IET 1st class dispute

[weeklycommuter]

I've just checked my emails and have seen the same document so can confirm that GWR have briefed their staff (and those of neighbouring TOCs who are also on the circulation list) that labelled First Class accommodation is for the use of First Class ticket holders, unless the onboard staff choose to declassify it - the only example given is where loadings make it necessary.

From this it would appear that GWR customer services have confirmed to myself as a rail passenger that when a train service is advertised as standard class only all seats and areas on the train including any labelled first class can be used by passengers holding standard class tickets (SWR customer services confirmed the same for SWR train services) while someone else at GWR has issued an internal memo to staff only which contradicts this.

If GWR wanted the Exeter to Penzance train services to include first class for the period of the current May 2025 timetable until the class 175 trains arrive all they had to do was enter the information that these services include first class in the National Rail Timetable, the railway database and the timetable on their website. Instead someone at GWR enters standard class only for these services in National Rail Timetable and the railway database while someone else at GWR enters includes first class in timetable K1 on their website. When this contradiction is pointed out to GWR customer services they contact the team responsible and timetable K1 on their website is corrected to match the National Rail Timetable and the railway database. Then someone else at GWR decides to issue an internal memo which in effect contradicts this.

I have to conclude that there is a problem with internal communications and management at GWR as different people and groups of people within the organisation appear to making conflicting decisions and issuing conflicting information. This does not inspire confidence in me that GWR can effectively manage their train services. It would clearly be better for GWR not to use any rolling stock with any seats and areas labelled first class for services advertised in the timetable as standard class only in view of this complete and utter mess they are making of managing this.

 

[AlterEgo]

Instead someone at GWR enters standard class only for these services in National Rail Timetable and the railway database while someone else at GWR enters includes first class in timetable K1 on their website. When this contradiction is pointed out to GWR customer services they contact the team responsible and timetable K1 on their website is corrected to match the National Rail Timetable and the railway database. Then someone else at GWR decides to issue an internal memo which in effect contradicts this.

It doesn’t contradict it at all. The train is scheduled to carry standard class accommodation only, but if it turns up with a first class carriage, you can’t sit in it unless you have a valid ticket. This is not hard to understand at all, unless you want to sit in there as a novelty and are frustrated they don’t declassify as custom and practice.

The reason they have made it standard class only in the timetable is because they don’t want to *guarantee* a train with a first class carriage will operate the service and they don’t want a retailer to sell tickets in first class against an itinerary.

The NRCoT is very clear. It’s an urban myth that “if the timetable says it isn’t planned to have a first class carriage then if one turns up it doesn’t count as one” - that just happens to be the custom and practice among mostly commuter operators who are operating with a hodgepodge of stock. One final time - what in the passenger contract (the NRCoT) makes you think the carriage is declassified? GWR had done, and continue to do, none of the actions which make a clearly marked first class carriage declassified.

The only issue here is customer services gave you a poor reply which didn’t, it seem, accurately state the company’s position.

 

[RPI]

It doesn’t contradict it at all. The train is scheduled to carry standard class accommodation only, but if it turns up with a first class carriage, you can’t sit in it unless you have a valid ticket. This is not hard to understand at all, unless you want to sit in there as a novelty and are frustrated they don’t declassify as custom and practice.

The reason they have made it standard class only in the timetable is because they don’t want to *guarantee* a train with a first class carriage will operate the service and they don’t want a retailer to sell tickets in first class against an itinerary.

The NRCoT is very clear. It’s an urban myth that “if the timetable says it isn’t planned to have a first class carriage then if one turns up it doesn’t count as one” - that just happens to be the custom and practice among mostly commuter operators who are operating with a hodgepodge of stock. One final time - what in the passenger contract (the NRCoT) makes you think the carriage is declassified? GWR had done, and continue to do, none of the actions which make a clearly marked first class carriage declassified.

The only issue here is customer services gave you a poor reply which didn’t, it seem, accurately state the company’s position.

Spot on.

Here is a copy of the internal document with names etc redacted. I don't know why people are getting so excited about it, What's the fascination with wanting to sit in a rather substandard first class through Cornwall on trains that mostly cart fresh air about?

