Silly routeing on Liverpool to Sheffield

Bletchleyite · 24 Dec 2018

Noticed today, wanting to go from Liverpool to Dore then back from Sheffield, that all fares seem to be routed Huddersfield or Stockport, meaning there is no fare valid via the Hope Valley stopper unless there is some kind of odd easement. This is the case for Dore as well making an extra change and double back effectively mandatory at most times of day.

Why aren't these routed Chinley instead?

FWIW I avoided it by splitting at Manchester.

RailUK Forums

_toommm_ · 24 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
Noticed today, wanting to go from Liverpool to Dore then back from Sheffield, that all fares seem to be routed Huddersfield or Stockport, meaning there is no fare valid via the Hope Valley stopper unless there is some kind of odd easement. This is the case for Dore as well making an extra change and double back effectively mandatory at most times of day.

Why aren't these routed Chinley instead?

FWIW I avoided it by splitting at Manchester.

I suspect it's either to do with the advances being routed 'via Stockport' (of which IIRC only one stopper goes via Stockport). Either that, or it's because the stopper takes up much more time compared to changing at Sheffield and doubling back.

Killingworth · 24 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
Noticed today, wanting to go from Liverpool to Dore then back from Sheffield, that all fares seem to be routed Huddersfield or Stockport, meaning there is no fare valid via the Hope Valley stopper unless there is some kind of odd easement. This is the case for Dore as well making an extra change and double back effectively mandatory at most times of day.

Why aren't these routed Chinley instead?

FWIW I avoided it by splitting at Manchester.

As a resident near Dore I'm sorry I can't answer the question, but fares outwards from Dore are a mystery. It can be cheaper to go to Manchester on TPE's fast commuter services, often standing all the way, than on the East Midlands Liverpool trains, but considerably cheaper than the Northern slow stopping services. In an evening commuters could get the cheapest fare on Northern. If cost is more important than time some flexibility and knowledge of timetables is essential. It's rather a bone of local contention.

In a morning it can be cheaper to get a single to Sheffield to catch a TPE service to Manchester Airport that stops at Dore! Curiously the cost to Piccadilly will be the same from Sheffield or Dore - but parking costs over £15 a day at Sheffield and free at Dore. A lot less than at Manchester Airport, which is a bit of a problem Wherever folks look there are anomalies to be taken advantage of.

ForTheLoveOf · 24 Dec 2018

_toommm_ said:
I suspect it's either to do with the advances being routed 'via Stockport' (of which IIRC only one stopper goes via Stockport). Either that, or it's because the stopper takes up much more time compared to changing at Sheffield and doubling back.

There aren't many TOCs left that still have geographic routes for their Advances, rather than company restrictions. GWR are the main one, really. TPE invariably use "AP TPE ONLY" or "AP TPE & CONNECT", so they don't have geographic restrictions.

DanTrain · 24 Dec 2018

NRE will offer me the HV route (looking 2 Jan), but it’s £10 more and takes 5 mins longer than a single change (and double back) at Sheffield. As for the Huddersfield route, that’s bizarre ans Sheffield - Huddersfield is so slow that NRE normally takes you via Piccadilly from Dore rather than the direct route. Maybe it’s something to do with the engineering work at Lime Street?

lyndhurst25 · 24 Dec 2018

There is indeed an easement:
030000 "Journeys routed Stockport may travel via Romiley. This easement applies in both directions."

Bletchleyite · 25 Dec 2018

lyndhurst25 said:
There is indeed an easement:
030000 "Journeys routed Stockport may travel via Romiley. This easement applies in both directions."

Oh well, would have saved me 50p! It is bizarre, though, when just routeing the ticket “via Chinley” would fix it.

lyndhurst25 · 25 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
Oh well, would have saved me 50p! It is bizarre, though, when just routeing the ticket “via Chinley” would fix it.

Quite. How Joe Public is supposed to understand that "via Stockport" actually means via Stockport or Romiley, and "via Huddersfield" means via Huddersfield or Stockport or Romiley, is anyone's guess.

_toommm_ · 25 Dec 2018

lyndhurst25 said:
Quite. How Joe Public is supposed to understand that "via Stockport" actually means via Stockport or Romiley, and "via Huddersfield" means via Huddersfield or Stockport or Romiley, is anyone's guess.

But how would the public know 'via Chinley' means you can use it on TPE and EMT through to Sheffield - chances are they've never heard of Chinley.

