• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

The Manual

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brucey

Member
Joined
7 Jan 2010
Messages
671
1. Condition 13(e) tells you;

"If you make your journey by a route other than those referred to in (a) and (b)
above, you will be liable to pay an excess fare. This excess fare will be the
difference between the price paid for the ticket you hold and the price of the
lowest priced ticket(s) available for immediate travel that would have entitled you
to travel by that route".

So it's £69 as the Any Permitted SOR would have been £279.00. I CBA to check if this is a trick question so if this ticket is valid on Virgin due to some rule somewhere, feel free to correct me.

But that is not correct as the NRCoC don't tell you something that The Manual does ... "Charge HALF the difference between the fare paid and the appropriate Return fare for the journey being made" (obtained from a printout given to me by a TOC).
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,221
3. I have an Anytime Single ticket from Crewe to Stoke, which I bought in advance. On the day, I end up wanting to continue travel to Derby. What excess fare should I pay at the ticket office at Crewe?

4. I have an Anytime Return ticket from Stoke to Crewe. On the return journey, I end up wanting to continue travel to Derby. What excess fare should I pay at the ticket office at Crewe?

I think I've covered every type of excess now - I hope! :)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
But that is not correct as the NRCoC don't tell you something that The Manual does ... "Charge HALF the difference between the fare paid and the appropriate Return fare for the journey being made" (obtained from a printout given to me by a TOC).

:shock: :shock: :shock:

I am surprised! ATOC withholding important information once again, that if unknown, can mean the passenger ends up paying a lot more than is necessary! :roll:

So what is correct? NRE or The Manual? NRE is "definitive" after all, whereas The Manual is just "a guide." :roll:
 
Last edited:

Brucey

Member
Joined
7 Jan 2010
Messages
671
:shock: :shock: :shock:

I am surprised! ATOC withholding important information once again, that if unknown, can mean the passenger ends up paying a lot more than is necessary! :roll:

So what is correct? NRE or The Manual? NRE is "definitive" after all, whereas The Manual is just "a guide." :roll:

The reason why I requested this information was because different staff were charging different amounts: sometimes 100%, sometimes 50% and other times random amounts. At least knowing that I should be charged 50%, I could prompt staff to double check their calculations. After doing this, I was always charged the correct excess fare of 50%.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Excesses essentially resemble a minefield. I will give this a go.

1. I have a Manchester to London "route Chesterfield" SOR at £196. I wish to travel with Virgin Trains on the return journey (during the Off-Peak, if this makes any difference). I turn up at Euston in the evening and request an excess fare - how much will this cost?

Excess is to the appropriate fare, which is the Route Any Permitted SVR, so the excess is zero.

2. I have a Manchester to London SVR at £70. I wish to travel First Class on the return journey. I turn up at Euston in the evening and request an excess fare - how much will this cost?

Upgrade to the FOR, and as it is a change of class excess, the full difference is payable. The Route Any Permitted FOR is £399, requiring £329 in excess fare, which is more expensive than the FOS, costing £199.50, so the FOS should be issued instead.

3. I have an Anytime Single ticket from Crewe to Stoke, which I bought in advance. On the day, I end up wanting to continue travel to Derby. What excess fare should I pay at the ticket office at Crewe?

Depending on the ticket you require, you just need to pay the difference between that and the price already paid. For example,

Crewe - Stoke-on-Trent
Route Any Permitted
Anytime Day Single
£5.80

If you want to excess it to a day return to Derby,

Crewe - Derby
Route Stoke on Trent
Off-Peak Day Return
£9.30

then just pay the difference, £3.50.

4. I have an Anytime Return ticket from Stoke to Crewe. On the return journey, I end up wanting to continue travel to Derby. What excess fare should I pay at the ticket office at Crewe?

I think I've covered every type of excess now - I hope! :)

I am not going to go this one. I think ALR knows the answer.
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,221
Excesses essentially resemble a minefield. I will give this a go.



Excess is to the appropriate fare, which is the Route Any Permitted SVR, so the excess is zero.