 

[styles]

Realistically I think there's a difference between the power to remove somebody from a 1st class area, and the power to say issue a penalty fare for sitting there without a 1st class ticket.

The passenger doesn't really have much recourse if they're asked to move to standard class, because that's the ticket they hold.

However I think a passenger would mount a solid defence against a penalty fare, or prosecution, if such action was taken against them; on the basis it's advertised as standard class only and it being commonplace for 1st class areas on standard class only advertised services to be considered standard class. You'd just point towards the hundreds (thousands?) of services each day where this is the case.

 

[Watershed]

Realistically I think there's a difference between the power to remove somebody from a 1st class area, and the power to say issue a penalty fare for sitting there without a 1st class ticket.

The passenger doesn't really have much recourse if they're asked to move to standard class, because that's the ticket they hold.

However I think a passenger would mount a solid defence against a penalty fare, or prosecution, if such action was taken against them; on the basis it's advertised as standard class only and it being commonplace for 1st class areas on standard class only advertised services to be considered standard class. You'd just point towards the hundreds (thousands?) of services each day where this is the case.

Custom and practice would not provide a defence to a breach of the Byelaws. The Byelaws create strict liability offences with the only defences being defined in the legislation.

It might be taken into account as mitigation in sentencing, but it wouldn't avoid a conviction.

You could raise it as a "compelling reason" why a Penalty Fare appeal should be allowed, but there is no guarantee this would succeed.

I would not suggest sitting there merely on the basis of 'custom and practice'. You want clear, ideally written, evidence from the operator that they have declassified first class.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An interesting question is why GWR decide they are different from the rest of the railway in this regard where that "custom and practice" mostly is followed. Do they actually think they will get much upgrade revenue on these specific trains?

 

[AlterEgo]

You'd just point towards the hundreds (thousands?) of services each day where this is the case.

Not on GWR though.

I think @Watershed neatly summarises the legal position here.

An interesting question is why GWR decide they are different from the rest of the railway in this regard where that "custom and practice" mostly is followed. Do they actually think they will get much upgrade revenue on these specific trains?

Probably not, but the policy of following the NRCoT is likely there to prevent edge cases or ambiguities. When you say "the rest of the railway", this is a very SE-centric view. All the major London and SE commuter operators do this (but crucially, communicate it - this is what given one the authority to sit there!), but there are 28 TOCs. Most of them don't have any such policy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Probably not, but the policy of following the NRCoT is likely there to prevent edge cases or ambiguities. When you say "the rest of the railway", this is a very SE-centric view. All the major London and SE commuter operators do this (but crucially, communicate it - this is what given one the authority to sit there!), but there are 28 TOCs. Most of them don't have any such policy.

It's largely only relevant to the South East commuter TOCs and GWR. Avanti only has stock with First Class and always* operates it as such, same with LNER. Northern has no first class anywhere on its network even though the 769s retain a 2+1 seated area. GTR has a mix of stock and a mix of services on which first class is and isn't offered, as does GWR. WMT has former first class areas on all its WCML stock but does not offer a first class product anywhere.

It could arise on ScotRail and I'm fairly sure they follow the convention, e.g. Inverness 158s used to have 1st (I think they removed it on refurb) but the Far North services are Standard only and so it wasn't enforced on those. What is EMR's policy on those rare race-day cases of Meridians running to Liverpool, that being the only possible overlap there? How about XC if a Voyager replaces a 170, or can't that happen? I know EMR had an ex-SWT 158 but that has clear signage stating the former 1st is in fact Standard.

It's confusing having different rules for different situations, so I really don't get why GWR don't just follow the convention and declassify it. What would they lose out on? One or two upgrades per train at most? But the advantage is that someone who likes it when they sit there for free might pay on a longer distance service in future...

* There used to be a Voyager worked Friday evening relief service from Euston, 1859 I think, which was advertised Standard only, though I don't know if they declassified 1st or locked it out.

 

[styles]

It's largely only relevant to the South East commuter TOCs and GWR. Avanti only has stock with First Class and always* operates it as such, same with LNER. Northern has no first class anywhere on its network even though the 769s retain a 2+1 seated area. GTR has a mix of stock and a mix of services on which first class is and isn't offered, as does GWR. WMT has former first class areas on all its WCML stock but does not offer a first class product anywhere.

