations. This customer will now want know why it isn’t only a few pence next time.

I believe the intention is that you travel on the booked train for the main, substantial, part of the journey.

For a journey from Exeter to Carlisle, changing at Birmingham, which would be the “main, substantial, part of the journey “?

This is also often the one operated by the fare-setting TOC, forms the bulk of your journey and is on a route with a high proportion of seat reservations,

South London to Norwich, fare set by Greater Anglia who don’t have seat reservations?

an Advance sold by GA for a journey entirely on their trains, but I'm not sure they survived COCID

London to Norwich, and onwards?

 

[jamiearmley]

A new ticket was the correct approach. Great customer service but you create the wrong expectations. This customer will now want know why it isn’t only a few pence next time

I'm always careful of that. I spent a lot of time with her. She's contacted her MP about ticket prices and also written to my employer about me. She fully understands that she fell lucky that day, and is now in her own way fighting the system for change.

 

[DelW]

My problem with counted place reservations on connecting services is that the connection time (across London in my case) is far too long.

Returning home from the Midlands or North via London, if I'm using an advance ticket then my short journey home on SWR has a counted place reservation despite the SWR train having no reservations at all. However the cross London connection time is based on such painfully slow transfers* that I often arrive at Waterloo 45 minutes or so before "my" train, meaning I have to watch typically two perfectly suitable trains depart without me. Sometimes this pushes me from a quieter mid-afternoon train onto a busier shoulder peak one.

That's one of the reasons I no longer use advance tickets for such journeys, another being the likelihood of encounters such as the OP described. Instead I pay the extra for a flexible ticket so that I can make my own decisions on times. If off-peak flexible tickets are removed LNER style, then even more of my trips will switch to my car. Weekend train travel has become so unreliable and unpleasant in the last four years that many already have been, but that's getting off topic.

*I normally manage to transfer WAT to/from EUS or KXSP in 20 - 25 minutes. I accept not everyone will manage that, but an hour and a quarter from arrival at EUS to departure from WAT is unacceptable to me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why not split in this sort of case? I do. Flexible on the London commuter leg but the option of Advance on the long distance one?

 

[Vexed]

You could generate the itinerary through National Rail Enquires and choose the allow less connection time through London option.

However you can't choose which retailer it goes to any more and some don't like the lower connection time itineraries. And you can't go to a third party retailer.

Why not split in this sort of case? I do. Flexible on the London commuter leg but the option of Advance on the long distance one?

Quite often the difference between London Terminals and a station a few further miles the other side is a lot less than if split in two. I use some GWR advances a couple times a year that can be the same price to London Terminals as St Albans.

 

[Haywain]

Quite often the difference between London Terminals and a station a few further miles the other side is a lot less than if split in two.

And if that's the case you have to weigh up whether you want price or flexibility.

 

[Vexed]

Which luckily for me isn't currently an issue with the local leg on the GTR.

 

[Hadders]

Northern could learn a thing or two from GTR on this.

GTR allow any train to be used where they are the connecting service into another operators service. EG, ‘LNER & Connections’, ‘AP Slough’, etc.

They also offer their own Advance fares which are train specific that do need to be used on the specified train.

 

[DelW]

Why not split in this sort of case? I do. Flexible on the London commuter leg but the option of Advance on the long distance one?

The SWR leg is disproportionately expensive if I split in London, plus I have to allow for two tube fares. Also through tickets can allow me to use an offpeak ticket on SWR trains that would be peak fare if using a London Terminals ticket.

And if that's the case you have to weigh up whether you want price or flexibility.

As mentioned above, I normally choose flexibility. If that becomes too expensive then I drive instead. But it's annoying to be forced into this by the pointless application of a completely spurious "reservation" on trains that in reality don't have any at all, just to suit some whim of the ticketing system.

 

[FaresGuru22]

Why does it make any sense to say that a passenger travelling from London to Skipton must only travel on a specific local service from Leeds to Skipton?