Upgrade to the FOR, and as it is a change of class excess, the full difference is payable. The Route Any Permitted FOR is £399, requiring £329 in excess fare, which is more expensive than the FOS, costing £199.50, so the FOS should be issued instead.



Depending on the ticket you require, you just need to pay the difference between that and the price already paid. For example,

Crewe - Stoke-on-Trent
Route Any Permitted
Anytime Day Single
£5.80

If you want to excess it to a day return to Derby,

Crewe - Derby
Route Stoke on Trent
Off-Peak Day Return
£9.30

then just pay the difference, £3.50.



I am not going to go this one. I think ALR knows the answer.

Well then... :lol: Well done to you and RJ for working these out! (Even though RJ was "wrong" according to The Manual. :|)

It's very interesting, but I still hold to my original point that most of these excesses would be almost impossible to work out without consulting The Manual. And since I can't access The Manual, I find excess fares incredibly confusing!
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,383
Location
Back office
But that is not correct as the NRCoC don't tell you something that The Manual does ... "Charge HALF the difference between the fare paid and the appropriate Return fare for the journey being made" (obtained from a printout given to me by a TOC).

NRE is the definitive source - therefore, you go by what's on there.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The reason why I requested this information was because different staff were charging different amounts: sometimes 100%, sometimes 50% and other times random amounts. At least knowing that I should be charged 50%, I could prompt staff to double check their calculations. After doing this, I was always charged the correct excess fare of 50%.

Are you going by the definitive source, or by some site which doesn't concern you? In case I didn't mention it several times already, The Manual is not a definitive source of information. You might have been charged a lower price as the guard was probably pushing the right buttons, but their machine has the wrong formula in it. The machine I was using was exactly like that. If you've been paying less that what the official amount is supposed to be, why are you making a song and dance about it? Most people would keep quiet, but I suppose it's only fair that nobody should benefit from a technical hitch so well done for flagging it up. Perhaps it should be raised as an issue of urgency?
 

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
The Luton airport parkway bus *does not* accept plusbus (although you can get local services from near the parkway with one). It needs a ticket to Luton Airport.

http://www.plusbus.info/luton-leagrave-plusbus-includes-dunstable

What I meant was, before PlusBus (when the airport bus was free) the three stations had a bus area ticket, the destination was simply '[station name] bus' for example if you went to Luton it was 'Luton bus', and so if you went to Luton Airport Parkway it was an abbreviation of 'Luton Airport Parkway bus', that is what became PlusBus, not the specific bus link to the airport, I apologise if I confused some people.

....I don't understand your latter point. The offer is not somehow "protected" - Virgin can remove it at will. I find that unlikely for the considerable future since it would generate a lot of negative publicity, but if Virgin ever want to alter the details of something mentioned in both The Manual and on the NRE website, they tell ATOC once and both get updated since ATOC manage both resources!

My point was that some people seem to think it should be advertised as it is part of the railcard conditions, but it is not, it is an easement, if it was part of the conditions it would have to be advertised in the relevant literature.

Provide an example of the excess fare you need and the circumstances in which you require it and we'll have a look at what the NRCoC has to say about it.

I was going to suggest conditions 10, 12, 13, 16 and 18 may be useful. Although the latter does seem to assume that you haven't made the effort to change them before travelling.

But that is not correct as the NRCoC don't tell you something that The Manual does ... "Charge HALF the difference between the fare paid and the appropriate Return fare for the journey being made" (obtained from a printout given to me by a TOC).

Then it will be a pleasant surprise when you do change them.:roll::lol:
 

Brucey

Member
Joined
7 Jan 2010
Messages
671
Are you going by the definitive source, or by some site which doesn't concern you? In case I didn't mention it several times already, The Manual is not a definitive source of information. You might have been charged a lower price as the guard was probably pushing the right buttons, but their machine has the wrong formula in it. The machine I was using was exactly like that. If you've been paying less that what the official amount is supposed to be, why are you making a song and dance about it? Most people would keep quiet, but I suppose it's only fair that nobody should benefit from a technical hitch so well done for flagging it up. Perhaps it should be raised as an issue of urgency?

