My wife and I booked two tickets via Trainsplit from Neath to Brighton via Paddington and Victoria. The barriers at Paddington Circle Line would not let us through. GWR said it was TfLs problem, Ticketsplit refused to accept the tickets wouldn’t work and blamed TfL. We were unable to complete our journey until we booked a taxi from Paddington to Victoria at a cost of £25. GWR said our tickets didn’t show the tube journey. So we were late for our next journey and £25 out of pocket with no one owning up.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Buck passing refund policy
- Thread starter fedup2
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Please can you post a link to the website which you used to purchase the tickets from? That would help clear up the confusion. Alternatively are you able to attach a screenshot of the booking confirmation email, with your names, email addresses, and reference numbers blanked out?
Did you get emailed the tickets directly or did you get a code to put into the station ticket machine?
Did you get emailed the tickets directly or did you get a code to put into the station ticket machine?
Why would you not just take the tube and pay contactless for it? Where’s £25 come from?
Please post *exactly* what tickets were held and whether these were in paper or e-ticket format so we can find out what’s happened here.
Royston Vasey
Established Member
It sounds like the slider might have accidentally been clicked in advanced options in Trainsplit:
"Experimental: Let me use Oyster/contactless to travel cross-London"
In which case you'd have been given tickets to Paddington and tickets from Victoria but nothing in between.
For future reference, you could have just tapped in and out with a contactless payment on the Circle Line connection, and raised a the customer service ticket with Trainsplit. They're usually very good.
"Experimental: Let me use Oyster/contactless to travel cross-London"
In which case you'd have been given tickets to Paddington and tickets from Victoria but nothing in between.
For future reference, you could have just tapped in and out with a contactless payment on the Circle Line connection, and raised a the customer service ticket with Trainsplit. They're usually very good.
WesternLancer
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 8,891
Did you have tickets that actually included travel on the tube? If the tickets were split you may not have done. I would check this. It can’t be assumed.
If I split my tickets in London for a cross London journey I use my Oyster card and don’t split if the cost of adding on a tube trip makes no meaningful cost saving.
Last edited:
MarlowDonkey
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,262
Not really relevant, but isn't the better route to take the Bakerloo to Oxford Circus and use the cross platform to the Victoria Line?
If splitting in London, one of the tickets can need to be a "U1", instead of London Terminals.
Unable? I think what you mean is you chose to take a taxi instead of paying yourself for a journey by tube.
Still not relevant, but if you've got luggage the attraction of a single tube journey without change is clear. You can't expect someone who is an occasional visitor to know that there is cross platform interchange at Oxford Circus.
Last edited:
Please can you post exactly what tickets you had.
If they were indeed valid then it would be £5.40 you would get back (or 20p more if travelling at peak) to cover the cost of the tube fare for your journey. They won't pay for taxis.
Yes, please tell us how much you paid for the tickets and provide more details, or upload a picture if you can. It is possible that you were issued with a ticket that was missing the Maltese Cross symbol ("AP READING"), which is a symbol that London Underground ticket gates and staff check for in the first instance. The symbol is just a convenience and tickets can still be valid across London without it but it means staff have to check the route manually and anecdotally many of them don't seem to do this and incorrectly think the absence of the symbol means it is not valid which has never been true. If GWR staff told you it was valid then I would take that to be correct and you're in a breach of contract situation with London Underground. As island points out, it's unlikely compensation would exceed the cost of the London Underground fares unless there was some other factor such as being delayed so much by this as risking missing the connecting train at a time of day (does such a time exist?) when a taxi would be faster.
(BTW There used to be direct services from Reading to Brighton, and there's another route SLOUGH that does have the Maltese Cross. But it doesn't say 'READING NOT LONDON'.)
(BTW There used to be direct services from Reading to Brighton, and there's another route SLOUGH that does have the Maltese Cross. But it doesn't say 'READING NOT LONDON'.)
Last edited:
paul1609
Established Member
Advance tickets availablle from Neath to Brighton have the following routes:
AP Salisbury and AP Reading tickets are not vaild on the tube. +AP Slough tickets are valid on the tube.
AP Reading tickets are intended to be routed via the North Downs Line and maybe confusing, perhaps theyd be better off route AP Gomshall or something.
