Announcement Hostility

[LowLevel]

I don't bother to 'threaten' or 'warn' - depending on your stand point - advance ticket holders because the terms are made clear on the ticket and at time of purchase (particularly on the new stock) so I take the default approach of if they haven't asked me first with a decent reason I charge them. If I go round and they've been delayed, had ticket acceptance granted or there's a really obvious issue I let them go there and then.

If however I am stood at a station where people ignoring ample ticketing facilities is a problem - Nottingham and Liverpool Lime Street are two of them - then I do make announcements effectively threatening that people who have ignored the signage, ticket machines and ticket office will be liable to pay far more than they thought and to give them fair warning to get off and pay or take a large hit in the wallet area. Lime St in particular is awful - I don't know what the two blokes in the boxes are there for but it's not checking tickets, it seems to be chatting about the football.

 

[yorkie]

Telling people what tickets are valid, and what aren't, along with what will happen if you have an invalid ticket is perfectly acceptable.

But they're not telling people "what will happen if you have an invalid ticket is perfectly acceptable"

They're telling people, in a hostile way, what might happen if you have a ticket that is invalid for a very limited set of reasons e.g. Railcard discounted ticket but no Railcard held, travel on the wrong Train Company, rather than the reasons most invalid tickets will be invalid e.g. travel on the wrong train etc.

 

[Moonshot]

But they're not telling people "what will happen if you have an invalid ticket is perfectly acceptable"

They're telling people, in a hostile way, what might happen if you have a ticket that is invalid for a very limited set of reasons e.g. Railcard discounted ticket but no Railcard held, travel on the wrong Train Company, rather than the reasons most invalid tickets will be invalid e.g. travel on the wrong train etc.

That really depends on what you term as " hostile ". But in any event , informing passengers on a train pre departure that certain tickets are not valid for that particular service would seem the rational thing to do. Having quickly scanned some of the twitter feeds, I cant see any obvious reference to what could be termed as hostility from the on board team, I ll gladly be corrected though.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I have been on lots of Virgin Trains East Coast services recently where the pre-departure announcement has been, for want of a slightly better word hostile.

That's your interpretation.

It is made while sat at Leeds and usually repeated twice, although sometimes three times.

This is done so that there is no excuse if someone hasn't heard it.

It explains that the train is today subject to ticket restrictions (like well... all trains) and customers should note that (select from Off-Peak, Super Off-Peak or both) tickets [to London - arguably waaay off the truth if that's not added] are not valid

Why would off peak tickets be accepted if they weren't to London (generally a smaller distance unless there it's a through London journey)

and customers with Advance tickets, available as Print at Home tickets (which must have been printed, not shown on a device screen) or tickets with 'Advance' in the top left hand corner, should note that these are valid on the booked train only.

Completely factual

There's then a warning that people should check their tickets carefully, if they are travelling on any other service they will need to buy a new full-price ticket - the Leeds - London Terminals Anytime Single fare of £112 (although this did recently go down) is mentioned. This is probably not right either as if someone is travelling off the booked train on an EC ticket and an Off-Peak ticket is valid, they would get sold that.

It's spot on. If you can't be bothered to buy the correct ticket before you travel then you are sold anytime tickets rather than the full range. This has been the same on the railway since BR days.

There then follows what sounds like a dire warning to ensure that your ticket is valid or bad things will happen and if anyone has an questions about their tickets they can come and find the guard. There is one particular train guard who even says just before departure that if your ticket is not completely valid this is your last chance to get off the train!

Seems like good advice to me.

What follows is sometimes actually just a cursory glance at the ticket or even no ticket inspection at all. So it sounds like this announcement is actually more just bluster to create fear and doubt than anything else. It sounds as if they expect passengers to have issues with their tickets which clearly the majority don't, but I'm sure it sets people worrying who would never have any issues. By pointing out that restrictions are in place on an Off-Peak train, that clearly might make people think their Off-Peak ticket is not valid.

And if an RPI turns up it could save the passengers a lot of money or a potential RoRA/Byelaw prosecution.

So I put it that the customer-friendly Virgin should ditch forthwith the approach of emphasising the risks, drawbacks and costs of rail travel by needlessly pointing out bad things that they might do to you but probably can't while the train is sat in the platform! This information isn't helpful they would know it from the ticket office; it's only going to scare people most of whom will already have valid tickets. Excessive announcements also annoy people, I thought we had plenty of evidence on that now. Lastly these announcements run contrary to the sections in the new Passenger's Charter about lost / mistaken tickets.

