Avanti West Coast: partial ticket acceptance not advertised

[Starmill]

Following this thread last year https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-valid-in-avanti-1st-due-to-disruption.231467

I've been passed a copy of the internal briefing at Avanti West Coast on ticket acceptance. Where ticket acceptance is in place due to disruption, dedicated First Class tickets for another operator are to be directed by front-line Avanti staff as follows.

First Class dedicated tickets not accepted in First Class:
ScotRail
TransPennine Express
Hull Trains
Grand Central

First Class dedicated tickets accepted in First Class:
EMR
LNER
GWR
CrossCountry

The brief mentions Northern First Class dedicated products, but these have been retired for some time. It also says Transport for Wales are standard only, which is of course not the case, and they have for many years offered First Class dedicated products. Thameslink, Greater Anglia and SWR offer First Class but aren't mentioned at all, presumably because it's thought that these cases won't come up. I don't think that's the case myself as I'd say acceptance of First Class Thameslink Only or similar tickets will come up eventually for example.

I thought that this would be useful as it would dispel the myth from the previous thread that Avanti don't treat passengers whose tickets they've agreed to accept differently on the basis of operator. In all of the cases I'm aware of, this crucial information was also not communicated out by ScotRail, TransPennine Express, Hull Trains or Grand Central at the time of the general communication that tickets were being accepted by Avanti. This suggests that either they think they have agreed ticket acceptance with Avanti West Coast which isn't partial, or they're giving out misleading information (either accidentally or in the hope that people won't notice and complain).

As a company entitled to a vast public subsidy, I think that policies like this one should be disclosed. As Avanti West Coast seem to have been very unwilling to state their policy, I'm disclosing it here in the public interest.

For completeness, other operators don't need to disclose such a policy because they follow the industry best practice on Passenger Information During Disruption. For the avoidence of doubt, that means that dedicated Avanti West Coast Standard and Standard Premium tickets are not valid in First Class on Hull Trains, Grand Central, TransPennine Express or ScotRail when those operators have ticket acceptance for Avanti West Coast in place.

If anyone is affected by this I would encourage them to write to Avanti West Coast, asking again for them to put out official words on this policy, unless the company have now relented and done so in some official capacity, which I'd encourage someone to link to if so.

 

[Hadders]

This is disgraceful. A First Class ticket is a First Class ticket.

I assume a passenger holding a First Class ticket but denied carriage in First Class would be able to claim compensation from Avanti.

 

[Mak1981]

Are there any actual obligations on avanti that they must allow passengers with other operator restricted first class tickets into first class on avanti services?

 

[Watershed]

Are there any actual obligations on avanti that they must allow passengers with other operator restricted first class tickets into first class on avanti services?

In some circumstances, yes. Firstly, if the passenger has not been told about any such restriction to the ticket acceptance. Furthermore, if Avanti are accepting the ticket under condition 28.2 of the NRCoT (the passenger would otherwise be stranded).

But in other cases, this is a matter for the TOC 'at fault' and the fact that they have made inadequate ticket acceptance arrangements. For such ticket acceptance to be in place, it's likely that the passenger faces a delay of over an hour and so the PRO obligation to re-route at the earliest opportunity, and subject to comparable transport conditions (i.e. in first class if you have a first class ticket), arises.

 

[Starmill]

Are there any actual obligations on avanti that they must allow passengers with other operator restricted first class tickets into first class on avanti services?

It's complex. The obligation in law is between the company or companies on whose services the customer's ticket may be used, and the consumer. In these cases, Avanti West Coast aren't one such company because it's only about dedicated tickets to other companies. The NRCoT also apply, though, and in these cases it's likely that Avanti's obligations under NRCoT to render assistance to those with contracts only to third parties would be engaged.

Regardless of the terms of the contract though, the relevant provisions of the Consumer Rights Act and PRO continue to apply. What that means in practice would likely need to be tested at Court.

 

[Gaelan]

For such ticket acceptance to be in place, it's likely that the passenger faces a delay of over an hour and so the PRO obligation to re-route at the earliest opportunity, and subject to comparable transport conditions (i.e. in first class if you have a first class ticket), arises.

I wonder if Avanti’s argument (which I don’t necessarily endorse) is that the listed TOCs have a fairly minimal first class offering, so the most comparable product is Standard Premium?