It could arise on ScotRail and I'm fairly sure they follow the convention, e.g. Inverness 158s used to have 1st (I think they removed it on refurb) but the Far North services are Standard only and so it wasn't enforced on those. What is EMR's policy on those rare race-day cases of Meridians running to Liverpool, that being the only possible overlap there? How about XC if a Voyager replaces a 170, or can't that happen?

* There used to be a Voyager worked Friday evening relief service from Euston, 1859 I think, which was advertised Standard only, though I don't know if they declassified 1st or locked it out.

The 1st class sections on ScotRail's 158s/170s on the Borders Railway aren't enforced as 1st class. They are marked standard class only in the timetables.

 

[Krokodil]

An interesting question is why GWR decide they are different from the rest of the railway in this regard where that "custom and practice" mostly is followed. Do they actually think they will get much upgrade revenue on these specific trains?

It's confusing having different rules for different situations,

I'm not confused. If the sign on the train says "First Class" then I will assume that it is First Class unless I hear otherwise from an official source (verbally from the guard, a label on the train, posters at stations, or a policy posted on their website).

On the contrary, routinely declassifying First without notice is what creates confusion because you're then telling people to disregard what they are reading.

so I really don't get why GWR don't just follow the convention and declassify it. What would they lose out on?

What would they lose out from not declassifying? No one is being forced to stand, there's plenty of room.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On the contrary, routinely declassifying First without notice is what creates confusion because you're then telling people to disregard what they are reading.

To be fair I don't wholly understand why GTR's Thameslink service works in the way it does with the whole "declassified at the rear" thing or indeed the declassification on the Sutton loop services. It was about capacity but they could just reduce the first class fares a bit particularly off peak so it fills! Or to be fair just get rid of it entirely as other commuter operations have done.

I do think signage should be clear though. TfW have failed on this - the "Standard Plus" area is now Standard permanently but there's nothing actually saying this - thus creating exactly the sort of confusion you seek to avoid. To be fair this is confusion unique to the UK - in every other European country second class (yes I know ours is technically Third) is clearly marked with a 2 even if that's all that is available on the train.

 

[RPI]

An interesting question is why GWR decide they are different from the rest of the railway in this regard where that "custom and practice" mostly is followed. Do they actually think they will get much upgrade revenue on these specific trains?

I'm pretty sure it's a matter of consistency, you have the same types of train running through Cornwall on different services, it creates a level of confusion if you can use the first class on trains going to Penzance from Plymouth, but not on trains from Paddington... When it's exactly the same type of train being used. There's no ambiguity with the approach that's been taken.

 

[bramling]

To be fair I don't wholly understand why GTR's Thameslink service works in the way it does with the whole "declassified at the rear" thing or indeed the declassification on the Sutton loop services. It was about capacity but they could just reduce the first class fares a bit particularly off peak so it fills! Or to be fair just get rid of it entirely as other commuter operations have done.

I do think signage should be clear though. TfW have failed on this - the "Standard Plus" area is now Standard permanently but there's nothing actually saying this - thus creating exactly the sort of confusion you seek to avoid. To be fair this is confusion unique to the UK - in every other European country second class (yes I know ours is technically Third) is clearly marked with a 2 even if that's all that is available on the train.

As far as Thameslink goes, I suspect the provision of first reflects the existence of a few places on their routes where there’s demand for it. I’m not sure if this is a myth, however I seem to remember there were issues when the 319s arrived, where the 319/0s didn’t have first, which led to complaints from passengers on the Brighton line. I’d imagine there’s a few other places with some vocal demand for first, for example Cambridge.

This then arrives at the problem that the 700/0s needed first as they sometimes work on 700/1 routes (either booked or as substitutes), plus part of their original work was to take over GN services which did have first. Where it seems to have gone awry was the 700/0s having the same size area as the 700/1s, which seems to have been where the declassification has come in, as a 700/0 replacing 8/317, 8/319, 8/321 or 8/365 would have been a significant reduction of standard class seating capacity. Hence what we have is a fudge, albeit one which seems to work reasonably well.

All that said, given how things have gone elsewhere, one wonders how long first will survive on GTR.