Sorry, that's wibble IMO.

 

[Flamingo]

Why does everything have to be sugar-coated touchy-feely?

A huge number of posters on here complain about how draconian the Railway Bylaws are (closing loopholes since 1879 ), and in my experience a large number of travellers think there are no consequences to breaking any or all of these bylaws (and if anybody tries to hold them to it, then a whinge on Twitter will be sufficient to get them off, because "they might apply to everybody else, but I'm special".)

I don't see anything wrong with a quick precis of the restrictions and consequences applying to travel on tickets invalid for that service - if anybody has any queries, there are lots of resources (including this forum) where they can clarify any query they have.

I do it all the time on the trains where common splits are not valid. This means that passengers on them either have their card out waiting on me when I pass through, some get off, and the ones who argue, I can say with a clear conscience "You were warned".

 

[Senex]

In the latter BR days, when PA kit was routine on trains, we never used to get so many announcements, and the tone of the scripts is often somewhat unwelcoming. I've ofrten sat in a train at King's Cross waiting to leave, heard the various announcements, and reflected that the tone, rather than being "Welcome to our service, we hope you have a pleasant journey" is instead "Are you sure you should be on the train -- you'll be paying if you're trying it on with the wrong ticket".

Air travellers and even passengers with Eurostar and Thalys are expected to be clued up enough not to try to travel on the wrong service. Why can't we expect the same level of intelligence from ordinary rail travellers? Or has the whole pricing system become so ridiculously complex that people really do have genuine cause for confusion? In which case, isn't it time for a drastic simplification of the pricing system? As for those who do try it on, why can't they simply be caught on board without advance warning and charged the excess (possibly with a penalty too)? Note how good XC are at policing their system in first class, to make sure that no-one not entitled to the free food gets it. If the guard isn't at the first-class end immediately after leaving a station, then a member of the catering staff appears very quickly asking to see the tickets of new arrivals.

 

[Robertj21a]

I'm not sure that I share the concerns from the original post, personally I'd rather be told quite clearly of any restrictions that I may have overlooked. I can well believe that it needs to be a fairly 'forceful' statement that most people will hear and understand.

The reason why there is little need for these sort of announcements abroad is two-fold, firstly the fare structures are generally far less restrictive and, secondly, IMHO, the residents of many other countries are somewhat more conscientious than some of the UK residents.

 

[transmanche]

Why does everything have to be sugar-coated touchy-feely?

You call it 'sugar-coated touchy-feely'. I call it 'polite'.

The language used can have a great effect on the audience. In an earlier post, I included the phrase, "Thank you for checking your ticket" as part of a hypothetical announcement. You might dismiss that as 'touchy-feely', but it's the kind of phrasing that primary school teachers use as part of their behaviour management techniques; rather than always stressing the negative, you stress the positive and thus you're more likely to get a positive outcome. Sales people use a similar technique too, they call it an 'assumed close'. It's simple and it works.

 

[headshot119]

In the latter BR days, when PA kit was routine on trains, we never used to get so many announcements, and the tone of the scripts is often somewhat unwelcoming. I've ofrten sat in a train at King's Cross waiting to leave, heard the various announcements, and reflected that the tone, rather than being "Welcome to our service, we hope you have a pleasant journey" is instead "Are you sure you should be on the train -- you'll be paying if you're trying it on with the wrong ticket".

Air travellers and even passengers with Eurostar and Thalys are expected to be clued up enough not to try to travel on the wrong service. Why can't we expect the same level of intelligence from ordinary rail travellers? Or has the whole pricing system become so ridiculously complex that people really do have genuine cause for confusion? In which case, isn't it time for a drastic simplification of the pricing system? As for those who do try it on, why can't they simply be caught on board without advance warning and charged the excess (possibly with a penalty too)? Note how good XC are at policing their system in first class, to make sure that no-one not entitled to the free food gets it. If the guard isn't at the first-class end immediately after leaving a station, then a member of the catering staff appears very quickly asking to see the tickets of new arrivals.

The only TOC who grip me twenty minutes before the due departure time, I mustn't have an honest face

 

[yorkie]

Why would off peak tickets be accepted if they weren't to London (generally a smaller distance unless there it's a through London journey)

Off Peak tickets must be accepted if they are valid, as per the restriction code applicable to the ticket held.