50% of the difference is what The Manual said. I was being charged various amounts between 50% and 100%, so was never undercharged. Also, this was at a ticket office.

If The Manual isn't correct, why do ATOC bother having it?
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,383
Location
Back office
Then it will be a pleasant surprise when you do change them.:roll::lol:

I used to charge whatever the machine came up with. If someone wanted a change of route excess, it would incorrectly charge 50% of the difference. I'd leave it like that, would rather do that than select an inappropriate excess that charged the correct price.

However, as we have the like of Brucey and co on this forum moaning about being charged 50% of the correct price, perhaps it may be worth informing ATOC and getting ATOS/Tribute to have it corrected during the next housekeeping session. That should keep the pedants happy then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
50% of the difference is what The Manual said. I was being charged various amounts between 50% and 100%, so was never undercharged. Also, this was at a ticket office.

If The Manual isn't correct, why do ATOC bother having it?

Whatever is in internal documents is of no concern to you and all staff worth their salt are aware that The Manual has its limitations. At the end of the day, a definitive public source of information cannot be argued with. Therefore, being charged anything less than the full difference is being undercharged.

What is it with people on here finding it impossible to grasp the fact that The Manual is not definitive?
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
The Manual will be made public one day, and if that upsets a few people then I am sure they will get over it. Besides, you can always get access to the important bits by sending an FOI to East Coast ;) I think that the more All Line Rover says it should happen, the more some people don't want it to happen.

I agree that if The Manual says something that is perhaps considered too lenient, we should not fuss about it too much in case it gets withdrawn.

As for change of route excess, it's not crystal clear but you can figure out what they mean from this:
Routeing Guide said:
DUAL ROUTE AVAILABILITY
Where two or more permitted routes are available for a specific journey,
customers may wish to travel out by one route and return by another. If a
higher fare applies for the return leg of the journey the customer should be
issued with a ticket for the more direct route and an excess fare issued to
cover the difference in fare for the return routeing. This option should be
made available to customers who wish to pre-book a dual routed ticket prior
to travel.
(and obviously if it was the full difference, this rule wouldn't exist, as you would just issue the more expensive ticket anyway)
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,383
Location
Back office
The Manual will be made public one day, and if that upsets a few people then I am sure they will get over it. Besides, you can always get access to the important bits by sending an FOI to East Coast ;) I think that the more All Line Rover says it should happen, the more some people don't want it to happen.

I agree that if The Manual says something that is perhaps considered too lenient, we should not fuss about it too much in case it gets withdrawn.

As for change of route excess, it's not crystal clear but you can figure out what they mean from this:

I doubt anyone is in the slightest bit bothered about it being free for all to access.

I just don't understand why people on here are unable to grasp the fact that it's not a definitive source of information despite it having been mentioned several times. NRE is, but people on here choose to ignore that fact when it suits them.
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,221
I doubt anyone is in the slightest bit bothered about it being free for all to access.

I just don't understand why people on here are unable to grasp the fact that it's not a definitive source of information despite it having been mentioned several times. NRE is, but people on here choose to ignore that fact when it suits them.

Yes, and as I have been saying numerous times, NRE is a definitive source of information but it doesn't contain as much information as The Manual. What harm can come from having both available? Most of the public use NRE, but a few use The Manual when they want more detailed information. Just like most of the public use Journey Planners, but a few use the Routeing Guide when they want more detailed information. What's difficult to grasp about that?
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,383
Location
Back office
Clearly you don't even know what it is you're wishing to access. It has just been demonstrated that there is erroneous, out of date information in there. What's the point in releasing something to the public which is not accurate? It's fine for staff use as staff use it in conjunction with the correct materials that has been issued to them.

Seems to be little more than the pursuit of the taboo - "I want it because I can't have it"
 

barrykas

Established Member
Joined
19 Sep 2006
Messages
1,579
NB: The following excesses have been calculated in accordance with the instructions in The Manual. I make no claims as to whether they're what you'd actually be charged or not, as not all Ticket Issuing Systems implement the rules in the same way, and I suspect that most don't apply the "correct" rules for First Class upgrades.

