Permitted Route Falkirk to Glasgow

[Butts]

On my outward journey I sometimes travel from FKG to Polmont and catch the train to Glasgow from there (it's far quicker and more frequent than from FKG)

Conversely on the return I travel pass Falkirk High to Polmont and catch a train back to FKG (same route in reverse)

I don't go from Falkirk High as it is a twenty minute walk from my house whereas Grahamstown is five minutes.

The ticket says Falkirk Stations to Glasgow Cen/Queen Street

 

[Paul Kelly]

No, that's not a permitted route. I don't think it is allowed by the routeing guide anyway, but there is a specific easement preventing it:

Customers travelling from Glasgow Queen Street to Camelon and Falkirk
Grahamston may not travel via Polmont. This easement applies in both
directions.

Presumably this is for the benefit of journey planners that would be tempted to offer the journey via Polmont because of its quickness/convenience.

As far as I can see you would need two separate return tickets: Falkirk Stations to Polmont and Polmont to Glasgow Central/Queen Street. A season ticket from Polmont to Glasgow would also cover the whole journey.

 

[Butts]

No, that's not a permitted route. I don't think it is allowed by the routeing guide anyway, but there is a specific easement preventing it:

Presumably this is for the benefit of journey planners that would be tempted to offer the journey via Polmont because of its quickness/convenience.

As far as I can see you would need two separate return tickets: Falkirk Stations to Polmont and Polmont to Glasgow Central/Queen Street. A season ticket from Polmont to Glasgow would also cover the whole journey.

Well I'm not disagreeing with you but when I booked my ticket on the East Coast Website the instruction was to join a train at FKG travel to Polmont and connect to the Glasgow train there. Could it be because it was 1st Class Anytime Day Single and services from FKG to Glasgow are 2nd Class Only (timetabled)

 

[Paul Kelly]

Probably because the East Coast booking engine is based on WebTIS from Atos, well-known purveyors of shoddy software (it seems to have a few problems with applying the routeing guide correctly at the minute). If you look on nationalrail.co.uk it will correctly show that you need to buy two separate tickets to make the journey via Polmont.

If you buy your tickets from East Coast and bring your printed itinerary, I should expect that you would be allowed to travel that way though.

 

[yorkie]

I will repeat my advice of a few days ago:

It is not uncommon for tickets that are not intended to be valid (at a particular time, and/or via a particular route) to be shown as valid on the online booking engines. This is for a variety of reasons. There are two main choices in these cases:

1. Argue that because it is shown as valid online, the ticket should be valid when purchased from a ticket office (which I'd agree with) BUT you run a very high risk of the ticket being withdrawn and/or being refused travel as per the online itinerary (as a contract was not formed at that point)
2. Booking online, obtain reservations (where available) and/or bring a printed itinerary from the website. That makes the tickets valid by the itinerary agreed by both parties as per the contract.

Personally I go for option 2 every time.

(add Option 3 which is not recommended either: Post details of the anomaly so it can be closed!! D'oh!)

 

[Butts]

I will repeat my advice of a few days ago:



(add Option 3 which is not recommended either: Post details of the anomaly so it can be closed!! D'oh!)

Thanks for that, might I just add my ticket was checked on all four trains with no adverse comments made...

Check 1 FKG to Polmont
Check 2 Polmont to Glasgow
Check 3 Glasgow to Polmont
Check 4 Polmont to FKG

 

[ainsworth74]

Thanks for that, might I just add my ticket was checked on all four trains with no adverse comments made...

Probably because it's not an outrageous route to use. Most staff are probably not aware of what the routing guide has to say on the matter (if they are even aware of its existence!) so if it seems reasonable they're going to allow it.

 

[jopsuk]

so, you save your self, erm, approximnately no time but do save yourself a bit of walking

Journey time from Grahamston to Queen Street, seemingly direct, via Polmont or via Larbert (also suggested by the EC journey planner) comes out at around forty minutes. High-Queen Street is around twenty five minutes. So if it takes fifteen minutes longer to walk to High than Grahamston, you save yourself around 0 minutes but get less exercise :P

On the other hand, if you are able to go via Polmont without hassle despite it apparently being explictly banned, I'd suggest that when you get to Grahamston you always get the very first train that turns up, regardless of which direction it is leaving the station, unless it is the Highland Chieftain (or sleeper, though this is less likely to be relvant) as regardless of which route it goes, it'll get you to Glasgow first.