 

[Starmill]

I wonder if Avanti’s argument (which I don’t necessarily endorse) is that the listed TOCs have a fairly minimal first class offering, so the most comparable product is Standard Premium?

Lots of CrossCountry services have no catering at all still, or have only a railgourmet host for the whole train, with nothing beyond a hot drink and a biscuit. Hull Trains by contrast provide far more substantial catering than that.

 

[Watershed]

I wonder if Avanti’s argument (which I don’t necessarily endorse) is that the listed TOCs have a fairly minimal first class offering, so the most comparable product is Standard Premium?

It's not really Avanti's argument to make, so much as the TOC that your ticket restricts you to - they're the ones to whom the PRO obligation applies.

In any event, whilst I don't think it's an argument that holds any legal water, it's rather a moot point unless you're willing to put the matter to the test by bringing legal action. The Regulator evidently couldn't care less about these blatant breaches of operators' licence conditions (which require them to comply with the PRO).

 

[Mak1981]

In some circumstances, yes. Firstly, if the passenger has not been told about any such restriction to the ticket acceptance. Furthermore, if Avanti are accepting the ticket under condition 28.2 of the NRCoT (the passenger would otherwise be stranded).

But in other cases, this is a matter for the TOC 'at fault' and the fact that they have made inadequate ticket acceptance arrangements. For such ticket acceptance to be in place, it's likely that the passenger faces a delay of over an hour and so the PRO obligation to re-route at the earliest opportunity, and subject to comparable transport conditions (i.e. in first class if you have a first class ticket), arises.

I tried to word my question to be slightly more specific, ie is avanti obliged to carry these passengers in first class, under NRCoT they have an obligation to carry them under certain circumstances but is there an obligation to carry them in first class at those times

It's complex. The obligation in law is between the company or companies on whose services the customer's ticket may be used, and the consumer. In these cases, Avanti West Coast aren't one such company because it's only about dedicated tickets to other companies. The NRCoT also apply, though, and in these cases it's likely that Avanti's obligations under NRCoT to render assistance to those with contracts only to third parties would be engaged.

Regardless of the terms of the contract though, the relevant provisions of the Consumer Rights Act and PRO continue to apply. What that means in practice would likely need to be tested at Court.

presumably the original operator would be the one the court action would be against, certainly the other operators should be the ones who are taken to task over this, I feel they are the "bad guys" in this not so much avanti, yes avanti could do more but the other operators are the ones who I believe have the obligation to fix this issue

 

[sot]

Is there something within this that relates to the ownership (well until recent OLR-ing) of the stated TOCs?
I seem to remember when calling the Avanti internal transfer number that First have substantial control of most of the stated TOCs (Scotrail obviously not).

 

[Starmill]

I tried to word my question to be slightly more specific, ie is avanti obliged to carry these passengers in first class, under NRCoT they have an obligation to carry them under certain circumstances but is there an obligation to carry them in first class at those times

There's simply no distinction in the NRCoT beyond it saying that if you have a First Class ticket but that's not provided where it was advertised at the time of booking, you're due a partial refund. It also says you mustn't sit in First Class with a Standard ticket unless you're advised otherwise, but that wouldn't be relevant here.

presumably the original operator would be the one the court action would be against, certainly the other operators should be the ones who are taken to task over this, I feel they are the "bad guys" in this not so much avanti, yes avanti could do more but the other operators are the ones who I believe have the obligation to fix this issue

If the former case applied then yes. However, the PRO and NRCoT could engage a new relationship between the end consumer and Avanti.

Is there something within this that relates to the ownership (well until recent OLR-ing) of the stated TOCs?
I seem to remember when calling the Avanti internal transfer number that First have substantial control of most of the stated TOCs (Scotrail obviously not).

Probably not. By far the most likely explanation is that Avanti don't want to give their meals and drinks out to too many people. They're also having a lot of complaints about First Class always being full, because on some services they've inexplicably reduced it to only about 20 seats.

 

[reb0118]

I'm struggling to think of a situation where somebody with a dedicated ScotRail only 1st class ticket would actually benefit timewise from being rerouted onto an Avanti service.