All Line Rover said:
1. I have a Manchester to London "route Chesterfield" SOR at £196. I wish to travel with Virgin Trains on the return journey (during the Off-Peak, if this makes any difference). I turn up at Euston in the evening and request an excess fare - how much will this cost?

Short answer: It depends. But potentially either £0.00 or £41.50.

Longer answer: If your outward journey was made at a time when you would have needed an Anytime Return to travel, it'd be HALF the difference between the two SORs, on the basis that the excess rules refer to the appropriate fare for the journey now being made. That would be half of £279.00 - £196.00, or £41.50.

If you made your outward journey at a time when the Off-Peak or Super Off-Peak was valid, it'd be a zero fare excess, or possibly suggesting purchasing a new Single for £69.00 and seeking a refund for the original ticket.

All Line Rover said:
2. I have a Manchester to London SVR at £70. I wish to travel First Class on the return journey. I turn up at Euston in the evening and request an excess fare - how much will this cost?

If it's a weekend, £15, payable on board and subject to space being available. ;)

On a weekday, £198.50 (being the difference between the sum of the Off-Peak Single and First Anyitme Single and the fare already paid).

All Line Rover said:
3. I have an Anytime Single ticket from Crewe to Stoke, which I bought in advance. On the day, I end up wanting to continue travel to Derby. What excess fare should I pay at the ticket office at Crewe?

Short Answer: Depends on when you're travelling.

If it's at a time when Off-Peak Day tickets are valid (in this case, that's from 08:30), the difference between the price already paid (£5.80) and the price of an Off-Peak Day Single for the through journey (£9.20), i.e. £3.40.

If it's at a time when Off-Peak Day tickets AREN'T, then it'd be £9.40 for an Anytime Day Single from Stoke-on-Trent to Derby providing the train stops at Stoke-on-Trent. (Thus complying with Condition 19(a) of the NRCoC).

If getting a train that doesn't stop at Stoke-on-Trent, it'd be the difference between the Anytime Single from Crewe to Derby (£18.00) and the price already paid, i.e. £12.20.

All Line Rover said:
4. I have an Anytime Return ticket from Stoke to Crewe. On the return journey, I end up wanting to continue travel to Derby. What excess fare should I pay at the ticket office at Crewe?

As with the previous example, either the full difference in fares or a new Single (providing you comply with Condition 19).

If the outward journey was made at a time when the Off-Peak Day Return would have been valid (i.e. a train that would have left Derby after 08:30), then it'd be the difference between the the Off-Peak Day Return from Derby to Crewe (£9.30) and the price already paid (£6.90), i.e. £2.40.

If, however, it was at a time when the Off-Peak Day Return wouldn't have been valid, it would be £7.70 for an Off-Peak Day Single from Stoke-on-Trent to Derby providing the train stops at Stoke-on-Trent. (Thus complying with Condition 19(a) of the NRCoC).

If getting a train that doesn't stop at Stoke-on-Trent, it'd be the difference between the Anytime Return from Derby to Crewe (£22.00) and the price already paid, i.e. £15.10.

Cheers,

Barry
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,221
Clearly you don't even know what it is you're wishing to access. It has just been demonstrated that there is erroneous, out of date information in there. What's the point in releasing something to the public which is not accurate? It's fine for staff use as staff use it in conjunction with the correct materials that has been issued to them.

Seems to be little more than the pursuit of the taboo - "I want it because I can't have it"

Two words - ROUTEING and GUIDE :lol:

No erroneous data?
No out of date information?
What's the point of releasing something to the public that is not accurate?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Short answer....

Cheers,

Barry

Thanks. :) ;)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Seems to be little more than the pursuit of the taboo - "I want it because I can't have it"

I'll reverse that question: "You can't have it because...."

?

  • "It's a staff resource" - the RG is a "staff resource"
  • "It would just confuse people" - what about the RG?
  • "Nobody would use it" - why do people use the RG?
  • "All the information is available on NRE" - are you sure?
  • "You don't need access to it" - it contains information that is relevant to the public. Taking that approach, why do I need access to the RG?
  • etc., etc.
 
