"Booked train and connecting services" - what's the definition of each?

[BRX]

"Outward Travel​

Only valid on booked train and connecting services only"

The text above appears in the conditions on an Advance ticket I have from Herne Hill to Dover Priory.

The itinerary is Thameslink to St Pancras and then Southeastern.

It states that we have a reservation on the SE leg, but not on the TL leg.

What exactly is the definition of a "booked train"? Is it one with a reservation?

And what's the definition of "connecting services"? The services that connect with the booked train? Are they limited to the one on the itinerary or can it be any connecting service within reason?

Essentially I want to know if there's any risk in getting a slightly earlier TL up to St Pancras to allow a more generous connection time.

(I think I'm used to getting these tickets on paper, where it often gives the time for the "booked train" but says nothing about the connecting service. But this time it's an e-ticket, and it's not set out like that - it states only the departure time from Herne Hill.)

 

[yorkie]

What exactly is the definition of a "booked train"? Is it one with a reservation?

Yes

And what's the definition of "connecting services"? The services that connect with the booked train? Are they limited to the one on the itinerary or can it be any comnecting service within reason?

If the Thameslink train is not "booked" and is shown as a "suggested service" and not as "mandatory" (or similar wording), you may take any appropriate service to connect with the booked service.

Essentially I want to know if there's any risk in getting a slightly earlier TL up to St Pancras to allow a more generous connection time.

You can.

However, my suggestion for future bookings is to obtain the exact itinerary you want at the time of purchase; you can do this by specifying changing at: St Pancras, and then specifying additional interchange time (the value you specify is added onto the minimum connection allowance, which is 15 minutes).

 

[BRX]

If the Thameslink train is not "booked" and is shown as a "suggested service" and not as "mandatory" (or similar wording), you may take any appropriate service to connect with the booked service.

It's shown as neither "mandatory" nor "suggested" if I view the ticket in Google Wallet and look at the itinerary.

However if I look at "booking details" for the ticket within the trainsplit app, there's a bit of text that says:

⚠️ You must follow your booked itinerary

 

[Hadders]

Thameslink have an easement allowing you to take any train where the Thmeslink train is a connection to of from a different train operators service.

 

[BRX]

Thameslink have an easement allowing you to take any train where the Thmeslink train is a connection to of from a different train operators service.

Saw this mentioned on another thread. But it's unpublished, is that right? So not any help if in dispute with a gateline attendant.

 

[yorkie]

Saw this mentioned on another thread. But it's unpublished, is that right? So not any help if in dispute with a gateline attendant.

If you want to guarantee no arguments, specify additional interchange time next time you book.

 

[BRX]

If you want to guarantee no arguments, specify additional interchange time next time you book.

I'm aware that's an option - the question though is about whether or not that connecting service is officially flexible. If it is, that's useful to know.

In this case, I'd not have booked onto an earlier train than necessary because I'd not want to me committed to that. As it turns out, on the day we have a bit of extra time and it's nice to have the option of using that to leave a little earlier and have a more relaxed change of trains at st pancras.

 

[yorkie]

I don't think we can provide anything that is publicly available which unequivocally and explicitly states you can do this, and is guaranteed to avoid any potential arguments.

 

[Hadders]

Even if something’s in the public domain, it won’t stop some staff making up their own rules saying things like ‘it doesn’t apply to us’ etc.

 

[BRX]

I was kind of wondering if the terms "booked train" and "connections" are clearly defined anywhere for these purposes, because if they are then it shouldn't matter whether TL have an easement or not.

 

[TUC]

Am I missing something here? I would have thought it is obvious that 'booked train' is the one with a reservation, and that 'connecting services' are the rest,

 

[toffeedanish]

Am I missing something here? I would have thought it is obvious that 'booked train' is the one with a reservation, and that 'connecting services' are the rest,

The phrase 'booked itinerary' (post #3) is problematic. Counted-place reservations also confuse many people.

 

[OscarH]

The text above appears in the conditions on an Advance ticket I have from Herne Hill to Dover Priory.

The itinerary is Thameslink to St Pancras and then Southeastern.

