Meanwhile, in the real world... I don't want to spend hours waiting to buy a ticket while the booking office staff explain every restriction to every passenger in front of me in the queue.
-
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!
Open Return Ticket Refused? Ordered to pay again.
- Thread starter GhibliFan
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
EssexGonzo
Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2012
- Messages
- 636
Excellent suggestion.
And if the recording is not declared, ask them to look again and notify them of your intention to inform the Information Commissioner's office if they don't look hard enough. Presumably the phone upon which your voice recording resides can be identified from the ticket data which will trace back to the guard and his phone.
And if the recording is not declared, ask them to look again and notify them of your intention to inform the Information Commissioner's office if they don't look hard enough. Presumably the phone upon which your voice recording resides can be identified from the ticket data which will trace back to the guard and his phone.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
They don't have to explain everything. They have to at least tell you that restrictions apply, however, and, if you ask, either detail the restrictions or tell you where those restrictions are detailed.
The 'real world' already is that only those restrictions which the passenger is informed of, or is given the chance to inform themselves of, can be enforced.
Booking offices in general seem to manage just fine telling passengers that Advance tickets are valid on the booked trains only; how difficult would it be to create an additonal field in the ticketing database of which walkup tickets have BoJ restrictions, and then to tell passengers that?
Oh wait, this is the rail industry. Even that is "too complex".
That's what I thought initially, though the screenshots earlier in the thread show that TfW uses the term Open Return on its website
The irony!
Unfortunately this argument falls down because if the customer is not advised of a break of journey restriction when they buy the ticket, the default position is that there is no such restriction!
So train companies are welcome to not mention anything about a break of journey restriction, but that simply means there isn't one!
Not only that, but if anyone was found to be breaking their journey when not permitted, the correct action is actually to issue an excess fare of the difference.
That's ironic given your judgement is among the most clouded of anyone's I've seen.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
I'm not proposing anything. These are the basic tenets of contract law, and they have existed for at least as long as the railway has.
There is no legislation required. It is a basic principle of contract law that only those conditions the non-drafting party is given the opportunity to acquaint themselves with, or those which are implied, can be enforced.
Break of journey restrictions cannot be an implied term and so the passenger must be given one way or another of informing himself of the conditions before he is bound by them.
It's like being sold an internet package without having the opportunity to see or agree to any terms, and then being expected to pay for data usage beyond a cap you weren't told about. It's a totally ludicrous suggestion to think that the railway is exempt from the same rules as everyone else.
The reality is that they are only exempt from having the rules enforced proactively as strong as everyone else, since the TOCs are government sanctioned operators.
Absolutely right. In any event there is both UK and EU legislation against unfair terms and conditions of contract. There is also binding precedent, from the highest Courts in both UK and the EU, that one party to a contract cannot unilaterally change its terms without offering the other party the ability to leave the contract at no cost to them. I suggest that some of the rail industry apologists do some basic research.
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
What, you mean like "unlimited doesn't mean unlimited" as many companies sold and still do sell? An "unlimited broadband package" with a 20GB "fair use policy" is a 20GB capped broadband package - yet they have been allowed to get away with this blatent fraud.
No, it wouldn't be fraud (unless they attempt to charge overage fees). And in any case, very few ISPs have them these days (at least the last four or five years) and where traffic management policies are in place, ISPs are required to clearly state them in a standard format.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
It is misleading, but at least you have every opportunity to acquaint yourself with the fair use policy, as it will be spelled out in the terms before you sign the contract. Not so when buying tickets, you will almost never be told the NRCoT apply when buying from a TVM or a ticket office (let alone from a guard), and even less so the restrictions on the ticket including the time of validity and any BoJ restrictions.
Any TVM I’ve used has signage or stickers attached stating that the NRCoT apply and giving the URL of their location. I checked a couple of (Southeastern) booking offices and the same applied. It suffices to make the passenger aware of the conditions; you do not have to print them in large print and wave them in his/her face.
However, in the present case there are a range of official, semi-official, and unofficial sources saying a range of inconsistent things about the entitlement to break one’s journey on a ticket with the 8A restriction. It is settled law that in a consumer contract any inconsistent terms fall to be interpreted in favour of the consumer, and it inevitably follows that TfW cannot rely on the break of journey restriction in these circumstances and ought to refund the cost of the extra ticket purchased.
