Change of route excess or new ticket?

[PermitToTravel]

But those are rules that you have to abide by, not us.

 

[crehld]

We've had debates about what the new ticket actually is and, IIRC, the last time it came up some people, who don't do the job, disagreed with those who do, but what is not in dispute is that the rules say you cannot excess a TOC specific ticket to use another TOC.

I am not debating what internal TOC rules state and I accept I am highly unlikely ever to be issued such an excess.

My point is the contact between me and the TOC as regulated by the NRCoC and evidenced by the ticket explicitly permits an excess fare to be issued under C13. This is because Virgin Trains only is defined as the route. As explained above the contact (ie ticket) does not extend the TOC specific restriction to any other aspect of the ticket's validity. Contractually speaking, to argue otherwise is plainly wrong. By not issuing me an excess fare (I never actually asked for the record) the TOC would be in breach of its contractual obligations.

Thus the rules regarding excess tickets do not appear to reflect the contractual obligations to which both I and the TOC are bound by. This is not being readily challenged because, let's face it, it isn't worth the couple of quid the excess would cost.

That's the contact law position. I accept in the real world this isn't the case! Doesn't make it right though!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

You are bound by Condition 10 though, you can't simply ignore that because it doesn't fit your argument.

10. Tickets valid only in trains of particular Train Companies
The validity of a ticket may:

a) be restricted to; or
b) prohibit

travel in the trains of a particular Train Company or Train Companies. Any such restriction
or prohibition will be shown on the ticket. If you travel in a train with a ticket that is not
valid, Condition 2 or 4 will apply. If you are unable to use a ticket or any part of it, you may
be able to claim a refund under Condition 26 or Condition 36. For other restrictions on use
of tickets, see Condition 11 below.

 

[YorkC]

If any of this matters, would "Not underground" be considered a route or operator restriction? LU is listed as a TOC on the NR website but I'd argue that "Underground" should reasonably be considered a route...

 

[PermitToTravel]

But the ticket is converted into one without such a restriction shown. If I was ever sold such an excess and it was convenient to ignore the TOC restriction that has been excessed away then I would

 

[crehld]

You are bound by Condition 10 though, you can't simply ignore that because it doesn't fit your argument.

I am not ignoring this. An excess would override any such restriction in the same way an excess overrides any C12 restrictions. By your argument you should not be able to excess an off peak ticket to an anytime one which is quite clearly incorrect.

But the main point of my argument is that contractually speaking C10 is irrelevant anyway because the TOC restriction is clearly defined as the route. The restriction does not apply in any other way to the ticket's validity. Perhaps I'm reading my contact/ticket wrong, so if you can show me how the TOC restriction applies beyond the route then I will bow to superior knowledge. If the TOC is unhappy with this then they should not define the restriction as a route in the contact. It's a simple solution really

 

[hairyhandedfool]

If any of this matters, would "Not underground" be considered a route or operator restriction? LU is listed as a TOC on the NR website but I'd argue that "Underground" should reasonably be considered a route...

It's not clear. LUL is not listed as a Train Company in the NRCoC.

But the ticket is converted into one without such a restriction shown. If I was ever sold such an excess and it was convenient to ignore the TOC restriction that has been excessed away then I would

The excess is only valid with an unused original ticket numbered appropriately. If the original ticket is TOC restricted then it would only be valid on those TOCs named upon it and thus the excess would only be valid on them. If you want to try it, go ahead, I won't lose any sleep over it.

I am not ignoring this. An excess would override any such restriction in the same way an excess overrides any C12 restrictions. By your argument you should not be able to excess an off peak ticket to an anytime one which is quite clearly incorrect....

Conditions 12 and 13 mention the ability to get an excess fare to change the terms of the contract, Condition 10 does not. Condition 10 is quite specific in mentioning Conditions 2 and 4 if Condition 10 is not adhered to.

....But the main point of my argument is that contractually speaking C10 is irrelevant anyway because the TOC restriction is clearly defined as the route....