It states that we have a reservation on the SE leg, but not on the TL leg.

What exactly is the definition of a "booked train"? Is it one with a reservation?

And what's the definition of "connecting services"? The services that connect with the booked train? Are they limited to the one on the itinerary or can it be any connecting service within reason?

Essentially I want to know if there's any risk in getting a slightly earlier TL up to St Pancras to allow a more generous connection time.

(I think I'm used to getting these tickets on paper, where it often gives the time for the "booked train" but says nothing about the connecting service. But this time it's an e-ticket, and it's not set out like that - it states only the departure time from Herne Hill.)

Aside from internal easements, the standard advance rules for all TOCs are that if the train in your itinerary is a reservable train you must stick to it. If it isn't reservable you have more freedom.

If you follow the timetables.trainsplit.com links on your email, you should see "Reservations available" at the bottom for your Southeastern, and if you also see that at the bottom for your Thameslink then in theory you should stick to it (ignoring the easement), if it doesn't say anything about reservations for the Thameslink train you have more freedom

 

[BRX]

Part of the issue here, I think, is with e-tickets because it can be difficult to know what's the definitive "ticket" and related itinerary information.

For the ticket in question, here's info from 3 different places - within the trainsplit app, as it appears within Google wallet, and as it appears on the pdf version.

Note that the info, relating to what's reserved or reservable, is not consistent.

 

[MrJeeves]

Part of the issue here, I think, is with e-tickets because it can be difficult to know what's the definitive "ticket" and related itinerary information.

For the ticket in question, here's info from 3 different places - within the trainsplit app, as it appears within Google wallet, and as it appears on the pdf version.

Note that the info, relating to what's reserved or reservable, is not consistent.

The information shown on PDF tickets and Wallet-based E-Tickets is decided by RDG through a list of fairly detailed requirements and logic.

The information within confirmation/itinerary emails is much less formulaic, and hence there is greater scope to provide more detailed information to customers.

At the end of the day, it is safe to say that the vast majority of people do plan (other than in case of delays and cancellations) to travel on the service(s) they chose when buying their ticket, and that the unambiguous itinerary information makes this only easier for them.

If someone were to start throwing "You don't necessarily have to travel on this service, but make sure that if you get another train it does not offer reservations (either for seats or *generic space in train*), and that you meet the minimum connection time for any future connecting service, which you can check on these two websites if you know what you're looking for." into the itinerary, it'd only create significant confusion for the vast majority of travellers.

 

[kacper]

Thameslink have an easement allowing you to take any train where the Thmeslink train is a connection to of from a different train operators service.

Is there any official statement of this online you could provide? I have wanted to utilise this easement before when travelling with someone but they referred to the forum as a “random train web no one ever heard of” so we couldn’t

EDIT: not needed I just saw post 12

 

[redreni]

Enforcement of "booked train only" restrictions on local connecting services is, to my mind, unsatisfactory as it stands. It's quite difficult to know what's allowed and what isn't as well as what's going to be enforced.

Therefore it's difficult to know if it's worth the hassle / modest extra cost of adding different legs of the journey to the basket separately when booking, so as to be able to specify flexible tickets only for the shorter leg(s) but allow Advances for the main leg.

Last time I booked an advance from Scunthorpe to London U1234 via St Neots and Bedford (with a replacement bus between the two), the replacement bus arrived at Bedford considerably earlier than planned. I wish I had known at the time about GTR's internal guidance not to enforce counted place reservations for Advances where GTR is a connecting leg. The GTR staff on the gateline didn't seem to know about their own company's guidance as they told me I had to wait 25 minutes and let two trains go so as to follow my itinerary.

I'm not sure I agree most passengers just want to stick to the trains they booked. If a better option is available on the day, most people want to know whether they're allowed to take it and want to do so. The lack of clarity around what you can and can't do on Advance singles might well be one reason why a lot of people prefer to use contactless for connecting legs in and around London, even when that works out more expensive and/or reduces their ability to vindicate their rights in the event of missed connections or delays.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If a better option is available on the day, most people want to know whether they're allowed to take it and want to do so.