 

[Kite159]

It could arise on ScotRail and I'm fairly sure they follow the convention, e.g. Inverness 158s used to have 1st (I think they removed it on refurb) but the Far North services are Standard only and so it wasn't enforced on those. What is EMR's policy on those rare race-day cases of Meridians running to Liverpool, that being the only possible overlap there? How about XC if a Voyager replaces a 170, or can't that happen? I know EMR had an ex-SWT 158 but that has clear signage stating the former 1st is in fact Standard.

ScotRail could arise in Fife when 170s work the stopping services to Perth/Dundee/Leven which are standard class only, likewise when 170s work Tweedbank services.

Certainly when I did a Meridian to Crewe last year when it was a kickball extra 1st class was declassified

 

[99009]

I'm not confused. If the sign on the train says "First Class" then I will assume that it is First Class unless I hear otherwise from an official source (verbally from the guard, a label on the train, posters at stations, or a policy posted on their website).

From an outsiders (not local to GWR perspective), I agree with this. If I see a train that externally or internally displays 1st class, no matter what the service or whether it's advertised, I automatically assume it's operating as 1st class and isn't declassified.

So if I were onboard a service like the one that started off this topic, travelling with a standard class ticket and for whatever reason I had doubts about whether I could use 1st class (e.g. train is close to full and standing, or no 1st class was advertised at the point of boarding), I wouldn't just go and sit in 1st class by my own choice. I would go to the guard and ask "Excuse me, is 1st class declassified on this train?" and get + respect the answer from them. Surely asking the guard first (if a guard is on board) is the solution here for anyone unsure in the future?

 

[weeklycommuter]

From an outsiders (not local to GWR perspective), I agree with this. If I see a train that externally or internally displays 1st class, no matter what the service or whether it's advertised, I automatically assume it's operating as 1st class and isn't declassified.

The problem with a train operator being allowed to make money from selling first class fares for a train service that is not advertised as including first class is that National Rail Conditions of Travel Condition 31 only entitles passengers holding first class tickets to claim compensation for being unable to get a first class seat on the train if the train service is advertised as including first class. If train operators are allowed to make money from selling first class fares for train services that are not advertised as including first class what is there to stop train operators getting out of paying compensation by not advertising their services with first class as including first class? So no I most certainly do not agree with this.

https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e8xgegruud3g/77fuBWp62YPSrGwBP1mNQX/5f912e6484a2dc7efbad3b4ed0c9b383/National_Rail_Conditions_of_Travel_2024.pdf

31. Travelling In Standard Class Accommodation with A First Class Ticket
31.1 If you have a first class Ticket and the train service you use is shown as offering first class accommodation at www.nationalrail.co.uk, but when you travel first class accommodation is not provided or is otherwise fully occupied, you may claim a refund.
The minimum refund to which you will be entitled will be the difference between the price of the first class Ticket purchased and the cheapest valid standard class walk-up fare available on the service you used. You must contact the Train Company you travelled with to notify them of your claim within 28 days of the date that you travelled.
31.2 If you hold a first class Season Ticket, the minimum to which you will be entitled will be a refund of the difference between the first class and standard class fare for the journey concerned.

 

[AlterEgo]

The problem with a train operator being allowed to make money from selling first class fares for a train service that is not advertised as including first class is that National Rail Conditions of Travel Condition 31 only entitles passengers holding first class tickets to claim compensation for being unable to get a first class seat on the train if the train service is advertised as including first class. If train operators are allowed to make money from selling first class fares for train services that are not advertised as including first class what is there to stop train operators getting out of paying compensation by not advertising their services with first class as including first class? So no I most certainly do not agree with this.

The whole point of changing the train to standard class only in the timetable is to *stop first class fares being sold* for it and to stop anyone expecting first class to be present.

This entire thread is such a reach to detect a problem that doesn’t actually exist. All of the back of someone who didn’t hold a first class ticket in the first place being told they can’t sit in first class.

 

[yorkie]

But the train only conveys standard class, as advertised.

GWR are acting differently to every other TOC in this respect; at a time we are supposed to be unifying, this is ridiculous.

We are going round in circles, so unless any new information comes to light, I suggest we leave it there.