It's spot on. If you can't be bothered to buy the correct ticket before you travel then you are sold anytime tickets rather than the full range. This has been the same on the railway since BR days.

If a passenger has not purchased the "correct" ticket, then the procedures vary as to what to do, depending on the reason. In many cases the correct action would be to charge an excess. If the passenger has an Advance and is on the wrong train for no good reason then they would be charged the appropriate fare (not the full fare).

Sorry, that's wibble IMO.

Saying " If you can't be bothered to buy the correct ticket before you travel then you are sold anytime tickets rather than the full range" could be argued to be likewise

 

[crehld]

You call it 'sugar-coated touchy-feely'. I call it 'polite'.

The language used can have a great effect on the audience. In an earlier post, I included the phrase, "Thank you for checking your ticket" as part of a hypothetical announcement. You might dismiss that as 'touchy-feely', but it's the kind of phrasing that primary school teachers use as part of their behaviour management techniques; rather than always stressing the negative, you stress the positive and thus you're more likely to get a positive outcome. Sales people use a similar technique too, they call it an 'assumed close'. It's simple and it works.

I completely agree with this.

I have no objection to terms and conditions being stated clearly or being clarified by staff. Nor do I object to staff enforcing the draconian byelaws and tickets restrictions. Nor even, do I mind a member of staff getting something wrong so long as their attitude is in order (yes - passengers are capable of applying the 'attitude test' too). Indeed, I've had PFs incorrectly issued to me but the staff were polite, courteous and conducted themselves in a professional matter (despite being in the wrong).

What I do take issue with, however, is the sometimes confrontational and outright rude way I and other passengers are spoken to by a small minority staff, for which there is no justification. It is unprofessional and, quite frankly, unacceptable behaviour. Indeed I would take issue with this in any situation, and not just the railways.

As the poster above said it's basic politeness which all people should adopt in any situation and, in a frontline role, a mark of one's professionalism. The tone, and the language, one uses to speak to their customers matters. I make an effort to be polite and courteous at all times when interacting with people, it's really not to much to expect the same in return.

At this juncture let me pre-empt the inevitable "yet another poster with an anti-staff attitude" response. Please refer to the use of the phase "a small minority of staff", which to further aid clarity has been set in bold type. I am not saying all staff and confrontational and rude; the majority in fact are rather great at what they do. I am suggesting, however, there is a small minority of staff who and rude and think it is acceptable speak down to passengers.

 

[Starmill]

Irrelevant, since it's not a market outside the railway industry.

The railway considering it a market all to itself is perhaps one of the reasons why it has a relatively low market share in many cases. It's part of the wider transport industry and must be competitive to survive. The idea that people can be treated badly by train companies and will continue giving business them is almost unique to the railway.

Imagined scenarios do not prove a point.

You seem to be getting very upset that most people are disagreeing with you.

Who's getting upset now?

Telling people what tickets are valid, and what aren't, along with what will happen if you have an invalid ticket is perfectly acceptable.

And if that were what was happening, in a sensitive, helpful and polite manner, I wouldn't be complaining.

 

[ainsworth74]

Lets stick to the issues rather than letting things get personal please.

 

[NSEFAN]

In the latter BR days, when PA kit was routine on trains, we never used to get so many announcements, and the tone of the scripts is often somewhat unwelcoming. I've ofrten sat in a train at King's Cross waiting to leave, heard the various announcements, and reflected that the tone, rather than being "Welcome to our service, we hope you have a pleasant journey" is instead "Are you sure you should be on the train -- you'll be paying if you're trying it on with the wrong ticket".

I can't comment on the announcement that starmill has heard, but I have heard ECML announcements before stating politely, but quite clearly, that passengers must make sure their tickets are valid. "If you have an advance ticket, this must be valid for the tt:tt to etc otherwise you will need to purchase a new full price ticket once we have departed." Nothing hostile about it, just making sure that everyone is aware that they need to check that they have the correct ticket. Never once were any of these announcements making any suggestion that passengers are trying it on.

Air travellers and even passengers with Eurostar and Thalys are expected to be clued up enough not to try to travel on the wrong service. Why can't we expect the same level of intelligence from ordinary rail travellers? Or has the whole pricing system become so ridiculously complex that people really do have genuine cause for confusion? In which case, isn't it time for a drastic simplification of the pricing system? As for those who do try it on, why can't they simply be caught on board without advance warning and charged the excess (possibly with a penalty too)? Note how good XC are at policing their system in first class, to make sure that no-one not entitled to the free food gets it. If the guard isn't at the first-class end immediately after leaving a station, then a member of the catering staff appears very quickly asking to see the tickets of new arrivals.