 

[Watershed]

I tried to word my question to be slightly more specific, ie is avanti obliged to carry these passengers in first class, under NRCoT they have an obligation to carry them under certain circumstances but is there an obligation to carry them in first class at those times

Yes, as you then aren't reliant on the terms of any 'goodwill' or other such ticket acceptance.

presumably the original operator would be the one the court action would be against, certainly the other operators should be the ones who are taken to task over this, I feel they are the "bad guys" in this not so much avanti, yes avanti could do more but the other operators are the ones who I believe have the obligation to fix this issue

That's correct. You don't see this sort of lack of ticket acceptance in first class on any other operator, which suggests that it's something that Avanti have tried to impose as a condition of the ticket acceptance agreed with other operators, but ultimately as with all of these things - if you make an offer they can't refuse...

I suppose it's not hugely surprising that they want to limit the number of first class passengers, when many of their services only have 20-odd first class seats in coach K - but with a bit of inventive thinking (e.g. split standard premium/first coaches) that needn't be the issue they're making it.

Of course without the nonsense of standard premium it wouldn't be an issue at all. SP seems to simply be an excuse to offer a poorer service for broadly the same money as before.

I'm struggling to think of a situation where somebody with a dedicated ScotRail only 1st class ticket would actually benefit timewise from being rerouted onto an Avanti service.

Yes; I imagine it's perhaps more for those holding tickets routed "TPE & ScotRail only", for example.

 

[Falcon1200]

I'm struggling to think of a situation where somebody with a dedicated ScotRail only 1st class ticket would actually benefit timewise from being rerouted onto an Avanti service.

Same here, the only route I can think of where Scotrail operate trains with First Class accommodation as well as Avanti is Edinburgh Waverley/Haymarket!

 

[Mak1981]

Yes, as you then aren't reliant on the terms of any 'goodwill' or other such ticket acceptance.

Looking at 28.2 I can see clearly an obligation to carry these passengers but I do not see an obligation that they must be allowed in first class, 28.2 says they must be provided an alternative means of travel, it doesn't say an equivalent unlike PRO obligations on the original carrier

 

[Starmill]

Same here, the only route I can think of where Scotrail operate trains with First Class accommodation as well as Avanti is Edinburgh Waverley/Haymarket!

The brief also states that Northern have First Class when they don't, and that Transport for Wales don't when they do, so I'm not really sure it matters too much. Neither of those have changed for many years now either. In any case a dedicated SR First Class product may be sold for use in Standard.

Looking at 28.2 I can see clearly an obligation to carry these passengers but I do not see an obligation that they must be allowed in first class, 28.2 says they must be provided an alternative means of travel, it doesn't say an equivalent unlike PRO obligations on the original carrier

It's implied that it means equivalent though isn't it? It has to, because otherwise Standard tickets would be accepted in First when ticket acceptance is in place! If it were on a partial basis it would say so. The implication is strong enough to form part of the contract.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The brief also states that Northern have First Class when they don't, and that Transport for Wales don't when they do, so I'm not really sure it matters too much. Neither of those have changed for many years now either. In any case a dedicated SR First Class product may be sold for use in Standard.

If you bought a ticket for use in Standard you can hardly complain when the acceptance offered is also in Standard, though. That must be pretty niche, why would you do that? I suppose on very rare occasions it can be cheaper, but it's not at all common.

I think a cup of tea is "de minimis" and so SP would be considered "comparable transport conditions" if a case was brought, but obviously I'm not a lawyer. The comparison is essentially between TOCs that offer full service First with significant free catering (LNER, Avanti) and TOCs that don't (ScotRail, TPE), though XC is an oddity as I think they're just tea and a biscuit?

 

[jfollows]