The main thing the railway needs to bang itself around the head about is delays. Most people don't want a partial refund, they want to get there on time. So if the 09:30 is the booked train but everything is delayed and the connection will be missed, people might want to use the 09:00 and not miss their connection. This situation arose for me on Friday, and as the connection was only two-hourly while I'd have got a full refund it would have been extremely annoying to be two hours late, but I had a walk up.

It isn't reasonable to consider being on time a service available only to those on premium priced tickets - it should be available to everyone.

 

[Snow1964]

Am I missing something here? I would have thought it is obvious that 'booked train' is the one with a reservation, and that 'connecting services' are the rest,

There seems to be another category, had an advance last week, and had to stand for part of the journey with reservation (GWR substituted a 5car IET on a busy train. Because had to stand on main part raised a complaint.

On way back the connecting service was specified in the advance, but was already full and standing. So even though itinerary and confirmation said specific train, sit in any seat, couldn't do so as no seats available. Wouldn't have bothered to complain for this on its own, but as already raising complaint about standing on advances with reservations, added it as part of same trip on same ticket booking.

GWR have replied that specified connections on advance tickets do not include reservations, so not getting anything as compensation for having to stand on this part.

So seems even specified train connections with sit in any seat, are deemed not reservable, even though we have mandatory reservation coupon included with the tickets. - Mandatory in railway speak appears to be different to usual definition

 

[JonathanH]

So seems even specified train connections with sit in any seat, are deemed not reservable, even though we have mandatory reservation coupon included with the tickets

I don't understand how you reach that conclusion. All they said is that you can't guarantee having a seat on the train you are obliged to catch as the mandatory reservation.

 

[Tetchytyke]

So seems even specified train connections with sit in any seat, are deemed not reservable, even though we have mandatory reservation coupon included with the tickets.

I'm honestly not sure what point you are making.

Unless you have a specific seat reserved then you are not guaranteed a seat.

This is different to it being mandatory to take a specific train.

It's made very clear in the booking process that a 'counted place' reservation- which is the system they use to book you on to a specific service- is not a seat reservation. As the booking systems say, take any available seat but we don't guarantee you will get a seat.

 

[JonathanH]

It's made very clear in the booking process that a 'counted place' reservation- which is the system they use to book you on to a specific service- is not a seat reservation.

It might be said that it is made very clear that it is a 'train reservation'.

 

[BRX]

My post further up the thread shows how inconsistently this information can be presented (depending on which app/format you view the ticket info in).

I think that there could be better wording than telling someone they have "reserved a space". They haven't actually reserved any space. Telling them they have reserved a space, but no specific seat, is only going to confuse people, and doesn't communicate anything useful. The useful info is (a) you are not guaranteed a seat and (b) your ticket is only valid on this train.


I'm reposting the three screenshots here at a more sensible size:

 

[MrJeeves]

They haven't actually reserved any space. Telling them they have reserved a space, but no specific seat, is only going to confuse people, and doesn't communicate anything useful. The useful info is (a) you are not guaranteed a seat and (b) your ticket is only valid on this train.

But part (b) only applies in the case of particular tickets (advances), provided there aren't easements which allow you to ignore counted places on that leg even with an advance!

If I buy an off-peak ticket from Brighton to London Bridge, I'll still have a counted place for that service even though the ticket is flexible.

There's a decent chunk of logic, which only then gets more complex with split ticketing where you might transition from a flexible ticket with a counted place onto an advance with a counted place while remaining on the train.

 

[BRX]

But part (b) only applies in the case of particular tickets (advances), provided there aren't easements which allow you to ignore counted places on that leg even with an advance!

If I buy an off-peak ticket from Brighton to London Bridge, I'll still have a counted place for that service even though the ticket is flexible.

There's a decent chunk of logic, which only then gets more complex with split ticketing where you might transition from a flexible ticket with a counted place onto an advance with a counted place while remaining on the train.

Sure, there are some tickets where part (b) doesn't apply, in which case, it doesn't need to say that.