Personally if I had a good connection at Reading Id always use the north downs train anyway even if it had a slightly longer journeytime. It avoids the London terminals faff and its much nicer than the tube even with 165/6s. Theres a good frequency of trains from Gatwick to Brighton.
AP Salisbury and AP Reading tickets are not vaild on the tube. +AP Slough tickets are valid on the tube.
AP Reading tickets are intended to be routed via the North Downs Line and maybe confusing, perhaps theyd be better off route AP Gomshall or something.
Personally if I had a good connection at Reading Id always use the north downs train anyway even if it had a slightly longer journeytime. It avoids the London terminals faff and its much nicer than the tube even with 165/6s. Theres a good frequency of trains from Gatwick to Brighton.
If the OP used Trainsplit it's quite possible separate tickets were issued which makes the above irrelevant.
Also it should be noted that if an "AP Reading" ticket is issued for travel via London despite the "intended" routing, that doesn't invalidate it.
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 18,223
It doesn't but, realistically, TfL are not going to accept it.
paul1609
Established Member
Its not a route Id ever use but as an advance ticket shouldnt it be booked trains only? I'd expect the itinery to be booked train to Reading, Booked train to Gatwick via Guildford, booked train to Brighton or some similar variation (Redhill etc). I cant really see how it would be possible to have a booked train to Paddington on a AP Reading routing shouldnt it then be the +AP Slough routing. If it is possible theres no real reason for +AP Slough tickets. I think it needs somebody way cleverer than me to look at the trainsplit algorithms. May be a post Elizabethline issue where you can get to Brighton via Paddington without using the underground via Farringdon.
The only actual restriction in the data for AP Reading is that the train has to travel via, well, Reading. It doesn't carry a cross-London marker, so TrainSplit shouldn't (based on how I understand the journey planner works) sell it regardless of whether it's "technically" valid.
You could get one of these to Paddington, but shouldn't let you go further due to the lack of such marker. It's very likely, though, that these tickets may not actually have availability in the reservations system to go into Paddington which renders this all moot in the first place.
paul1609
Established Member
I agree, re-reading the OPs post additionally its not really clear who sold the ticket is ticketsplit another variation of trainsplit?
Raileasy
Verified Rep
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 15
Hello! Just want to clarify a few things regarding this case to aid discussion:
The customer in question held a combination of two tickets, one of which had a 'Maltese cross' symbol indicating validity for a cross-London transfer on TfL services, including London Underground. The search was made with "Let me use Oyster/contactless to travel cross-London" switched off. The ticket was fulfilled as a paper ticket via ticket on departure (ToD). Tickets held:
@fedup2 - did you show the staff member at the Paddington gateline the ticket? If it wasn’t accepted despite showing the Maltese Cross, this is a training issue particularly at such a major station.
The customer in question held a combination of two tickets, one of which had a 'Maltese cross' symbol indicating validity for a cross-London transfer on TfL services, including London Underground. The search was made with "Let me use Oyster/contactless to travel cross-London" switched off. The ticket was fulfilled as a paper ticket via ticket on departure (ToD). Tickets held:
- https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=4216&dest=3333&rte=00820&tkt=W2O
- https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=SWI&dest=BTN&rte=411&ldn=1&tkt=W2Q
@fedup2 - did you show the staff member at the Paddington gateline the ticket? If it wasn’t accepted despite showing the Maltese Cross, this is a training issue particularly at such a major station.
It is still unclear why the OP did not use contactless for the tube. He was already at the tube barrier and would have had to make way to the exit (spend more time and effort).
Even if the staff had training issue etc, one should look to cut their losses. Going with the notion that "I am right, these chaps are wrong, and they will have to pay for it" makes no sense.
Spending £25 when 2x£2.8=£5.6 would have been a more sensible thing to do makes me think there is something missing in the narrative.
Even if the staff had training issue etc, one should look to cut their losses. Going with the notion that "I am right, these chaps are wrong, and they will have to pay for it" makes no sense.
Spending £25 when 2x£2.8=£5.6 would have been a more sensible thing to do makes me think there is something missing in the narrative.
Slightly puzzled why GWR are involved at all as the issue is only about the TfL leg.
BTW who is the highlighted "they," the OP or GWR?
GWR.
Adam Williams
Established Member
Ticketysplit is a whitelabelled version of TrainSplit, provided to a partner who owns the brand. The fulfilment and customer service are still done by TrainSplit/Raileasy.