Last edited:

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,753
Location
Essex
Two words - ROUTEING and GUIDE :lol:

No erroneous data?
No out of date information?
What's the point of releasing something to the public that is not accurate?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

So? Just because there is one inaccurate document out there doesn't mean we should add more!
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,221
So? Just because there is one inaccurate document out there doesn't mean we should add more!

The RG is inaccurate, but is it useless? Are you saying that you would prefer the public not to have access to the RG? We are certainly "enlightened" by having access to such a resource.
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,753
Location
Essex
The RG is inaccurate, but is it useless? Are you saying that you would prefer the public not to have access to the RG? We are certainly "enlightened" by having access to such a resource.

That is most certainly not what I am saying, and you know it. I am saying that it is only going to be counter productive if you release more inaccurate information into what is already an unclear field.
 

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
....I'll reverse that question: "You can't have it because...."

?

  • "It's a staff resource" - the RG is a "staff resource"
  • "It would just confuse people" - what about the RG?
  • "Nobody would use it" - why do people use the RG?
  • "All the information is available on NRE" - are you sure?
  • "You don't need access to it" - it contains information that is relevant to the public. Taking that approach, why do I need access to the RG?
  • etc., etc.

  • The routeing guide is part of the contract with the TOC, so I'd say it isn't entirely a staff resource.
  • If you got rid of section F, I don't think it would confuse many.
  • Most people don't use the RG, they use NRES, or thewearecheaperthanbuyingonthedayticketsellingsite.com, or similar
  • The vast majority (if not all) of information needed can be found in the public domain. Indeed it is a part of the contract (NRCoC) that the relevant information, or details on where to find it, is provided at the time of sale.
  • See the first point about the RG, but in fairness, you don't really need to see the manual. What little information might not be directly available could be put on NRES if it came to it.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
Clearly you don't even know what it is you're wishing to access. It has just been demonstrated that there is erroneous, out of date information in there. What's the point in releasing something to the public which is not accurate? It's fine for staff use as staff use it in conjunction with the correct materials that has been issued to them.

Seems to be little more than the pursuit of the taboo - "I want it because I can't have it"

If it is that erroneous and out of date, then why on earth are staff using it anyway? No wonder why we get posts on here complaining about members of staff if they are being given wrong and out of date guidelines.
 

mallard

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2009
Messages
1,304
The fact is that there exists a set of rules that differ from those publicly available and that these rules are enforced and applied by staff.

Whether these rules are officially "definitive" is utterly and completely irrelevant, the fact is that they are applied.

Any rules that are applied to the products bought by the public should be publicly available. This is a legal requirement (except, apparently, in the railways).

Whether this problem is solved by withdrawing the manual and updating NRE or by releasing the manual to the public doesn't really bother me, but one of these must happen. You simply cannot tell the staff one thing and the public something different.
 

bnm

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2009
Messages
4,996
Some stuff like Rail/Bus Links and Shipping Links in The Manual that should be in the public domain on the internet, but isn't or is very difficult to find. Suggesting a call to NRE or a TOC for this info is a waste of time as well. I know from experience that trying to get accurate information about bus and shipping links is nigh on impossible from the usual channels.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
You simply cannot tell the staff one thing and the public something different.
Agreed. However it's part of the culture, and changing that is very difficult.

For example, there used to be a hidden rule that the outward portion of a Standard Open Return (SOR) or First Open Return (FOR) was only valid with an unstamped Return Portion, and this was enforced when using the outward ticket on any day after the first day of validity. (I found this out long before I knew of the existence of The Manual; I was given some of these as a teenager, the GNER guard - one of the infamous Newcastle-based ones - refused to believe I could be using such an expensive ticket, and demanded to see the return portion - feeling confident he would be able to catch me out - he seemed very disappointed when handed an unused return portion.)

When "Simplification" occurred, this hidden rule became public, but not only applied to SOR/FOR tickets, but all return tickets! Quite how they were allowed to get away with that I do not know, but the TOCs are always looking to erode our rights where they think they can get away with it (fortunately they realise that sometimes they can't get away with it).