It just makes Avanti look cheap and nasty, really, any good business would welcome new customers onboard, be happy to treat them well and impress them with the quality of their service and would effectively sign up a few future First Class passengers with Avanti by doing so. But, no, they tell people with First Class tickets that they're not good enough for them, consign them to the other half of the train, and mean that the overriding memories of the passengers will be of being delayed and being treated poorly by everyone involved.
It just seems that cheapness and penny-pinching pervades the Avanti brand. Virgin, for all their flaws, would probably have done the opposite.
We need to encourage people to use trains, especially now, and one of the reasons people won't is because they get messed around when things go wrong. They don't care from whom they bought their tickets or who provides the replacement service, they just expect "the railway" to get them to their destination, and if they've paid more for First Class tickets they expect not to have to squeeze in with all of those who haven't.
I just get the feeling that Avanti couldn't care less, really.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It just makes Avanti look cheap and nasty, really, any good business would welcome new customers onboard, be happy to treat them well and impress them with the quality of their service and would effectively sign up a few future First Class passengers with Avanti by doing so. But, no, they tell people with First Class tickets that they're not good enough for them, consign them to the other half of the train, and mean that the overriding memories of the passengers will be of being delayed and being treated poorly by everyone involved.
It just seems that cheapness and penny-pinching pervades the Avanti brand. Virgin, for all their flaws, would probably have done the opposite.
We need to encourage people to use trains, especially now, and one of the reasons people won't is because they get messed around when things go wrong. They don't care from whom they bought their tickets or who provides the replacement service, they just expect "the railway" to get them to their destination, and if they've paid more for First Class tickets they expect not to have to squeeze in with all of those who haven't.
I just get the feeling that Avanti couldn't care less, really.

Acceptance would generally be in Standard Premium, which looks and quacks rather like First Class, just without the freebies.

 

[Starmill]

If you bought a ticket for use in Standard you can hardly complain when the acceptance offered is also in Standard, though.

Obviously you could because you're not being provided comparable transport conditions. The original ticket came with the promise of tables at every seat and extra space to work in. This isn't available in TPE Standard.

That must be pretty niche, why would you do that?

Because you've paid extra for Standard Premium and received the same as what you would have got if you'd only paid for Standard, obviously. Avanti must pay a partial refund in this case. I don't see anything niche about it?

I think a cup of tea is "de minimis"

With respect, nobody asked for your view on that. This thread is about a) whether Avanti West Coast, a government supplier in receipt if a lot of public money, are being adequately transparent and b) whether Avanti West Coast are complying with PIDD by descriminating on the basis of operator. We already knew that was your view from the other thread in any case and people have explained to you politely several times why they disagree with it, which is that if you were correct, a hot drink and a biscuit would be provided at £0 in the shop. They're not, and you had no response on that point last time.

The comparison is essentially between TOCs that offer full service First with significant free catering (LNER, Avanti) and TOCs that don't (ScotRail, TPE), though XC is an oddity as I think they're just tea and a biscuit?

This is also fundamentally wrong. Standard Premium tickets for Avanti West Coast are not accepted in First Class on TPE. Therefore it isn't possible to describe them as "comparable".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Obviously you could because you're not being provided comparable transport conditions. The original ticket came with the promise of tables at every seat and extra space to work in. This isn't available in TPE Standard.

You mean if you were travelling SP and got rerouted onto TPE? Actually most 397 seats are at tables, though I'd agree that 2+2 isn't really comparable transport conditions to 2+1 even though the 397 does have a very low density, very Mk1-like interior.

Because you've paid extra for Standard Premium and received the same as what you would have got if you'd only paid for Standard, obviously. Avanti must pay a partial refund in this case. I don't see anything niche about it?

We were talking about rerouting from TPE onto Avanti weren't we? I'd expect that if you'd upgraded to SP you would just get the SP upgrade refunded and Standard acceptance, though if it was an SP Advance that's slightly more complex.

With respect, nobody asked for your view on that.

Last time I checked it wasn't the original poster who dictated how a discussion should unfold, that's the moderators' job.

This thread is about a) whether Avanti West Coast, a government supplier in receipt if a lot of public money, are being adequately transparent and b) whether Avanti West Coast are complying with PIDD by descriminating on the basis of operator. We already knew that was your view from the other thread in any case and people have explained to you politely several times why they disagree with it, which is that if you were correct, a hot drink and a biscuit would be provided at £0 in the shop. They're not, and you had no response on that point last time.

As I said, they are "de minimis" whether they're provided or not. "Comparable" does not mean "exactly the same". Avanti SP and TPE 1st are broadly the same - 2+1 seating in a quieter environment. A cup of tea costing about £2 is moot. A full meal with alcoholic drinks which might cost over £10 or even £20 to buy at the buffet or not be purchasable at all is not de-minimis (yet notably if an Avanti 1st pax is rerouted onto TPE they don't go round asking for orders from the chippy!).