 

[yorkie]

Thanks for that, might I just add my ticket was checked on all four trains with no adverse comments made...

Check 1 FKG to Polmont
Check 2 Polmont to Glasgow
Check 3 Glasgow to Polmont
Check 4 Polmont to FKG

• If it's deemed reasonable (by the ticket inspector; not you or us!) then you will be allowed travel (regardless of negative easements!)
• If you hold reservations (where available) then you will be allowed travel
• If you are on non-reserveable trains but have an itinerary which you are complying with then you will be allowed travel

It is not that uncommon for passengers to hold reservations for routes that are not permitted routes and/or unreasonable routes, especially when using a website powered by WebTIS, who in this case live up to their claim that they offer "best-value pricing to rail passengers" however in some cases they do not live up to their claim as they charge passengers walking between Bicester stations approximately £12 to make a walk.

My advice is to shop around for the best deal. Some websites are cheaper, or offer more attractive itineraries, than others for certain journeys, but are worse for other journeys. This freedom to choose is better for customers than the dark ages of only having Thetrainline and no-one else (after Qjump was bought out but before WebTIS and the others came along).

 

[Butts]

Probably because it's not an outrageous route to use. Most staff are probably not aware of what the routing guide has to say on the matter (if they are even aware of its existence!) so if it seems reasonable they're going to allow it.

I like your style "if they are even aware of it's existence"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

so, you save your self, erm, approximnately no time but do save yourself a bit of walking

Journey time from Grahamston to Queen Street, seemingly direct, via Polmont or via Larbert (also suggested by the EC journey planner) comes out at around forty minutes. High-Queen Street is around twenty five minutes. So if it takes fifteen minutes longer to walk to High than Grahamston, you save yourself around 0 minutes but get less exercise :P

On the other hand, if you are able to go via Polmont without hassle despite it apparently being explictly banned, I'd suggest that when you get to Grahamston you always get the very first train that turns up, regardless of which direction it is leaving the station, unless it is the Highland Chieftain (or sleeper, though this is less likely to be relvant) as regardless of which route it goes, it'll get you to Glasgow first.

Have you seen the weather up here .....plus no 1st Class in the morning a 1st Single is £10 ..2nd £7 so its a no brainer (free Scotsman as well to read) while you are actually sitting down !!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

• If it's deemed reasonable (by the ticket inspector; not you or us!) then you will be allowed travel (regardless of negative easements!)
• If you hold reservations (where available) then you will be allowed travel
• If you are on non-reserveable trains but have an itinerary which you are complying with then you will be allowed travel

It is not that uncommon for passengers to hold reservations for routes that are not permitted routes and/or unreasonable routes, especially when using a website powered by WebTIS, who in this case live up to their claim that they offer "best-value pricing to rail passengers" however in some cases they do not live up to their claim as they charge passengers walking between Bicester stations approximately £12 to make a walk.

My advice is to shop around for the best deal. Some websites are cheaper, or offer more attractive itineraries, than others for certain journeys, but are worse for other journeys. This freedom to choose is better for customers than the dark ages of only having Thetrainline and no-one else (after Qjump was bought out but before WebTIS and the others came along).

Thanks for the heads up - in this respect my new name is "Zippy" keep quiet Butts Q Jump thats a blast from the past.

 

[reb0118]

Thanks for that, might I just add my ticket was checked on all four trains with no adverse comments made...

Check 1 FKG to Polmont
Check 2 Polmont to Glasgow
Check 3 Glasgow to Polmont
Check 4 Polmont to FKG

Not by me then ching ching

To be fare the booking office at FKG advise this, and online planners show this, not forgetting our avantix (ATOS again!) offer via PMT as an option.

I tend to let this go because of the above but also because there is not a great difference in fare. I may make a comment about the BO dishing out duff advice though.

