The outgoing SWT franchise agreement states:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...6360/RED_SSWT_Franchise_Agreement__x___1_.pdf
13.6 The Franchisee shall, subject to and in accordance with the Ticketing and Settlement
Agreement, introduce ‘megatrain.com’ Fares on the following Flows by 31 December 2007:
I presume that the EMT agreement has similar language.
It seems clear, from the TSA:
“Fare” means the right, exercisable against one or more Operators (and, where applicable, another
person or persons), subject to the Rights and Restrictions applicable to it and the payment of the
relevant Price (less any applicable discounts):-
(a) to make one or more journeys on the Network (whether or not together with other
rights); or
(b) to carry on such a journey an item of luggage or an animal, where this right does not
arise (except on the payment of a fee) under the National Rail Conditions of Carriage or, as
the case may be, the CIV Rules or any additional conditions that are applicable,
and from basic principles of contract law, that:
1) the contractual agreement for travel is directly with the TOC, with 'Megabus', insofar as it even legally exists as an entity, acting as the TOCs agent, rather than the contray;
2) these are rail tickets for rail journeys, not bus journeys; and
3) that the NRCoC (as it then was, now of course NRCoT) applies to them.
I don't think franchised TOCs can pick and choose which bits of the NRCoT to apply based on whether they like them or not. I therefore suggest that the denial of the minimum compensation standards (and the excess fare provisions) set forth in the NRCoT is legally doubtful, albeit that the TOCs know perfectly know that no sane people is going to sue over a debt of £1, or even £3.