But, worse than that, The Manual has a secret condition that tells guards to refuse to accept return portions of tickets if the outward portion could not have been used. Yet, as far as various fares experts can determine, there are no rules at all to prevent a customer at, say, York, travelling one-way to Peterborough on the 0700 train, to buy a return from Peterborough-York, throw away the outward portion and just use the return. That's valid, yet there is a hidden rule that tells guards it's not. This is utterly absurd. Yet some people want to keep this information hidden from us. They have the right to those opinions, but I oppose their opinions; we'll have to agree to disagree!

If ATOC want The Manual to remain hidden then they must ensure that all relevant information is in the public domain and ensure that secret instructions to guards, that apparently give them the supposed right to withdraw valid tickets, be completely and utterly abolished. I have absolutely no confidence in ATOC doing this, but if the DfT make them comply, then they will have to, whether they want to or not.
 

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,221
  • If you got rid of section F, I don't think it [The Routeing Guide] would confuse many.

Is that a serious question?

Next time you travel, give a guard a printout of the Routeing Guide (you will need a suitcase to carry it, as well as plenty of printer ink!) and ask him/her to determine the permitted routes for the journey you are making.
 

Old Timer

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Messages
3,703
Location
On a plane somewhere at 35,000
.....When "Simplification" occurred, this hidden rule became public, but not only applied to SOR/FOR tickets, but all return tickets! Quite how they were allowed to get away with that I do not know, but the TOCs are always looking to erode our rights where they think they can get away with it (fortunately they realise that sometimes they can't get away with it).

But, worse than that, The Manual has a secret condition that tells guards to refuse to accept return portions of tickets if the outward portion could not have been used. Yet, as far as various fares experts can determine, there are no rules at all to prevent a customer at, say, York, travelling one-way to Peterborough on the 0700 train, to buy a return from Peterborough-York, throw away the outward portion and just use the return. That's valid, yet there is a hidden rule that tells guards it's not. This is utterly absurd. Yet some people want to keep this information hidden from us. They have the right to those opinions, but I oppose their opinions; we'll have to agree to disagree!.....
Yorkie
Let me give you a fiddle as old as time.

Travel without getting your outward ticket stamped or cancelled and then next time you travel use that and only pay for one way. Better still as long as the outward is valid then keep using it. This is one of the reasons that BR went to day of issue validity in many cases.

Another example that isvalid is the case of a Milton Keynes Central to New St ticket. This is cheaper (certainly was last time I had any dealings) than the corresponding reverse journey. So a again a fiddle is to buy the ticket and use only the return portion for the outward journey. THAT is yet another example of why the rule is there and I can see no hardship for that being the case.

Because tickets are priced selectively for flows this situation can arise. Again it is a potential source of abuse and loss of revenue to the Railway. Until there is a cast iron means of preventing fare evasion, then it is necessary to put up with such things. You cannot achieve a perfect world out there but I sometimes feel that you neglect to think about the other side of the argument. I think I know you well enough to say that without you taking offence.
 

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
Is that a serious question?

Next time you travel, give a guard a printout of the Routeing Guide (you will need a suitcase to carry it, as well as plenty of printer ink!) and ask him/her to determine the permitted routes for the journey you are making.

If it was a question, it would have a question mark at the end;)

If you read Section F and compared it to the instructions and other parts of the RG you would see how many errors, anomalies and unwritten rules in contains.
 

Smethwickian

Member
Joined
9 Feb 2011
Messages
666
Location
Errr, Smethwick!
Some stuff like Rail/Bus Links and Shipping Links in The Manual that should be in the public domain on the internet, but isn't or is very difficult to find. Suggesting a call to NRE or a TOC for this info is a waste of time as well. I know from experience that trying to get accurate information about bus and shipping links is nigh on impossible from the usual channels.

Spot on.

The old printed Rail-Links manual contained all the information about routes, validities, operators, etc., which is now virtully impossible to ascertain. Only some information is buried away in obscure corners of the NRE website or those of individual TOCs.

