Can staff refuse to let you through a barrier when abandoning a journey?

[Bertie the bus]

How long does the delay need to be for an advance ticket to be accepted for exit at an intermediate station, on the basis that we accept that an advance ticket may not be used to exit when everything is running to plan?

If we are getting technical I don't think passing through a gateline is either breaking your journey or exiting an intermediate station. Break of journey is, or at least used to be, classed as leaving the station and there are reasons why someone might want to pass the gateline without leaving the station, e.g. buy something from the shop or smoke a cigarette.

 

[Bluejays]

Others have already mentioned it, and I'd imagine you have done so already. But I would very much urge you to get a complaint in, with a good description and name if you managed to get it. Management needs to have a word here, because it's really not an acceptable way to be treating people.

 

[tspaul26]

You can purchase a through fare from Euston to Kenilworth on the Trainline or Avanti website. It is a return journey I do once or twice a week.

In that case the £54.20 figure is not a through fare: it is a combination of a Euston to Coventry Advance (£51.00) and a Coventry to Kenilworth Anytime Day Single (£3.20).

If travelling with this combination of tickets then the passenger is at liberty to leave at Coventry and simply not use the second ticket.

This is nothing to do with break of journey nor, for that matter, abandonment of a journey as such.

It is of course different if travelling on a through Advance fare.

 

[Exrover]

In that case the £54.20 figure is not a through fare: it is a combination of a Euston to Coventry Advance (£51.00) and a Coventry to Kenilworth Anytime Day Single (£3.20).

If travelling with this combination of tickets then the passenger is at liberty to leave at Coventry and simply not use the second ticket.

This is nothing to do with break of journey nor, for that matter, abandonment of a journey as such.

It is of course different if travelling on a through Advance fare.

This is my ticket - it was an advance single through ticket. Since my itinerary had already failed as the delay from Euston meant I could not make the 19.00 train, should I not have been allowed to abandon the journey?

 

[SteveM70]

Is there a definition of what constitutes "disruption"? Is it as simple as missing a connection, or is there some defined number of minutes of delay, or is it just a bit vague?

 

[redreni]

Not if the passenger has an advance ticket, where the rules unfortunately quite clearly state that the ticket is only valid between the points at the start and end of the ticket.

Stopping short on tickets that permit break of journey was what the 'Man in Seat 61' was describing.

Clearly there is a point of impass between asking to be paid the excess to leave an intermediate station and asking to exit without paying that, potentially resolved by travelling on to the destination.

The way these conditions are now enforced by some TOCs and some staff can make the railway borderline unusable at times.

It's worth checking, when booking such journeys, whether you can get a separate ticket (possibly a flexible ticket if you think you might want to travel earlier than booked) for the first and/or last leg of the journey on local trains, and only use an advance for the longest and most expensive leg. Often the cost of doing this is very similar to using a through ticket and can avoid a certain kind of employee trying to persecute you for using common sense and responding to the world around you.

 

[tspaul26]

This is my ticket - it was an advance single through ticket. Since my itinerary had already failed as the delay from Euston meant I could not make the 19.00 train, should I not have been allowed to abandon the journey?

View attachment 151230

If the delay to the Euston to Coventry train is what caused the missed connection then you would have been entitled to abandon the journey and claim a full refund because you could not complete the booked itinerary.

You would also be entitled to return to your origin free of charge, although the passenger is not obliged to do this.

NRCOT nn. 29.2 and 30.1 deal with this.

However, you seem to have misunderstood the point around the £54.20 price you quoted for hypothetical travel on 7 February: that is not a through fare which means that the passenger would be permitted to leave at Coventry regardless i.e. even if the train ran on time.

 

[Starmill]

Is there a definition of what constitutes "disruption"? Is it as simple as missing a connection, or is there some defined number of minutes of delay, or is it just a bit vague?

It's not vague in my reading, you're entitled to abandon a journey if the train is delayed, cancelled or your reservation(s) won't be honoured.

If the delay to the Euston to Coventry train is what caused the missed connection then you would have been entitled to abandon the journey and claim a full refund because you could not complete the booked itinerary.

You would also be entitled to return to your origin free of charge, although the passenger is not obliged to do this.

NRCOT nn. 29.2 and 30.1 deal with this.

However, you seem to have misunderstood the point around the £54.20 price you quoted for hypothetical travel on 7 February: that is not a through fare which means that the passenger would be permitted to leave at Coventry regardless i.e. even if the train ran on time.