Bletchleyite · 25 Dec 2018

_toommm_ said:
But how would the public know 'via Chinley' means you can use it on TPE and EMT through to Sheffield - chances are they've never heard of Chinley.

They can look at a map or ask staff, but at least it isn't completely wrong. I bet at least some staff don't know the easement and if I'd bought the (valid, it seems) through ticket I'd have been challenged unnecessarily.

They could use route <any station on the Hope Valley> - route Hope (Derbys) would probably make it fairly clear as the line is quite widely known as the Hope Valley - or even just "not Huddersfield" (Goodness only knows why anyone would go that way). Or if they want one it stops at, "Stockpt/Marple" would fit and be accurate.

kieron · 26 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
Oh well, would have saved me 50p! It is bizarre, though, when just routeing the ticket “via Chinley” would fix it.

The "via Stockport" route is used for many different tickets. Some are valid via Chinley, but others (such as Wilmslow-Knutsford) aren't. A "via Stockport/Romiley" route would be easier to check, and there's plenty of space for it on new-style tickets.

I'm sure you're not the only person to have misunderstood what the route on a ticket means. Putting the contents of some of the simpler fare route easements (like this one) onto the ticket would make things clearer for the customer.

Bletchleyite · 26 Dec 2018

kieron said:
I'm sure you're not the only person to have misunderstood what the route on a ticket means. Putting the contents of some of the simpler fare route easements (like this one) onto the ticket would make things clearer for the customer.

And staff. Even knowing about the easement I'd be uncomfortable as I'd be expecting an argument.

Starmill · 26 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
Oh well, would have saved me 50p! It is bizarre, though, when just routeing the ticket “via Chinley” would fix it.

It took me less than 60 seconds to determine that the route Stockport ticket was valid on the route you suggest using NRE:

Screenshot_20181226-223820_National Rail.jpg

Screenshot_20181226-223733_National Rail.jpg

Would that really have been so difficult, rather than assuming it wasn't valid?

yorkie · 26 Dec 2018

There are websites that will calculate if it's cheaper, or necessary, to split.

If it's necessary to split, Trainsplit won't charge a fee at present.

So no reason to assume anything ... unless you don't have access to any sort of internet enabled device, in which case you can ask staff, and if there are no staff available at the station, and no help point able to advise, I'd argue you can buy on board.

kieron · 26 Dec 2018

Have you had any issues with staff with a "via Stockport" ticket? I'd expect the route to be nodded through on a Chinley train on the assumption that staff are only really interested in how you cross the Pennines, if that. Even if someone isn't sure, it should come up as valid on any device they use to check the route, in the same way it does on web sites.

Bletchleyite · 27 Dec 2018

Starmill said:
It took me less than 60 seconds to determine that the route Stockport ticket was valid on the route you suggest using NRE:
View attachment 57202
View attachment 57203

Would that really have been so difficult, rather than assuming it wasn't valid?

You have far more confidence in Northern and their poorly trained agency staff (and prosecution happy approach) than I do. At least for 50p on a one off journey.

The wrong routeing needs to be fixed, simple.

Starmill · 27 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
The wrong routeing needs to be fixed, simple

Changing it to 'Any Permitted' would be the only thing that would make sense. So basically, it's never going to happen.

Bletchleyite · 27 Dec 2018

Starmill said:
Changing it to 'Any Permitted' would be the only thing that would make sense. So basically, it's never going to happen.

In what way would "Not Huddersfield", or "Chinley", or "Stockport/Romiley" not make sense? All would fit on the new format.

The one thing that does not make sense is having a ticket that has "Valid only via Stockport" printed on a ticket where that ticket is also valid via a route that does not pass through Stockport.

There is one thing, and one thing only that describes this - sheer laziness on the part of TPE (the fare setter).

sheff1 · 27 Dec 2018

kieron said:
Have you had any issues with staff with a "via Stockport" ticket?

Never, and I have used them many times over the years.

I even have used them a couple of times on the ~2350 from Piccadilly to Sheffield which used to run via Huddersfield (not sure if it still does) - there is no way for a normal punter to know it goes that way and staff are only interested in whether you have a ticket to Sheffield, not getting into an argument about unadvertised routing at that time night.

_toommm_ · 27 Dec 2018

sheff1 said:
Never, and I have used them many times over the years.