Given a customer travelling from Bristol to Stevenage can jump on any train between London and Stevenage, why not apply the same principle for London to Skipton?

The AP LONDON READING fares are just the same. You wouldn't be able to get on LNER KGX-SVG unless that's the one you selected. You may be able to use any GTR train between London and Stevenage but that's because ticket checks are very rare. Even Transport Focus regards Advance tickets as 'Fixed train' tickets.

 

[BRX]

Very similar discussion here from just a few weeks ago

"Booked train and connecting services" - what's the definition of each?

"Outward Travel Only valid on booked train and connecting services only" The text above appears in the conditions on an Advance ticket I have from Herne Hill to Dover Priory. The itinerary is Thameslink to St Pancras and then Southeastern. It states that we have a reservation on the SE leg...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Haywain]

The AP LONDON READING fares are just the same. You wouldn't be able to get on LNER KGX-SVG unless that's the one you selected.

That's not true. LNER have a long standing waiver that for such tickets the London to Stevenage leg is not fixed to the reserved train.

 

[FaresGuru22]

That's not true. LNER have a long standing waiver that for such tickets the London to Stevenage leg is not fixed to the reserved train.

Really? Even if the customer selected the LNER train when booking?

 

[Adam Williams]

Really? Even if the customer selected the LNER train when booking?

Yes, really. Given I suspect you have access, you may find the iKB entry "Travelling with Advance Tickets" illuminating.

 

[OscarH]

Really? Even if the customer selected the LNER train when booking?

Yes, the guidance is clear on that

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Yes, really. Given I suspect you have access, you may find the iKB entry "Travelling with Advance Tickets" illuminating.

Although that may be the case, I'd strongly bear in mind that most Pricing Managers / Commercial Managers etc (let alone other staff, especially on the frontline) have never even heard of iKB or would know where to find it, even if they were inclined to spend the time reviewing and updating it.

There's stuff on it that was added years ago by someone who has long retired that I know for certain is no longer applicable.

The PAF (Product Advisory Forms) to create or vary new products, restrictions etc that are supposed to feed into iKB are often blank or have N/A against them in the section about updating knowledgebase or National Rail.

 

[Adam Williams]

I'd strongly bear in mind that most Pricing Managers / Commercial Managers etc (let alone other staff, especially on the frontline) have never even heard of iKB

I would've hoped this was a pre-requisite for the job, to be honest.

The maintenance of the documentation is, I agree, a problem. Some products have next-to-nothing to go on, and so many are created every week via the PAF process (a good chunk of the products are, frankly, pointless, and don't need to be created - they duplicate other products that already exist and could be used [but perhaps owned by another operator], exist purely to work-around supplier incompetence etc). Really, each article on the knowledgebase should get a mandatory review date to ensure it doesn't just exist there untouched forever, whilst incorrect. I suspect workloads are enough without this additional admin, though.

 

[Hadders]

Although that may be the case, I'd strongly bear in mind that most Pricing Managers / Commercial Managers etc (let alone other staff, especially on the frontline) have never even heard of iKB or would know where to find it, even if they were inclined to spend the time reviewing and updating it.

There's stuff on it that was added years ago by someone who has long retired that I know for certain is no longer applicable.

The PAF (Product Advisory Forms) to create or vary new products, restrictions etc that are supposed to feed into iKB are often blank or have N/A against them in the section about updating knowledgebase or National Rail.

This doesn’t mean that what is in iKB should be swept away.

The GTR easement is extremely sensible. As I said to a GTR manager years ago - why shouldn’t someone travelling on an Advance ticket from Bristol to Stevenage be able to take an earlier connecting train from St Pancras to Stevenage?

Think about the consequences if you make them wait. Do you really want these people hanging around on the cramped platforms at St Pancras? Better for everyone to just get them on their way.

The problem is too many people in positions of influence in the railway don’t understand this sort of thinking and seem to want to make things as difficult as possible for passengers.

 

[FaresGuru22]

Yes, really. Given I suspect you have access, you may find the iKB entry "Travelling with Advance Tickets" illuminating.