I disagree. Condition 13 makes no reference to TOC restrictions. Condition 10 is not irrelevant.

....The restriction does not apply in any other way to the ticket's validity. Perhaps I'm reading my contact/ticket wrong, so if you can show me how the TOC restriction applies beyond the route then I will bow to superior knowledge. If the TOC is unhappy with this then they should not define the restriction as a route in the contact. It's a simple solution really

If the TOC restriction was routeing based then it would be included in Condition 13. It isn't, it has it's own condition, Condition 10.

If they were not to put the TOC restriction in the route field, where would you suggest they put it?

 

[Tracky]

I'm fed up with these restrictive tickets. They cause so many problems and Virgin are able to get away with listing them at the top of their Piccadilly TVMs which leads to genuine mistakes for which the customer is penalised.

Spose Branson needs to pay for his island retreat somehow.

 

[bb21]

The only solution will be to have them withdrawn, and everyone ending up with the more expensive Any Permitted fares.

The number of passengers affected is likely to be small, not that I am denying the fact that it is inflexible, but you are blowing things out of all proportion.

 

[crehld]

The excess is only valid with an unused original ticket numbered appropriately. If the original ticket is TOC restricted then it would only be valid on those TOCs named upon it and thus the excess would only be valid on them. If you want to try it, go ahead, I won't lose any sleep over it.

This makes no sense to me. Are you saying thatr I were to get an excess from an off-peak ticket to an anytime one, I would still not be allowed to travel anytime, as the original ticket names the ticket type as "off-peak" and thus the off-peak restrictions remain in force, regardless of the excess?

Conditions 12 and 13 mention the ability to get an excess fare to change the terms of the contract, Condition 10 does not. Condition 10 is quite specific in mentioning Conditions 2 and 4 if Condition 10 is not adhered to.

Accepted, and this would be the case if the TOC restriction was not purely routing based, which it is (see below). Although condition 2 and 4 have absolutely nothing to do with restricting my ability to get an excess so are irrelevant to this discussion. They only apply would only apply if I chose to travel on a ticket that wasn't valid. The whole purpose of me asking if there was an excess available (which in the end I never even sought) was to avoid this situation.

I disagree. Condition 13 makes no reference to TOC restrictions. Condition 10 is not irrelevant.

If the TOC restriction was routeing based then it would be included in Condition 13. It isn't, it has it's own condition, Condition 10.

All train tickets are issued subject to the NRCoC. Condition 1 states that my ticket is evidence of the contract between the train company and me. Under this contract the TOC restriction is routing based, as evidenced on the ticket which states quite clearly "Route: VTWC TRAINS ONLY" (here is another example coutesy of the wonderful ticket gallery). To suggest this is not a route is incorrect - the contract clearly states it is regardless of what any TOC rules and so on state. Thus I would argue that C13 does apply as it is a matter of routing, and this explicitly permits changes to a route following the payment of an appropriate excess fare.

If the TOC restriction extended to other areas of ticket validity I would agree with you, but it does not. The only other restrictions printed on my ticket are "SEE RESTRICTNS B1". Obviously ticket space is limited, so looking this up provides me with the following details:

Not valid on trains timed to depart after 04:29 and before 09:30.

(The only exception to this rule is that passengers travelling from Coulsdon South may use an Off-Peak One Day Travel Card after 09:15. Please see Restriction Code B2 for more details)

This is it. There is no mention whatsoever of a TOC-specific restriction here at all, unless I'm missing something? Indeed, the very mention of Coulsdon South pretty much confirms this considering Virgin Trains goes nowhere near here!

If they were not to put the TOC restriction in the route field, where would you suggest they put it?