OK we now know it's not valid - but does the forum think via PMT is reasonable

 

[yorkie]

I'd say it is quite reasonable, but the best solution (which won't happen!) is for there to be a 'Route Polmont' fare, priced the same as Polmont. That then gives people the option.

 

[jopsuk]

Have you seen the weather up here .....plus no 1st Class in the morning a 1st Single is £10 ..2nd £7 so its a no brainer (free Scotsman as well to read) while you are actually sitting down !!!

You make a good point about the weather- and there is of course no 1st class on the via Cumbernauld or change at Larbert routes at all.

 

[reb0118]

Just an aside with regard to reasonableness - I can see that it reasonable for the outward journey as it it a fair climb from FKG to FKK and as the OP seems to be a heavy smoker () (from his avatar?) & we don't want to induce a heart attack on the High Station Road!! (tongue firmly in cheek)

However on the return it is downhill all the way so no excuses - even if it was snowing! (remember as a 1st class pax you can borrow the station sledge)

 

[route:oxford]

You make a good point about the weather- and there is of course no 1st class on the via Cumbernauld or change at Larbert routes at all.

Although, I'm sure some services conveying first class accommodation call at Larbert en-route to and from Glasgow.

 

[Butts]

Just an aside with regard to reasonableness - I can see that it reasonable for the outward journey as it it a fair climb from FKG to FKK and as the OP seems to be a heavy smoker () (from his avatar?) & we don't want to induce a heart attack on the High Station Road!! (tongue firmly in cheek)

However on the return it is downhill all the way so no excuses - even if it was snowing! (remember as a 1st class pax you can borrow the station sledge)

As you can smoke on three of the four platforms while waiting for trains this is not a big issue really. They used to run a bus direct from High into town but it didn't last long (always empty when I used it)

 

[PaulLothian]

Various references to travel via Larbert in this thread, which have confused me. While routing engines say it is OK to travel Edinburgh - Glasgow via Larbert (and for same fare as direct services), easement 300209 states: "Customers travelling between Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh may not travel via Larbert. This easement applies in both directions"

I know that station staff may occasionally suggest the Larbert change late at night (my son has got home from music gigs that way), so what is the standing of the easement?

 

[jopsuk]

Searching Larbert-Perth (so as to remove all the Glasgow to Stirling, Dunblane and Alloa services which don't have 1st class) there's two Northbound and one Southbound that I can see that have 1st (there's even a Standard-only service all the way to Carnoustie as far as I can tell- EC booking site)

 

[John @ home]

"Customers travelling between Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh may not travel via Larbert. This easement applies in both directions" ...

what is the standing of the easement?

The OP is not travelling between Glasgow and Edinburgh, but between Falkirk and Glasgow, so my view is that the Easement does not apply to this journey.

A quick check suggests Falkirk Grahamston - Larbert - Glasgow Queen St is only 2 miles longer than the shortest route. If so, it is a Permitted Route.

 

[PaulLothian]

The OP is not travelling between Glasgow and Edinburgh, but between Falkirk and Edinburgh, so my view is that the Easement does not apply to this journey.

A quick check suggests Falkirk Grahamston - Larbert - Glasgow Queen St is only 2 miles longer than the shortest route. If so, it is a Permitted Route.

Sorry, my post was (in every sense) a diversion from the OP's issue, being more of a related enquiry.

To pick up on your point, why would there be an easement preventing use of a Permitted Route?

 

[Butts]

The OP is not travelling between Glasgow and Edinburgh, but between Falkirk and Edinburgh, so my view is that the Easement does not apply to this journey.

A quick check suggests Falkirk Grahamston - Larbert - Glasgow Queen St is only 2 miles longer than the shortest route. If so, it is a Permitted Route.

I'm actually travelling between Falkirk Grahamstown and Glasgow in the example.

 

[John @ home]

I'm actually travelling between Falkirk Grahamstown and Glasgow in the example.

Agreed. I have corrected my earlier post.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

why would there be an easement preventing use of a Permitted Route?

This is a significant issue. I will start another thread to answer it rather than divert this thread even further.