I do not however thing that an invalid break of journey was in the conductor’s mind. To me, he was concerned with the reuse of a period return ticket, which had been marked by some previous conductors, and which had prima facie no further validity. The vast, vast majority of passengers use a portion of a ticket to make one continuous journey between the stations written on the ticket. The piecemeal use of a return portion of a ticket on several different days is most unusual. Whilst a passenger is entitled to use his/her ticket as he/she wishes – within the bounds of its validity – it seems to me that a passenger making such an unusual use can smooth his/her passage by proactively asking conductors to mark (for example) “used HFW-SWA 4/11” when intending to break a journey and resume on a later date. How well that would have helped here remains a mystery.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
A few TVMs I've used reference the terms. But there are a great number that don't, and similarly the few times I've seen notices at booking offices, any reference to the NRCoT applying to sales has misleadingly been to the NRCoC, and furthermore it has been in such a small piece of font that it hardly seems possible they could claim it is sufficient to raise the passenger's attention to the fact that the NRCoT apply to the contract. This is important, because the NRCoT place several limitations on the rights of the passenger - e.g. the requirement to call at any splitting stations when using normal tickets - which might not be deemed an implied term per se.
I agree; if they want it to be enforceable from the position of the text of the restriction, they only need add a simple sentence clarifying what portion(s) the restrictions apply to. It's not complex. But obviously they would also have to make sure that all points of sale also informed the passenger of the correct restrictions prior to sale, which is much harder (but still their problem and not the customer's).
Indeed; if one is using a ticket in this way I think it would be a worthwhile step of 'self protection' to ask any member of staff who marks the ticket to clarify where exactly the ticket is used. That way any accusations of reusing an already used ticket will be very difficult to substantiate.
Indeed, I suspect so too. I think there's a lot of conductors out there who don't even know what restriction codes are, let alone how they work or which ones have break of journey restrictions. As you say, it seems much more likely that the conductor saw the existing marks and thought the ticket was being reused, as does happen from time to time.
Wallsendmag
Established Member
The LNER TVMs display the NRCoT under the FAQs
Silverdale
Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2018
- Messages
- 522
My habit is to tell the conductor if I intend using a ticket in anything other than a straight forward way, e.g. by breaking my journey or in combination with a rover or other ticket.
My sense is that there is no specific procedure for marking a ticket to show how it has been used, so that any mark at all can be somewhat ambiguous when looked at later in the journey. I sometimes have to explain again that I broke my journey.
Which is fine, as long as my explanation is believed. If it isn't, what do the various squiggles on the ticket actually prove?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I do think this is something where an electronic system for recording ticket use would be of benefit (in conjunction with e-ticketing, but also applied to paper tickets). Scan the ticket's barcode, then there would be the option to press a button to add a note, be that suspicion of misuse, or simply that the passenger has said they are breaking their journey.
A biro squiggle proves nothing other than that the ticket has been used at some point in some form - I suppose it at least does prevent re-use from the starting station on the ticket, as when starting out the ticket would be completely unmarked. At least the old (expensive, hence their disappearance) stamping machines showed date and train reporting number/headcode so you could vaguely work out what had been done.
A biro squiggle proves nothing other than that the ticket has been used at some point in some form - I suppose it at least does prevent re-use from the starting station on the ticket, as when starting out the ticket would be completely unmarked. At least the old (expensive, hence their disappearance) stamping machines showed date and train reporting number/headcode so you could vaguely work out what had been done.
Silverdale
Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2018
- Messages
- 522
But unless the scanner device modifies the ticket's barcode in some way, how would another scanner at a subsequent point in the journey see the ticket as anything but unused, let alone the special notes?
There would have to be a central database, updated in near real-time.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
By looking it up in a database.
Silverdale
Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2018
- Messages
- 522
But then it becomes a rather large sledgehammer to crack a nut.
A live database of all tickets and their use state, plus the networked scanners to read the barcode and update the database before the tickets get scanned again. It would let someone check the use state of tickets without having to see the tickets themselves, but why would someone need or want to do that?
It seems more intuitive to store the ticket's use state on the ticket itself, but with something more informative than a biro squiggle. A standard form of marking is all that's really required.
A live database of all tickets and their use state, plus the networked scanners to read the barcode and update the database before the tickets get scanned again. It would let someone check the use state of tickets without having to see the tickets themselves, but why would someone need or want to do that?
It seems more intuitive to store the ticket's use state on the ticket itself, but with something more informative than a biro squiggle. A standard form of marking is all that's really required.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Not really, because it allows for e-ticketing without a loss of revenue protection functionality or passenger flexibility over paper ticketing.
gray1404
Established Member
To the OP: I assume by now you have complained to TfW? Let us know what their response is.....
Too complex for me. I want to go to the booking office, buy my ticket and leave. Preferably before my train does. While I have sympathy for the OP's situation if I was planning that kind of complex journey I would try to find out in advance what conditions apply, not rely on NRCoT or consumer law to protect me after the event (useful though that is).