Because the customer complained to GWR.
paul1609
Established Member
Especially since the journeytime from the Paddington LU Barriers to Victoria wouldnt (depend on timing) be significantly faster by taxi than by circle line.
Regrettably, and I am not suggesting this applies in the extant case, from my experience in transport customer service there are passengers who upon encountering a problem with no immediate resolution will choose to jump in a taxi and demand reimbursal from the perceived failing transport provider. They do not seek to minimise any additional costs they incur.
I'd be interested in seeing a picture of the Swindon (Wilts) to Brighton tickets, assuming the Brighton ticket gates didn't retain them. The only thing I can think of is if they somehow printed without Maltese Crosses (data error, old printer with faded gaps on the ticket etc). Because the Maltese Cross is such a fundamental piece of cross-London transfer ticket knowledge that gateline staff should not be getting this wrong.
It is not uncommon that tickets don't work barriers; this can be for a variety of reasons (e.g. improper encoding by the ticket machine that dispensed the tickets, or the magstripe was damaged, which can happen if it gets near anything magnetic, etc...) but staff should let you through, on presentation of the tickets.
They are both correct, TfL/LU are to blame for this. If their staff refused to let you through, the best thing to do would be to tap in and out, and submit a refund request to TfL. Unfortunately some TfL gateline staff do refuse to allow passengers to travel with valid tickets; this is a known problem, which TfL doesn't do enough to rectify.
If you missed the train from Victoria, as part of your journey from Neath to Brighton, this is likely due to taking a taxi instead of taking the Underground. It's 14 min by Underground (excluding time to get to/from platforms, wait for a train) but at busy times would be 35 min by car (excluding time to book the taxi and get to/from the pickup/set down locations).
TfL may be reluctant to refund you for a taxi, as the appropriate course of action would be to tap in using a Contactless card. If you do not have a Contactless payment card, there are ticket machines available which take cash and cards, albeit at a higher fare, but still much less than the taxi fare.
I don't understand how you can say that "GWR said our tickets didn't show the tube journey" when you also said that "GWR said it was TfLs problem"; perhaps different people at GWR said different things? This is not uncommon for GWR, who have poor standards of staff training at stations such as Paddington, and poor standards in their customer services department too.
In summary, the dispute is with TfL; TfL are liable and must pay compensation, however TfL may be reluctant to pay more than the cost of the cash fare from Paddington to Victoria.
Wonder where OP went after posting. 
TfL staff could potentially be in the wrong here, but their liability is only limited to the service they did not provide. Any consequential loss here is the fault of OP.
Imagine someone arrives at a transit airport and is denied boarding on their onward flight due to misunderstanding of some fee payable. Any sensible person would just pay the fee and try to claim that back later, rather than miss the flight altogether. The passenger cannot just decide to buy a first class ticket or hire a private jet to get to destination and then claim that from the airline where he had bought economy class ticket.
Maybe I am being cynical, but till we don't have sight of the tickets, I think we are not told the full story.
TfL staff could potentially be in the wrong here, but their liability is only limited to the service they did not provide. Any consequential loss here is the fault of OP.
Imagine someone arrives at a transit airport and is denied boarding on their onward flight due to misunderstanding of some fee payable. Any sensible person would just pay the fee and try to claim that back later, rather than miss the flight altogether. The passenger cannot just decide to buy a first class ticket or hire a private jet to get to destination and then claim that from the airline where he had bought economy class ticket.
Maybe I am being cynical, but till we don't have sight of the tickets, I think we are not told the full story.
The Raileasy account posted BRFares links, and I'm sure would have mentioned if there was anything particularly out of the ordinary about the tickets.
WesternLancer
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 8,891
Sound like maybe the op was trying to pass the buck…
Agreed but when the customer is out of pocket (and has a receipt to prove it) they can be very demanding when communicating with the CR Department.
Sometimes customers are reimbursed simply to bring a close to what can be increasingly time consuming exchanges.
I agree and every customer has a right to demand their costs when they are out of pocket.
I was just highliting that the OP choose to incur costs no reasonable person would have done. He had the choice to use the tube via contactless or even cash. He was already at tube station, but chose to go out of his way to be extra out of pocket by £25 instead of £5.6.