I even have used them a couple of times on the ~2350 from Piccadilly to Sheffield which used to run via Huddersfield (not sure if it still does) - there is no way for a normal punter to know it goes that way and staff are only interested in whether you have a ticket to Sheffield, not getting into an argument about unadvertised routing at that time night.

Still runs that way most nights as does the 03:25 from Sheffield, although recently it's been going along the Hope Valley a lot more..

Starmill · 27 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
In what way would "Not Huddersfield", or "Chinley", or "Stockport/Romiley" not make sense? All would fit on the new format.

The one thing that does not make sense is having a ticket that has "Valid only via Stockport" printed on a ticket where that ticket is also valid via a route that does not pass through Stockport.

There is one thing, and one thing only that describes this - sheer laziness on the part of TPE (the fare setter).

1. Huddersfield does not lie on a mapped route between Liverpool and Sheffield, so 'Not Huddersfield' is a totally redundant route.
2. 'Via Chinley' is unsuitable because it could lead to tickets from Chinley being routed 'via Chinley' which is an oxymoron ans has been known to break things.
3. A route Stockport / Romiley is too long, so it would need to be illogically shortened down to fit into the route field on old tickets. This in itself may not present too much of a problem, but it would add to the maintenance of the data that's required. I notice that you haven't been leading any calls for 'Via High Wycombe' to be changed to 'Via High Wycombe / Little Kimble' even though that situation is exactly the same as this one.

The answer is to change the route to Any Permitted. There is no reason to do anything else. It's exceedingly unlikely though because while they can be very quick to add new restrictions (including without the proper authorisation to do so). The removal of restrictions is rare. Furthermore it would go against the current industry agenda which states that 'Any Permitted' is too confusing. It seems they take the view that the current situation is "simpler".

Bletchleyite · 28 Dec 2018

With regard to HW, I thought they indeed were not valid via Aylesbury. If they are, changing that to via Princes Risborough would seem an obvious fix, and yes, it is equally ridiculous in this case.

I’m amazed you can in any way defend this ludicrous, wilfully misleading situation.

ForTheLoveOf · 28 Dec 2018

Bletchleyite said:
With regard to HW, I thought they indeed were not valid via Aylesbury. If they are, changing that to via Princes Risborough would seem an obvious fix, and yes, it is equally ridiculous in this case.

I’m amazed you can in any way defend this ludicrous, wilfully misleading situation.

Easement 030039 permits travel via Aylesbury for fares routed via High Wycombe.

I suspect the issue with changing it to 'via Princes Risborough' is that it might produce unusual or unexpected results somewhere else, and the TOCs are not prepared to spend the time finding out where those kinds of corner cases might arise. Plus, what kind of member of the average general public would ever willingly choose to travel via Aylesbury to London, if coming from Princes Risborough and north (except of course when the High Wycombe route is closed)*?

I agree that it is a situation where the TOCs have no easy way out. If they change 'via Stockport' to 'via Stockport/Chinley', it's more complicated and not everyone will know where Chinley actually is, thus they may be uncertain as to the validity of their ticket. If they change it to 'Any Permitted' people don't necessarily know where it's valid via (allegedly ), plus it might open up one or two anomalies!

*Of course I agree that the current bilateral validity should continue, but it would make very little sense to a member of the general public.

Starmill · 28 Dec 2018

I'm not defending the situation. I must've said four times now that the only way forward is to remove pointless restrictions and change tickets to a simpler 'Any Permitted' routing. The current situation is beyond bananas.

However, I'm also a realist, and I know that it's very rare for train companies to take action to remove confusing restrictions (though they're quick to add bizarre restrictions when they feel it suits their purpose).

button_boxer · 28 Dec 2018

Starmill said:
and change tickets to a simpler 'Any Permitted' routing.

It has been suggested above that the industry line is that “any permitted” is more confusing for passengers rather than simpler.

Bletchleyite · 28 Dec 2018

button_boxer said:
It has been suggested above that the industry line is that “any permitted” is more confusing for passengers rather than simpler.

I'd be inclined to agree. Where there is a single point that all Permitted Routes pass through, and there are some non-Permitted and somewhat more circuitous routes that some people might like to take, it probably makes sense to put a specific route on the ticket.

What does not make sense is to put a route on the ticket and then make it valid via routes that don't pass through that station. That is exactly the kind of thing that gives the railway a bad name.

Silly routeing on Liverpool to Sheffield

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member