This case also sounds like no refund at all is being requested, whether entitled or no, which makes it even more egregious that someone took such a hostile interpretation.

 

[SteveM70]

t's not vague in my reading, you're entitled to abandon a journey if the train is delayed, cancelled or your reservation(s) won't be honoured

Delayed at all?

 

[tspaul26]

Delayed at all?

The NRCOT is not qualified so, in effect, yes.

And since the passenger will almost inevitably be a consumer then it is highly unlikely that the courts would interpret the plain wording in a stricter fashion - and a TOC would be foolish in the extreme to allow a judge to rule on the matter.

 

[AlterEgo]

Delayed at all?

The NRCoT could define this but chooses not to, so we must assume it means “at all”.

 

[tspaul26]

This case also sounds like no refund at all is being requested, whether entitled or no, which makes it even more egregious that someone took such a hostile interpretation.

I suppose, in theory, another way to conceptualise the matter would be as follows:

1. Train is delayed
2. Missed connection
3. Passenger wishes to break journey when not permitted to do so on a through Advance fare
4. Passenger must pay an excess fare in order to permit break of journey
5. Passenger then recovers the additional expense from the TOC in default for breach of contract, subject to the usual rules applicable to such a claim.

But this is obviously much more convoluted, as opposed to the delay - abandon - refund approach.

 

[The exile]

If the delay to the Euston to Coventry train is what caused the missed connection then you would have been entitled to abandon the journey and claim a full refund because you could not complete the booked itinerary.

Surely not - this would put the passenger to Kenilworth (who is still able to complete his/her journey - just late) at a massive advantage over the passenger to Coventry only, whose journey is complete and thus can’t “abandon” it

 

[tspaul26]

Surely not - this would put the passenger to Kenilworth (who is still able to complete his/her journey - just late) at a massive advantage over the passenger to Coventry only, whose journey is complete and thus can’t “abandon” it

Surely yes.

And our Kenilworth passenger can’t complete his intended journey because he missed the relevant train as a result of the railway’s default.

The fact that our Coventry passenger may have completed his journey late is neither here nor there: his train ran, he travelled on it, he reached his intended destination and may be entitled to compensation (not a refund) for the inconvenience occasioned by the delay.

 

[JonathanH]

And our Kenilworth passenger can’t complete his intended journey because he missed the relevant train as a result of the railway’s default.

The Kenilworth passenger can complete the journey, just an hour late. The railway has defaulted on getting them there on time, but hasn't defaulted on getting them there.

 

[tspaul26]

The Kenilworth passenger can complete the journey, just an hour late. The railway has defaulted on getting them there on time, but hasn't defaulted on getting them there.

Which leads us to the question of what the following words mean:

• “journey”
• “complete”

And any interpretation which would in effect require as a matter of legal obligation that a consumer be inconvenienced following such default must be treated with a great degree of suspicion.

 

[Starmill]

The Kenilworth passenger can complete the journey, just an hour late. The railway has defaulted on getting them there on time, but hasn't defaulted on getting them there.

They can't oblige the customer to travel on the subsequent train under any circumstances. If they wished to insist upon this it was open to them to hold the connection. Inevitably this will not happen.

 

[SteveM70]

The NRCoT could define this but chooses not to, so we must assume it means “at all”.

I don’t doubt it’s incredibly difficult to define (eg 10 mins missing a connection at Inverness onto a Wick is a very different impact compared to the same delay missing a connection at Reading for a train to Paddington) but it feels mad that it could be interpreted as any delay at all.

That awful legal word “reasonable” may need to make an appearance

 

[tspaul26]

That awful legal word “reasonable” may need to make an appearance

On what legal basis would it make an appearance?

 

[Starmill]

I don’t doubt it’s incredibly difficult to define (eg 10 mins missing a connection at Inverness onto a Wick is a very different impact compared to the same delay missing a connection at Reading for a train to Paddington) but it feels mad that it could be interpreted as any delay at all.

That awful legal word “reasonable” may need to make an appearance

I don't understand what the problem is. Nearly all cases where refunds are requested are for tickets that were never used at all (or were used but the claim is illegitimately made on the false basis of being unused, or incorrectly made because of confusion with delay repay). Why might it seem mad?

 

[The exile]

Surely yes.

And our Kenilworth passenger can’t complete his intended journey because he missed the relevant train as a result of the railway’s default.