Try boarding a plane with an invalid ticket. You'll find you won't be able to board in the first place. If anything, airline boarding facilities mean that the passenger can be less aware of their ticket restrictions because there are dedicated staff to make sure they get on the right plane. As for what you've described, passengers with the incorrect tickets are indeed charged for the correct fare, be it an excess or a penalty fare, although guards may show discretion where they feel it is appropriate, so there's nothing wrong there. I personally wouldn't like to see a mass-simplification of fares, at least not until a national smart ticketing standard is adopted which can make use of information about what train the passenger is actually on.

 

[IanM]

This is really what gets me - we'll try to scare people into submission. Not a clever approach to customer relations Virgin group companies should know that! In fact - it's a very Stagecoach-like trait.

Funny you should say that - something with almost exactly the same words happens a couple of times before departure from St Pancras on the Sheffield services.

 

[Starmill]

That's your interpretation.

It is - so do you think they are friendly welcoming announcements that becomes a railway service we can all be proud of?

This is done so that there is no excuse if someone hasn't heard it.

The best way to do that would be to have an automatic announcer that repeats 100% of the time throughout the journey verbalising the entire NRCoC and all of the byelaws, just to make sure nobody has an excuse for not knowing them. Do you think that's appropriate?

Why would off peak tickets be accepted if they weren't to London (generally a smaller distance unless there it's a through London journey)

By being clear about that, the guard is commenting on the range of walk-up tickets between Leeds and London Terminals, which they are probably familiar with and confident they would get right. But do they know the exact restrictions to all of the other conceivable tickets that are valid on that train? I certainly wouldn't.

Completely factual

I'd be upset if it weren't, but isn't it obvious and does it really need to be announced?

It's spot on. If you can't be bothered to buy the correct ticket before you travel then you are sold anytime tickets rather than the full range. This has been the same on the railway since BR days.

As has been pointed out the £112 is hardly ever appropriate. The main situation would be someone who got through the barriers at Leeds ticketless and onto the train - they might consider a prosecution in that case anyway.

Seems like good advice to me.

I hope you don't work in customer service!

And if an RPI turns up it could save the passengers a lot of money or a potential RoRA/Byelaw prosecution.

Someone who is intentionally trying to avoid their fare is unlikely to be deterred by such an announcement are they, given they already know it is wrong.

Sorry, that's wibble IMO.

Virgin don't seem to agree:

We’re making listening to you one of our top priorities with one simple mission....to give the very best levels of customer service to everyone who travels with us.

 

[Saint66]

I've been travelling from Leeds to London very regularly in the past 8 months, and to be honest, the announcements, to me anyway, sound no different prior to departure at the moment than they were under East Coast.

Anyway, my opinion is that there is no problem with them, and they're just making sure no one makes a costly mistake. There's no harm in checking your ticket again before departure... I always do, just to make completely sure.

 

[Iskra]

I've been travelling from Leeds to London very regularly in the past 8 months, and to be honest, the announcements, to me anyway, sound no different prior to departure at the moment than they were under East Coast.

Anyway, my opinion is that there is no problem with them, and they're just making sure no one makes a costly mistake. There's no harm in checking your ticket again before departure... I always do, just to make completely sure.

This. It's exactly what East Coast were doing.

These announcements are not Leeds specific, and while they don't make as much sense at Leeds (only one operator to London- excluding EMT), they make a lot of sense leaving London where there are numerous operators to places like Doncaster/York, which must be causing confusion.

These announcements are trying to prevent you having to buy a very expensive ticket, and while most people on this forum are familiar with operators and advance tickets, a lot of normal people will not understand the various caveats. It is much better for those people to check the validity of their ticket before the train leaves.

 

[yorksrob]

Although a more customer friendly way of preventing people from having to pay for a very expensive ticket would be to excess them, rather than making them buy a full open ticket.

 

[martynbristow]

It seems your complaint is the way the message was delivered.
Weh I travel on more established routes e.g. VTWC and SWT I've never had issues.
They issue sensible warnings prior to departure.
Maybe the message could have been less gruff.

If VTEC wish to implement a set of rules which are legal and tighten up one ticketing I don't see the problem. I think feel conned when I pay extra to travel at peak time and others cheat the system.
If VTEC are holding to the rules thats good.