And have you tried typing in 'Bridgnorth SVR' or 'Buckingham rte MK Bus' or similar into the NRE journey planner? It DOES NOT WORK.

If ATOC/Rail Settlement Plan had no problem selling the old fares manuals including Rail-Links, and still sells the fares CD-ROM, why not make the full Manual information available? It contained a proviso that it was intended mainly as a staff resource but was available to the public on condition that the passenger should be aware that any local or over-riding updates might apply.

It wasn't full of top-secret codes or anything - just useful info which explained fully how add-on fares, shipping fare zones, inclusive tickets etc. actually worked.
 

barrykas

Established Member
Joined
19 Sep 2006
Messages
1,579
If ATOC/Rail Settlement Plan had no problem selling the old fares manuals including Rail-Links, and still sells the fares CD-ROM, why not make the full Manual information available? It contained a proviso that it was intended mainly as a staff resource but was available to the public on condition that the passenger should be aware that any local or over-riding updates might apply.

It wasn't full of top-secret codes or anything - just useful info which explained fully how add-on fares, shipping fare zones, inclusive tickets etc. actually worked.

Except The Manual combines the information from the Fares Manuals, Retail Manual/Rail Directory for Travel Agents and Ticket Examiners Hanbook, and thus DOES contain information that would be regarded as commercially sensitive, such as the sections on Payment (which includes credit/debit/charge card floor limits), Revenue Protection and contact details for TOC Pricing Managers.

Also, parts of The Manual (except the fares) are updated on a weekly basis, so an "offline" copy would be outdated within a week of it being issued.

Cheers,

Barry
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,659
Travel without getting your outward ticket stamped or cancelled and then next time you travel use that and only pay for one way. Better still as long as the outward is valid then keep using it. This is one of the reasons that BR went to day of issue validity in many cases.

Another example that isvalid is the case of a Milton Keynes Central to New St ticket. This is cheaper (certainly was last time I had any dealings) than the corresponding reverse journey. So a again a fiddle is to buy the ticket and use only the return portion for the outward journey. THAT is yet another example of why the rule is there and I can see no hardship for that being the case.

Because tickets are priced selectively for flows this situation can arise. Again it is a potential source of abuse and loss of revenue to the Railway. Until there is a cast iron means of preventing fare evasion, then it is necessary to put up with such things. You cannot achieve a perfect world out there but I sometimes feel that you neglect to think about the other side of the argument. I think I know you well enough to say that without you taking offence.

I don't think that Yorkie's post states that these regulations shouldn't exist - for the reasons you suggest - but that if they do then they need to be made fully public, in order that people can follow them.

--
FWIW I agree with the basic principle that NRES should be the definitive source, should be fully updated, and that The Manual should be kept private. However, if the two contradict each other and if even only the occasional staff member believes that what The Manual tells them trumps what the passenger is told by NRES then there is a problem. One way of solving this to make The Manual public; there are better ways, but it is one solution.
 

thedbdiboy

Member
Joined
10 Sep 2011
Messages
955
Just to confirm that there is a plan to publish the Manual. The only reason that it has not happened immediately is that the opporunity is being taken to review the contents, updating them where necessary. The Manual is populated by individual TOCs and by different ATOC departments, so (like Wikipedia) there are issues with consistency and quality that are being adressed as part of this. Also some parts will not be published for very good reasons (e.g. things that tell staff how to deal with irregular travel).
There is a recognised issue in the industry with the number of different systems and sources of information and the fact that they can contradict each other. There is a project to rationalise the multiple systems (which have grown up during and after the BR years as various individual manuals where converted to electronic format and then combined); and in parallel to ensure that the information they use is from common and reliable sources. One of the reasons for contradictory information is often where there is a technical validity description which some well-meaning person translates into plain English but accidentally changes the meaning of! The objective over the next couple of years is to go through all this data and basically to ensure that the source data is comprehensible and written to a high standard - this ought to prevent the above scenario. It will also mean that NRES and retail systems are powered form the same source (this is not currently the case for all of NRE's data feeds).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top