The fact that our Coventry passenger may have completed his journey late is neither here nor there: his train ran, he travelled on it, he reached his intended destination and may be entitled to compensation (not a refund) for the inconvenience occasioned by the delay.

In other words, I'm on a non-stop Kings Cross - Newcastle train (if there still are any) holding an advance ticket. It arrives about 20 minutes late, just after the Morpeth stopper has left. If my advance ticket is KGX- NCL then I can get a bit of delay repay. If my ticket is KGX - Manors (so I have missed my connection) I can "abandon" my journey (about 1 mile short) and claim the entire cost back. I cannot believe that is correct (or even morally right!). There is surely a difference between "cannot complete your journey [at all]" and "cannot complete your journey on time".
Unless I misunderstood completely - the comment I originally responded to was that you could abandon a journey (and claim a refund) if there was any delay.

 

[SteveM70]

I don't understand what the problem is. Nearly all cases where refunds are requested are for tickets that were never used at all (or were used but the claim is illegitimately made on the false basis of being unused, or incorrectly made because of confusion with delay repay). Why might it seem mad?

Because it would mean someone could abandon their journey based on a two minute delay. I’m not saying many people would do that, but it feels daft that they could

 

[TJM]

There is a reason for this restriction, although it wouldn't particularly matter in this case. On some journeys (for example to Mid-Wales or stations North of Preston on the WCML) an off-peak fare from Euston can apply at the classic peak times, meaning it is a common (and disallowed) trick to use that for shorter journeys when you would otherwise pay a peak fare. Blanket instructions on enforcement may have been overriding common sense here.

 

[wilbers]

In other words, I'm on a non-stop Kings Cross - Newcastle train (if there still are any) holding an advance ticket. It arrives about 20 minutes late, just after the Morpeth stopper has left. If my advance ticket is KIC - NEC then I can get a bit of delay repay. If my ticket is KIC - Manors (so I have missed my connection) I can "abandon" my journey (about 1 mile short) and claim the entire cost back. I cannot believe that is correct (or even morally right!). There is surely a difference between "cannot complete your journey [at all]" and "cannot complete your journey on time".
Unless I misunderstood completely - the comment I originally responded to was that you could abandon a journey (and claim a refund) if there was any delay.

You can certainly claim delay repay of 20 minutes on the Newcastle ticket, and longer than that on the Manors ticket. I wonder if anyone in the past has booked all their long distance Newcastle tickets to Manors to get more delay repay then they otherwise would - can change to the Metro at either station so may make some sort of sense for anyone on the Whitley Bay loop.

 

[JonathanH]

There is a reason for this restriction, although it wouldn't particularly matter in this case. On some journeys (for example to Mid-Wales or stations North of Preston on the WCML) an off-peak fare from Euston can apply at the classic peak times, meaning it is a common (and disallowed) trick to use that for shorter journeys when you would otherwise pay a peak fare. Blanket instructions on enforcement may have been overriding common sense here.

With respect, that is a different situation, where a ticket type that usually allows break of journey and stopping short (ie an off-peak type ticket) carries additional restrictions.

Here, we are discussing advamce tickets which are valid solely between the origin and destination shown on the ticket, and not at any intermediate station.

 

[Fermiboson]

It is not legal in any case to detain someone inside a train station for any reason, no? The staff may be entitled to issue a TIR or something (that would absolutely not stand once it was taken up with a human being), but surely the staff cannot simply turn around and leave. That isn’t just customer service issues, that is a safety-critical criminal offence.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is not legal in any case to detain someone inside a train station for any reason, no? The staff may be entitled to issue a TIR or something (that would absolutely not stand once it was taken up with a human being), but surely the staff cannot simply turn around and leave. That isn’t just customer service issues, that is a safety-critical criminal offence.

Agreed. Leaving may be an offence if the requested excess is not paid, but staff have no right to outright refuse exit.

 

[JonathanH]

Agreed. Leaving may be an offence if the requested excess is not paid, but staff have no right to outright refuse exit.

What if the passenger refuses to pay the excess fare necessary to leave the station?

 

[TJM]

With respect, that is a different situation, where a ticket type that usually allows break of journey and stopping short (ie an off-peak type ticket) carries additional restrictions.

Here, we are discussing advamce tickets which are valid solely between the origin and destination shown on the ticket, and not at any intermediate station.

Yes, but presumably advance tickets on the services I mentioned follow a similar pricing strategy?

 

[Trackman]

I'm surprised in this instance that the ticket gate would not open at a connection station - unless it was a manual ticket check.