If they actually AREN'T checking in reality it may be that they are doing it incase management are watching/listening.

 

[yorkie]

Although a more customer friendly way of preventing people from having to pay for a very expensive ticket would be to excess them, rather than making them buy a full open ticket.

Some announcements appear to suggest it's always a full price ticket. However the rules are, in most cases, to charge an excess fare, or a discounted/appropriate fare in the case of a passenger being on the wrong train on an Advance ticket.

 

[yorksrob]

Some announcements appear to suggest it's always a full price ticket. However the rules are, in most cases, to charge an excess fare, or a discounted/appropriate fare in the case of a passenger being on the wrong train on an Advance ticket.

Indeed. If only the announcements reflected this.

 

[tbtc]

Imagine I live in Wakefield and work in Leeds, as many people do. Occasionally I'll want to go for a break in London - again as many do. I know the train is quite comfortable and quick, but that it can be pricey and coaches are available very cheaply. But I have heard these announcements about making sure I've got the right ticket and am concerned about the risk that I might end up having to pay a whopping £112 they keep mentioning on the train because I don't really understand about all the different tickets and whatnot. But I do know that you can go onto the National Express website and pay for a coach and there's no risk of ending up with a 'fine' there and I'll definitely get a seat

The fairly massive difference that you don't appear to have considered (?) is that if you tried to board a National Express service with the wrong ticket (restricted to a different departure, not valid via this route, only valid with proof of child/pensioner status, a Megabus ticket...) then you wouldn't be allowed on the vehicle in the first place.

However, with the railway, your ticket isn't checked as you board the service, so you could easily be on a train that your ticket isn't valid on (or not have evidence to qualify for the discount that goes with it).

Since the East Coast route has various competing TOCs (Hull Trains, Grand Central) and various peak/off-peak restrictions (as well as standard things like people needing evidence of young person/ pensioner/ armed forces raillcards et), having a brief announcement to remind people that they need to be on the right service (and need to have evidence for any discounted ticket) seems reasonable, especially as it then covers the Guard in case there's any bother.

Maybe they make the announcement for the benefit of people who don't know the consequences. You are not their target audience.

Agreed.

The OP's frustrated, but the announcements need to cover all sorts of passengers.

So would you rather that they started selling expensive standard single tickets on the train instead to hapless travelers? I'd rather have a short and abrupt message and save myself in excess of £100 if I'd boarded the wrong train.

Agreed.

Even on their buses, Stagecoach's warning about paying the 'standard' fare of £60 are worded quite nicely. Something like, 'Make sure you keep your ticket, otherwise you might be liable to pay the standard fare of £60 - and we wouldn't want that to happen to anyone"

Same on First buses round here - I think it's "only" £35 though.

Since there's obviously no ticket barriers when you leave the bus (and the driver is concentrating on driving), I appreciate that there needs to be some "stick" to deal with people who buy a shorter ticket for their journey.

I don't know whether you realise that there are many, many people who do actually try to get away with having the wrong ticket and then plead ignorance? Happens on a daily basis on nearly every train that has special tickets :roll:

I'd take your regular experience of this kind of thing in the industry over the OP's opinion

Why does everything have to be sugar-coated touchy-feely?

A huge number of posters on here complain about how draconian the Railway Bylaws are (closing loopholes since 1879 ), and in my experience a large number of travellers think there are no consequences to breaking any or all of these bylaws (and if anybody tries to hold them to it, then a whinge on Twitter will be sufficient to get them off, because "they might apply to everybody else, but I'm special".)

I don't see anything wrong with a quick precis of the restrictions and consequences applying to travel on tickets invalid for that service - if anybody has any queries, there are lots of resources (including this forum) where they can clarify any query they have.

I do it all the time on the trains where common splits are not valid. This means that passengers on them either have their card out waiting on me when I pass through, some get off, and the ones who argue, I can say with a clear conscience "You were warned".

Agreed.

I'm not sure that I share the concerns from the original post, personally I'd rather be told quite clearly of any restrictions that I may have overlooked. I can well believe that it needs to be a fairly 'forceful' statement that most people will hear and understand

That's it - something that most people will hear and understand (which may be boring to seasoned enthusiasts who may well know more than the average punter)

Although a more customer friendly way of preventing people from having to pay for a very expensive ticket would be to excess them, rather than making them buy a full open ticket.