So there are terms and conditions of tickets, in this case benefitting customers, again not presented to customers. Fantastic as ever!

 

[yorkie]

The AP LONDON READING fares are just the same. You wouldn't be able to get on LNER KGX-SVG unless that's the one you selected. You may be able to use any GTR train between London and Stevenage but that's because ticket checks are very rare. Even Transport Focus regards Advance tickets as 'Fixed train' tickets.

Here it is:

• Where LNER is a connecting TOC from Stevenage via London and vice versa, e.g. “AP London-Reading”, or “AWC& Connections”, LNER waives the need to travel on the exact LNER train booked on this relatively short journey Stevenage ↔ Kings Cross, even though retail systems will force a reservation to be made.
• Where a passenger has a through Advance Ticket and reservations for a journey which involves using a Gatwick Express, Great Northern, Southern and / or Thameslink train, as a connection to or from a different operator’s train service.

For example, Advance Tickets routed "AP SLOUGH", “AWC &CONNECTIONS” or "LNER & CONNECTNS".

The LNER easement is very longstanding; the GTR one is much more recent because, for many years, it wasn't actually necessary (because GTR didn't used to offer counted place reservations)

There is absolutely no justifiable reason for Northern to not do this.

I've heard through the grapevine that it is TPE policy to do this, but it's not documented (maybe I will contact someone to see if they can change that...)

 

[Adam Williams]

The problem is too many people in positions of influence in the railway don’t understand this sort of thinking and seem to want to make things as difficult as possible for passengers.

I'd wager that some of them don't actually have regular contact with passengers and/or frontline staff in their day-to-day work.

I honestly think that all TOC staff including those who come up with fares policy/strategy, those that work in software development, stakeholder engagement and those that work in marketing should be required to do a bit of customer service on a regular basis. It's a great way of understanding the direct impact of your work, and appreciating the pain points that people who use your service run into. Some interactions will be positive, some will be negative - and some customers will be downright unreasonable and hurl abuse at you - but that's what the customer support staff have to put up with. It's a shame that most of the "Meet the Manager" sessions died a death, in this same vein.

So there are terms and conditions of tickets, in this case benefitting customers, again not presented to customers. Fantastic as ever!

Yeah I don't think it's ideal at all, but here we are...

 

[Haywain]

There's stuff on it that was added years ago by someone who has long retired that I know for certain is no longer applicable.

I think you mean ‘no longer intended to be applicable’.

 

[Hadders]

I'd wager that some of them don't actually have regular contact with passengers and/or frontline staff in their day-to-day work.

I honestly think that all TOC staff including those who come up with fares policy/strategy, those that work in software development, stakeholder engagement and those that work in marketing should be required to do a bit of customer service on a regular basis. It's a great way of understanding the direct impact of your work, and appreciating the pain points that people who use your service run into. Some interactions will be positive, some will be negative - and some customers will be downright unreasonable and hurl abuse at you - but that's what the customer support staff have to put up with. It's a shame that most of the "Meet the Manager" sessions died a death, in this same vein.


Yeah I don't think it's ideal at all, but here we are...

Yes, I absolutely agree with this.

Where I work everyone has to spend at least a week working at the front-end. Many of the ‘old stagers’ like me started at the sharp end years ago and enjoy the challenge of showing the youngsters that we can still cut it. Some of my colleagues absolutely hate it but it’s essential that everyone gets an insight into what happens on the shop floor.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I think you mean ‘no longer intended to be applicable’.

Perhaps, but you're going to struggle to rely on any information contained within iKB from a customer perspective. It's an internal resource and cannot possibly form part of any contract, implied or otherwise. Access to it is supposed to be firewalled / IP restricted, albeit there's some issues with that. The information could be altered or completely removed without any warning whatsoever.

At best, you can use it to assess what should probably happen in a specific situation.

 

[Adam Williams]

Access to it is supposed to be firewalled / IP restricted, albeit there's some issues with that.

That's certainly one way of putting it