Delayed by one TOC, rights on Advance with another TOC

Hi All - I think I know the answer to this but am just checking.

Last week, I was on 2 Advances on one itinerary, Doncaster to King's Cross with Hull Trains and then Paddington to Swindon with GWR.

The Hull Trains was delayed into Kings Cross and I had little time to make my connection at Paddington.

Luckily I got a tube straight away and my booked GWR was on the platform next to the ramp down from the tube at Paddington and I got on with seconds to spare.

If I had missed the connection, would I have been able to get the next (any) GWR service to Swindon and would I simply tell the conductor of the earlier delay?

Thanks.

ricoblade said:

If I had missed the connection, would I have been able to get the next (any) GWR service to Swindon and would I simply tell the conductor of the earlier delay?

Click to expand...

My view is that you would but some people will argue that as you didn't have a through ticket (or tickets) covering your whole journey you were not covered for that.

ricoblade said:

Last week, I was on 2 Advances on one itinerary, Doncaster to King's Cross with Hull Trains and then Paddington to Swindon with GWR.

Click to expand...

If one of the tickets is specified as London Zone 1 rather than Kings Cross/Paddington, then they join.

Sorry, didn't make myself clear.

It was one Advance Single ticket but with Mandatory Reservations for both legs.

ricoblade said:

Hi All - I think I know the answer to this but am just checking.

Last week, I was on 2 Advances on one itinerary, Doncaster to King's Cross with Hull Trains and then Paddington to Swindon with GWR.

The Hull Trains was delayed into Kings Cross and I had little time to make my connection at Paddington.

Luckily I got a tube straight away and my booked GWR was on the platform next to the ramp down from the tube at Paddington and I got on with seconds to spare.

If I had missed the connection, would I have been able to get the next (any) GWR service to Swindon and would I simply tell the conductor of the earlier delay?

Thanks.

Click to expand...

If you bought this as a through journey from us, we would support you in the event of a dispute.

MarlowDonkey said:

If one of the tickets is specified as London Zone 1 rather than Kings Cross/Paddington, then they join.

Click to expand...

Not necessary in my opinion; our site has an advanced option to allow people to use contactless/oyster for cross London journeys.

This may be of particular benefit to people who want e-tickets, or are using other modes to cross London, etc.

We will provide a through itinerary, which is evidence of a contract for the whole journey.

If a passenger books each segment separately, then that's an argument for the passenger, but anyone denying them travel would be wrong in my opinion.

There is no 'gap'; the tickets do join up at London Terminals. No-one can argue there is a gap at say 0300, so how can there be a gap at 1500?

Yes, the minimum interchange times need to be adhered to, and any passenger who doesn't make their connection due to taking a different mode isn't covered. However, additional interchange time can also be requested. In any case, this debate is purely about the incoming train being delayed and that being the reason for missing the connection.

ricoblade said:

Sorry, didn't make myself clear.

It was one Advance Single ticket but with Mandatory Reservations for both legs.

Click to expand...

* However as it's actually one Advance fare, this is a moot point.

It would still be valid if issued as 2 Advance fares to/from London Terminals, but I would urge anyone doing that, to book through us, to obtain a through itinerary.

yorkie said:

It would still be valid if issued as 2 Advance fares to/from London Terminals, but I would urge anyone doing that, to book through us, to obtain a through itinerary.

Click to expand...

Sorry @yorkie but I was under the impression that the forum's site would offer tickets A to U1 and Terminals to B in such a circumstance and that this would form a clearly continuous itinerary, where am I going wrong?

andythebrave said:

Sorry @yorkie but I was under the impression that the forum's site would offer tickets A to U1 and Terminals to B in such a circumstance and that this would form a clearly continuous itinerary, where am I going wrong?

Click to expand...

It does where they exist, but sadly since the change of rules on how they are issued (you can no longer just calculate an add-on to any fare, it has to be priced) there will be far, far fewer of them.

Bletchleyite said:

It does where they exist, but sadly since the change of rules on how they are issued (you can no longer just calculate an add-on to any fare, it has to be priced) there will be far, far fewer of them.

Click to expand...

I'm finding it hard to keep up!

andythebrave said:

Sorry @yorkie but I was under the impression that the forum's site would offer tickets A to U1 and Terminals to B in such a circumstance and that this would form a clearly continuous itinerary, where am I going wrong?

Click to expand...

The site offers an option to cross London via other modes, which will avoid the expense of a +Z1 addition to one’s ticket. It is entirely permissible to cross by means other than rail or tube.

AlterEgo said:

The site offers an option to cross London via other modes, which will avoid the expense of a +Z1 addition to one’s ticket. It is entirely permissible to cross by means other than rail or tube.

Click to expand...

Does anyone know why this feature doesn't see Abbey Wood to Kings Cross as a cross-London transfer, when both stations are designated as interchange stations for Maltese Cross tickets?

If I search Dartford to Edinburgh, for example, specifying 'fastest' (to avoid being given cheaper splits involving Thameslink to Stevenage or Peterborough) and specifying change at Abbey Wood, with the 'no cross-London fares' option selected, it finds this:



Would I be right in thinking this is because the segment from Abbey Wood to the next interchange point (Farringdon in a sane world; Liverpool Street in the warped world of crazy, incomplete and inconsistent fixed links and MCTs the industry has created) is timetabled, rather than defined as a fixed link? If so, it is very disadvantageous to passengers that this segment is treated for fares purposes as a tube journey, but for journey planning purposes as an ordinary train journey, yet many local through tickets require travel via City Thameslink so exclude the obvious and fastest route. Is it possible to book this as a through journey but use PAYG for the Abbey Wood to Kings Cross segment?