If I knew that I could get away with buying a heavily discounted ticket from Yorkshire to London (only valid on Hull Trains, only valid with a YP railcard, only valid on one at a different time of the day) safe in the knowledge that the worst that'd happen is that I could just excess it to the normal price then boarding a train with an invalid ticket would be a "no risk" option - would you trust everyone to pay £100 for a normal ticket (rather than pay £30 for a discounted one, safe in the knowledge that the worst case scenario would be excessing it to £100)?

Sure, give the Guard discretion to allow excessing, but there needs to be some "stick" otherwise people will have no incentive to pay for the correct ticket before boarding.

 

[Starmill]

If I knew that I could get away with buying a heavily discounted ticket from Yorkshire to London (only valid on Hull Trains, only valid with a YP railcard, only valid on one at a different time of the day) safe in the knowledge that the worst that'd happen is that I could just excess it to the normal price then boarding a train with an invalid ticket would be a "no risk" option - would you trust everyone to pay £100 for a normal ticket (rather than pay £30 for a discounted one, safe in the knowledge that the worst case scenario would be excessing it to £100)?

Sure, give the Guard discretion to allow excessing, but there needs to be some "stick" otherwise people will have no incentive to pay for the correct ticket before boarding.

This makes no sense. You're saying the penalty for making a mistake should be even harsher than it currently is, just so people are more likely to play by the rules? I think like too many of the people in charge you have fallen into the trap of thinking all of the railway's customers are dishonest and you by default need to stop them trying to commit fraud of behave unfairly towards the company. I just can't believe that's the case and it's one terrible way to run a business. For my part, the way these announcements are currently worded would make me feel contempt towards the guard should he then decide to take issue with my obviously always perfectly valid ticket.

 

[transmanche]

This makes no sense. You're saying the penalty for making a mistake should be even harsher than it currently is, just so people are more likely to play by the rules? I think like too many of the people in charge you have fallen into the trap of thinking all of the railway's customers are dishonest and you by default need to stop them trying to commit fraud of behave unfairly towards the company. I just can't believe that's the case and it's one terrible way to run a business. For my part, the way these announcements are currently worded would make me feel contempt towards the guard should he then decide to take issue with my obviously always perfectly valid ticket.

That's an excellent point.

Continually treat people with contempt and they will treat you likewise...

 

[CC 72100]

So announcements are made that encourage people to check their tickets so that they don't make an expensive 'mistake', warning them of the consequences and people don't like it.

Maybe they should just not say anything and just go for the strongest penalty at each irregularity they find instead. You don't have to listen to the 'hostile' announcement that way.

 

[transmanche]

So announcements are made that encourage people to check their tickets so that they don't make an expensive 'mistake', warning them of the consequences and people don't like it.

No. People don't like the way it's done.

There are positive and negative ways of doing it. The railway always seems to prefer the negative way...

 

[satisnek]

In the old days you went to the station, bought a ticket and got on the train. If it was peak time you weren't sold a cheaper off-peak ticket. That was as complicated as it got.

This is a direct consequence of advance purchasing, online purchasing and all the rest. You wanted it, you got it.

 

[transmanche]

You wanted it, you got it.

Ah, blame the customer. Always a successful marketing strategy.

Even Ryanair have decided that's it's time to move on from that...

 

[RichmondCommu]

This is a 'false dichotomy'. Having a more friendly / less threatening announcement is NOT equivalent to allowing rampant fare evasion.

I wasn't suggesting that was the case so please don't put words into my mouth. The OP seemed to be suggesting that travelers on the wrong train should be allowed to travel on it at no extra cost (see below). My point is that approach sets a dangerous precedent in terms of travelers flouting clearly laid out rules and traveling on what ever train takes their fancy.

Oh, I see. So revenue from charging people who've made mistakes is part of the franchise agreement's projected income is it? Ah, that's where these several billion pounds everyone has been wondering about will come from! Remember the last company on the ECML who were counting on revenue from 'unethical' sources.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Another big gripe of mine on the announcements department is this the such and such train to followed by Coach B is the quite coach in standard and Coach F (?) is the first class quiet coach, then to be followed by the catering facilities etc etc., so if I am in the quiet coach of which I have selected then why do I have to kept been bombarded with all these announcements at every station.

Just wish they would also either pipe down to just shut up and leave us in peace.

If the guard only made one announcement on each service how do you expect travelers who board at other stations to be aware of information that is important to their journey?