 

[styles]

Custom and practice would not provide a defence to a breach of the Byelaws. The Byelaws create strict liability offences with the only defences being defined in the legislation.

It might be taken into account as mitigation in sentencing, but it wouldn't avoid a conviction.

You could raise it as a "compelling reason" why a Penalty Fare appeal should be allowed, but there is no guarantee this would succeed.

I would not suggest sitting there merely on the basis of 'custom and practice'. You want clear, ideally written, evidence from the operator that they have declassified first class.

But according to the timetable, the service is standard class only, so no offence has been committed.

Yes it is a strict liability offence so the intent of the defender is not relevant, but case law could be set that if a service is advertised at the time of booking at being wholly standard class, that it is so. In such a situation, the defender would not be guilty.

It would however require a strong defence counsel to make this argument and in all likelihood require being heard in a crown court of higher (England & Wales).

 

[Harpo]

Just change the wording.

‘This service is not expected to include first class accommodation…..’

Problem solved

 

[saismee]

Just change the wording.

‘This service is not expected to include first class accommodation…..’

Problem solved

GA uses "This train is not scheduled to have first class" but I've been given very conflicting information about whether this means its declassified or if you'd need to purchase an upgrade.

 

[Watershed]

But according to the timetable, the service is standard class only, so no offence has been committed.

What's advertised in the timetable is irrelevant as far as the Byelaws are concerned.

Byelaw 19 states:

Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in ... any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is reserved for ... holders of tickets of a specific class, except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place.

Therefore if a coach (or part of a coach) has signs indicating it as being first class, you need "permission from an authorised person" to occupy it with a standard class ticket.

It would be a very "brave" submission to suggest that a timetable marking amounts to "permission from an authorised person", unless it explicitly states that first class accommodation is declassified.

The only reference in the NRCoT to first class accommodation being advertised in the timetable is to claiming a partial refund, if you have a first class ticket but the advertised first class doesn't materialise. There is nothing there stating that a marking of "standard class only" means you can occupy any part of the train.

In fact, to the contrary it mirrors the position under the Byelaws:

Some train services include first class accommodation. Where first class accommodation is available, the relevant seats and area(s) of the train will be clearly marked. Unless Train Company staff, or notices on the train give you specific permission, you cannot travel in first class accommodation (including standing in corridors or passageways) with a standard class Ticket.

but case law could be set that if a service is advertised at the time of booking at being wholly standard class, that it is so.

Case law would only be established if the cass were appealed to the Court of Appeal. Very unlikely to be worthwhile for a Byelaw conviction, I would suggest.

 

[35B]

But the train only conveys standard class, as advertised.

GWR are acting differently to every other TOC in this respect; at a time we are supposed to be unifying, this is ridiculous.

We are going round in circles, so unless any new information comes to light, I suggest we leave it there.

I can think of plenty of good reasons for both why GWR's policy on these services is sensible and reasonable, and their staff's treatment of the OP on the day was cack-handed and counterproductive.

As a simple piece of plain English, the idea that if a train is not advertised as carrying 1st class, any 1st class provision is always declassified makes no logical sense - and potentially creates a trap for the unwary to fall into.

A free upgrade is a nice thing to get - but if I always get the upgrade for free, I will then resent paying for it.

 

[yorkie]

As a simple piece of plain English, the idea that if a train is not advertised as carrying 1st class, any 1st class provision is always declassified makes no logical sense - and potentially creates a trap for the unwary to fall into.

As stated previously, and has also cropped up on many other threads, there are loads of trains all over the country which convey standard only accommodation, but are operated by stock that includes a 'first class' area.

GWR are choosing to go against custom and practice and act differently to other operators.

Unless there is any new information that comes to light, I suggest we leave it there.

 

[Krokodil]

Maybe it is the custom and practice that is wrong. Confusing people by telling them that they can routinely ignore the signs in front of them, so long as an arcane set of conditions is met.

Much simpler to follow the signage, unless specifically told otherwise.

 

[RPI]

Maybe it is the custom and practice that is wrong. Confusing people by telling them that they can routinely ignore the signs in front of them, so long as an arcane set of conditions is met.

Much simpler to follow the signage, unless specifically told otherwise.

You mean.... Common sense