Avanti may not be complying with domestic regulations, I'm not totally sure, but I am pretty confident that if they accommodated a TPE 1st ticket holder in SP then a legal challenge on the EU regulation would fail. It's 2+1 and it's quieter, that's the main thing.

This is also fundamentally wrong. Standard Premium tickets for Avanti West Coast are not accepted in First Class on TPE. Therefore it isn't possible to describe them as "comparable".

I don't see how that in any way affects an objective comparison of the accommodation provided. Which is how the EU law is intended to be read, because there are all manner of classes on the European rails, not just simple 1st and 2nd - for instance the middle class on Italo is very much like SP - 2+1 with reduced service - but on Trenitalia it's very much like Italo's lowest class as the seating is 2+2 and you get a few basic freebies. I'd expect (would be interested if anyone has experience of this) thus that Italo's middle class would be rerouted into Trenitalia's 1st, but that Trenitalia's middle class would be rerouted into Italo's lowest, because when looking at the fundamental product they're basically equivalent.

 

[realemil]

though XC is an oddity as I think they're just tea and a biscuit?

Last time I travelled on XC, it either a breakfast or dinner.

Albeit it not being a full course meal, and all microwaved, you were also given biscuits, crisps, fruit, etc.

There were items like curries and sandwiches though.

Edit: for clarity this is on routes like Edinburgh - Exeter

 

[AY1975]

I presume Avanti has unilaterally decided to adopt this policy, although I suppose there's nothing to stop other train operators from adopting a similar policy on acceptance (or not) of other operators' dedicated First Class tickets where ticket acceptance is in place due to disruption (or even deciding not to accept any such tickets of other operators in First Class under such circumstances).

I would guess that this would also apply to First Class upgrades bought using the Seatfrog app, if the operator whose train you originally planned to catch participates in Seatfrog (which Grand Central and TransPennine Express do but Hull Trains doesn't and AFAIK nor does ScotRail). Thus, if you had a Seatfrog upgrade for a GC or TPE train that was cancelled and there was disruption on the East Coast Main Line so you were redirected onto an Avanti train via the West Coast Main Line your upgrade wouldn't be honoured, but if you had one for EMR, GWR, LNER or XC (all of whom participate in Seatfrog, at least in theory, although from my experience Seatfrog upgrades on XC are very hard to come by) it would be honoured by Avanti.

 

[Falcon1200]

It just makes Avanti look cheap and nasty, really, any good business would welcome new customers onboard, be happy to treat them well and impress them with the quality of their service and would effectively sign up a few future First Class passengers with Avanti by doing so.

Avanti have created a problem for themselves by reducing First Class accommodation on the majority of their fleet (the Pendolinos) to 1.5, and at times 0.5, coaches only (the rights and wrongs of that is a separate discussion!). So there is a risk, if displaced passengers from other operators are accepted into First Class, that Avanti's own First Class passengers will be disadvantaged. Allowing those displaced passengers into Standard Premium seems to me a reasonable compromise in the circumstances.

 

[Haywain]

So there is a risk, if displaced passengers from other operators are accepted into First Class, that Avanti's own First Class passengers will be disadvantaged.

That risk arises in standard class as well during disruption; do Avanti's First Class passengers deserve extra protection.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Avanti have created a problem for themselves by reducing First Class accommodation on the majority of their fleet (the Pendolinos) to 1.5, and at times 0.5, coaches only (the rights and wrongs of that is a separate discussion!). So there is a risk, if displaced passengers from other operators are accepted into First Class, that Avanti's own First Class passengers will be disadvantaged. Allowing those displaced passengers into Standard Premium seems to me a reasonable compromise in the circumstances.

Agreed. If there's an argument over a cup of tea and a biscuit, then they could provide those for free to such passengers, though that really is "de minimis". The core product is the upgraded seat.

 

[Watershed]

Agreed. If there's an argument over a cup of tea and a biscuit, then they could provide those for free to such passengers, though that really is "de minimis". The core product is the upgraded seat.

If it's so "de minimis", then why do Avanti expect people to pay far more for First Class than for Standard Premium?

TPE catering is also rather more substantive than just a cup of tea and a biscuit nowadays, especially on the 397 routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If it's so "de minimis", then why do Avanti expect people to pay far more for First Class than for Standard Premium?