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
Well the TOC can't have it both ways. Not explaining the important conditions of a ticket, or at least referencing that conditions and restrictions apply (for the sake of reducing queueing and 'improved customer service'), and yet also enforcing these conditions or restrictions.
Here's the exact wording from the NRCoT:
If you're buying your ticket from a station with an open staffed ticket office, in theory you should be able to ask the clerk to look up any specific restrictions in their TIS for you. The onus is on you to ask though. I believe that this satisfies the requirement.
However if there is no staffed ticket office, then I believe that the TOCs are not complying with s. 2.3. All the TVMs that I have used only advise that the NRCoT applies and where to access it online. If you're lucky they will also display a summarised version of the restrictions. I've just had a look at my local Southern S&B TVM (picture attached), and it only mentions http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/tickets/ , which is a page describing ticket validity in general terms. The QR code goes to the same place.
You can't look up the full restrictions on NRE without knowing the restriction code, which the TVM doesn't tell you. If you're lucky, the ticket will have nationalrail.co.uk/XX printed on it, where you can look up restriction code XX that applies to your ticket, but you only get this information after you purchase the ticket, not when purchasing the ticket. The TOCs could easily solve this by making the URL and QR code displayed be the URL to the actual restrictions of the ticket, which the TVM clearly knows as it prints it on the ticket! NRE could also add a link to this page in the ticket restrictions summary by each ticket in the itineraries that the journey planner generates. That would be enough to satisfy me.
As to the OP's original problem. Whenever I break my journey, after each time I've used the ticket, on the back I write the date and the stations I've travelled between. I don't believe this really classes as tampering with the ticket and thus violating s. 4.7, as the whole front of the ticket is unaltered. I hope that if there is ever an accusation I am re-using the ticket, I can point to this to back up my story.
NRCoT said:
If you're buying your ticket from a station with an open staffed ticket office, in theory you should be able to ask the clerk to look up any specific restrictions in their TIS for you. The onus is on you to ask though. I believe that this satisfies the requirement.
However if there is no staffed ticket office, then I believe that the TOCs are not complying with s. 2.3. All the TVMs that I have used only advise that the NRCoT applies and where to access it online. If you're lucky they will also display a summarised version of the restrictions. I've just had a look at my local Southern S&B TVM (picture attached), and it only mentions http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/tickets/ , which is a page describing ticket validity in general terms. The QR code goes to the same place.
You can't look up the full restrictions on NRE without knowing the restriction code, which the TVM doesn't tell you. If you're lucky, the ticket will have nationalrail.co.uk/XX printed on it, where you can look up restriction code XX that applies to your ticket, but you only get this information after you purchase the ticket, not when purchasing the ticket. The TOCs could easily solve this by making the URL and QR code displayed be the URL to the actual restrictions of the ticket, which the TVM clearly knows as it prints it on the ticket! NRE could also add a link to this page in the ticket restrictions summary by each ticket in the itineraries that the journey planner generates. That would be enough to satisfy me.
As to the OP's original problem. Whenever I break my journey, after each time I've used the ticket, on the back I write the date and the stations I've travelled between. I don't believe this really classes as tampering with the ticket and thus violating s. 4.7, as the whole front of the ticket is unaltered. I hope that if there is ever an accusation I am re-using the ticket, I can point to this to back up my story.
Attachments
gray1404
Established Member
There is a more fundamental question at play here other then the issue of the OP not being advised of break of journey restrictions on the return leg at the point of sale. That is, the OP was travelling on the return portion of an Off Peak Return. This is a regulated fare which always allows break of journey on the return portion. Therefore any attempt by ATW formally or TfW now to impose such a restriction without the appropriate approvals (which it doesn't look like they have obtained) is void.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
Does their franchise (or ATW's old one) prevent them from barring BoJ on regulated ex-Savers? When I've read other franchise agreements, I don't remember there being any provision to do with BoJ having to be permitted on the return portion, only that it must be sold (or rather, defined), that the time restrictions are limited, and that the return portion must be valid for at least a month. But maybe I just wasn't looking in the right place.
gray1404
Established Member
I thought that BOJ on the return portion of ex Savers always had to be allowed regardless and could never be prevented.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
There is only one restriction code that appears to attempt to prevent it (8A) and no-one seems quite sure if it was an administrative error that became fact or if it was intentional.
dave4jackie
Member
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2006
- Messages
- 158
i have just had a look at journey planner and star machine and both say that you can break your journey so even staff are not being told correct information on the systems that are meant to help them
- Status