In the end what the passenger needs to know about each ticket leg is:

- Do I have a seat reservation with this ticket
- Am I obliged to travel on this particular train

So, just convey whatever info applies to each leg in a clear way.

Saying "you have a reserved place on this service, but individual sear reservations are not possible" answers neither question clearly & unambiguously.

 

[redreni]

Saying "you have a reserved place on this service, but individual sear reservations are not possible" answers neither question clearly & unambiguously.

It's also false - 'counted place' is industry jargon, so rightly not used, but the use of the term 'reserved place' in substitution is just misleading. There is no place on that train reserved for that particular passenger. For all the retailer knows, the train may be full on arrival and impossible to board.

The recent history of the introduction of advance tickets to the GB railway (a textbook case of 'bait and switch') also needs to be borne in mind. The phenomenon of operators of local and regional services caring about booked trains and mandatory reservations is considerably more recent than the phenomenon of advance 'Intercity operator & connections' tickets.

People got used to the connections being flexible. A lot of the time, they still are flexible, but there's no way for an average passenger to check. The non-enforcement of these restrictions most of the time makes the occasions where the rules are enforced, and passengers caught out, all the more unreasonable.

If I were the rail regulator I would not allow enforcement of the booked train only restriction on connecting legs shorter than 10 miles or on connecting legs shorter than 10% of the distance of the main leg, until such time as the industry works out a way of conveying clearly and accurately to the passenger whether or not they're actually going to enforce the booked train only restriction on each leg of the journey. That way, the passenger will know what to expect and will have the option to book a flexible ticket either for their entire journey, or just for the connecting leg(s) where flexibility is important to them, if they wish.

It really isn't good enough just to say "always stick to your itinerary on an advance" when the reality is there are many cases where passengers will not want to and do not, in practice, have to. It doesn't do anybody any good to have people hanging around on platforms waiting for their 'booked'(?) Thameslink train, unaware that secret guidance exists to the effect that they can take the first train that comes along.

 

[telstarbox]

In this situation I wouldn't expect any hassle if checked on board the Thameslink, because it's clearly the 'short' leg to a destination well outside London. If necessary I'd say that I wasn't familiar with STP and got the earlier train to ensure I made the connection easily.

 

[redreni]

In this situation I wouldn't expect any hassle if checked on board the Thameslink, because it's clearly the 'short' leg to a destination well outside London. If necessary I'd say that I wasn't familiar with STP and got the earlier train to ensure I made the connection easily.

No, there wouldn't be any hassle on Thameslink. But there would be on Northern. And most irregular leisure travellers wouldn't know the difference.

 

[Tester]

The Germans manage this clearly and unambiguously without difficulty.

Why can't we?

 

[OscarH]

If I were the rail regulator I would not allow enforcement of the booked train only restriction on connecting legs shorter than 10 miles or on connecting legs shorter than 10% of the distance of the main leg, until such time as the industry works out a way of conveying clearly and accurately to the passenger whether or not they're actually going to enforce the booked train only restriction on each leg of the journey. That way, the passenger will know what to expect and will have the option to book a flexible ticket either for their entire journey, or just for the connecting leg(s) where flexibility is important to them, if they wish.

It really isn't good enough just to say "always stick to your itinerary on an advance" when the reality is there are many cases where passengers will not want to and do not, in practice, have to. It doesn't do anybody any good to have people hanging around on platforms waiting for their 'booked'(?) Thameslink train, unaware that secret guidance exists to the effect that they can take the first train that comes along.

I'd agree with this. So few trains are actually non-reservable now, and trying to explain counted places for passengers is virtually impossible, they're a useful bean-counting concept internally but passengers shouldn't need to care.

I think the industry needs to decide that advances aren't used how they used to be as you say, and we should:

• Display counted place as no reservation to passengers, they shouldn't need to care
• Generally advise always following the itinerary on advances (without the "no reservations" nonsense there currently is - which served a purpose in the past but is now basically useless and just a source of confusion)
• With a proper and public set of easements on this, either based on a rule as you suggest, or by expanding the current 2 easements that exist. These should be publicly accessible on NRE and also in machine readable format so retailers can know and show proper advice.