Because First Class includes substantial catering.

TPE catering is also rather more substantive than just a cup of tea and a biscuit nowadays, especially on the 397 routes.

I just looked and it does look like that's changed. In that case, it probably does make more sense to accommodate TPE passengers in 1st, or if there's only room to sit in SP for the 1st service to be provided to those passengers there.

 

[Starmill]

Last time I checked it wasn't the original poster who dictated how a discussion should unfold, that's the moderators' job.

Sure, that's why you received a public reply from me politely asking you to stay on topic, and not a (confidential) message from a moderator about the forum's rules.

As I said, they are "de minimis" whether they're provided or not.

No they're not. If you really want to air your opinion about this so badly, that's fine but could you not find somewhere else to do it?

"Comparable" does not mean "exactly the same". Avanti SP and TPE 1st are broadly the same - 2+1 seating in a quieter environment.

This is wrong. If you were right, Standard Premium tickets would be accepted in First Class on these operators.

A cup of tea costing about £2 is moot.

You clearly haven't bought a cup of tea or coffee and a biscuit on a train recently. Where can you get them at that price? They'd usually be about double that on Avanti. If you have a railcard paid an extra £15 that's about 30% of the value of your upgrade. In no way "de menimis" then.

I don't see how that in any way affects an objective comparison of the accommodation provided.

So what? It shows that Avanti a) want to have their cake and eat it and b) are engaged in trying to cover it up.

If they came out, on the record, and said "these are the comparable standards of accommodation", then of course I'd look at that and consider whether I agreed. Every chance that you and I would be in agreement with Avanti, and that'd be fine. However, until someone can point me towards where Avanti have stated, on the record, what is comparable with what and why, then obviously I'm going to criticise them. I'd have thought all of this were obvious if you'd read the opening post.

This policy doesn't comply with the code of practice on PIDD, and Avanti know it doesn't so they're trying to keep it hush-hush.

If there's an argument over a cup of tea and a biscuit, then they could provide those for free to such passengers, though that really is "de minimis".

Nobody except for you is really bothered about that either way though.

Because First Class includes substantial catering.

OK but Avanti don't have a working definition for "substantial catering". I don't know if you do or not but if you do please don't post it here. As pointed out above Hull Trains offer more than CrossCountry so I don't think this has any true bearing on the matter.

I just looked and it does look like that's changed. In that case, it probably does make more sense to accommodate TPE passengers in 1st, or if there's only room to sit in SP for the 1st service to be provided to those passengers there.

It hasn't really changed though. The North and South TransPennine routes have had different menus and operating hours to the West Coast routes going back to at least 2013. Sandwiches were served when 350s worked the route for example, but only on that route. Other routes have now got a much expanded range of pastries and packaged snacks too. It just goes to show how it's a fools game using the catering as a comparison.

 

[yorkie]

https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/about-us/publications/archive/350-2014-07-passenger-information-during-disruption-cop/file.html

During disruptive incidents passengers should not be discriminated against on the basis of operator and efforts should be made to deliver the same high standards to everyone. This includes passengers travelling on Railway Undertaking-specific tickets who have been re-routed onto another Railway Undertaking’s trains because of disruption.

If Avanti are an honourable company, they will amend their ways once this is pointed out to them. Let's see if they do...

https://twitter.com/RailUKForums/status/1661074003593764865

"...passengers should not be discriminated against on the basis of operator and efforts should be made to deliver the same high standards to everyone..." Any chance you will do the right thing and adhere to this @AvantiWestCoast ?

Agreed. If there's an argument over a cup of tea and a biscuit, then they could provide those for free to such passengers, though that really is "de minimis". The core product is the upgraded seat.

A First Class ticket is valid in First Class accommodation.

If Avanti want to be different with their own tickets to the rest of the rail network, that's Avanti's problem.

Edit: The last time I used First Class on TPE, the snack box was better than the snack box on what is now called Avanti, so the argument made by Avanti and yourself is totally without merit anyway.

You clearly haven't bought a cup of tea or coffee and a biscuit on a train recently. Where can you get them at that price?

@Bletchleyite's pro-TOC arguments tend to be based on old memories (which aren't always accurate) and guesses. Not actual research.