If the TOC restrictions were included under the validity field then there would be no problem here. I am even happy to accept looking this up when I am advised to "SEE RESTRICTNS B1" or whatever code is deemed necessary. There is nothing to stop TOCs doing this, and absolutely no reason why they have not done so to date, other than the explanation that the restriction is indeed a matter of routing hence why it is placed in the routing field. As it stands, I have gone to the effort of looking up the relevant restrictions and these do not include any TOC-specific restriction, other than that defined as the Route, which Condition 13 clearly states can be excessed.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree, and I appreciate I will never in the real world be issued such an excess. Nevertheless from the position of contract law, my contract with the train company would be breached if I approached a ticket counter, asked for the excess and was refused. It's not worth going to court over my example, but might be when larger sums are involved.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm fed up with these restrictive tickets. They cause so many problems and Virgin are able to get away with listing them at the top of their Piccadilly TVMs which leads to genuine mistakes for which the customer is penalised.

Yes - this is what happened to me. I was in a rush and unintentionally purchased the VT only fare, rather than the any permitted.

The only solution will be to have them withdrawn, and everyone ending up with the more expensive Any Permitted fares.

The number of passengers affected is likely to be small, not that I am denying the fact that it is inflexible, but you are blowing things out of all proportion.

Yes, I no doubt am!

 

[bb21]

Yes, I no doubt am!

That wasn't aimed at you.

It was aimed at the Branson comment.

Yes - this is what happened to me. I was in a rush and unintentionally purchased the VT only fare, rather than the any permitted.

If that is the case, I think the TVM should have been designed better.

I for one do not think that the "Quick Select" screen should be listing individual fares, but rather destinations. Once a destination is chosen, the fare options can be shown, maybe through another screen filtering out single and return fares as appropriate.

In addition, the Any Permitted fare should always be the default top one imo.

 

[Tracky]

On a Sunday, there is a gap of almost 8 hours between possible journey options from Manchester to Chester using Virgin Trains Only. During the week there are only a handful of journey options between Manchester and North Wales destinations.

Virgin Trains list the TOC specific fares first on their Ticket Vending Machines at Manchester Piccadilly and do not make it clear that they are so restrictive. Passengers buy before they board, as the industry has been trying to tell them to do, in good faith. The tickets now say 'Route: VTWC TRAINS ONLY' which is utterly meaningless to the public and not all that clear to staff. They then board another TOCs train, are challenged, and have to pay for a whole new ticket.

There are also Route Specific tickets for the journey to Chester introduced by Northern. While these can be excessed in theory, add in the availability of Northern Duo fares and you start to see how confusing the situation is for the customer. On their return journey on a Sunday, the trains from Chester to Manchester via Altrincham are advertised as "Southport" or "Wigan".

The industry should be working to simplify fares. I firmly believe Virgin introduced the TOC specific fares - and retail them as they do not to offer 'their customers great value' but to abstract revenue from the lead operator on the route - and in doing so CON RAIL USERS.

 

[yorkie]

...The industry should be working to simplify fares.....

If you mean "...by withdrawing TOC specific tickets, so everyone pays more" I disagree.

But if you mean "...by allowing any fare to be excessed into any other fare" then I agree completely!

I won't ever call for, or agree to, "simplification" as a concept without any details, as there is evidence "simplification" has used, by some Companies, as an excuse to raise/abolish good value fares.

 

[Tracky]

Where sold I believe the TOC should make the restrictions absolutely clear.

I don't believe they should be available on a route where the TOC has no direct services.

I don't believe they should be available on a route where the TOC has such poor Sunday journey options.

In this case I don't believe the tickets offer 'good value for money' as they are just too restrictive. Value for money and Cheap are quite different.

 

[PermitToTravel]

You're at liberty to buy the full priced ticket then and leave the discounted one for those who do want it...

 

[Merseysider]

I firmly believe Virgin introduced the TOC specific fares - and retail them as they do not to offer 'their customers great value' but to abstract revenue from the lead operator on the route - and in doing so CON RAIL USERS.

A little over the top.

Where sold I believe the TOC should make the restrictions absolutely clear.

Completely agree.

I don't believe they should be available on a route where the TOC has no direct services.

Why not? Under this logic, you'd be against a Merseyrail Only ticket from Chester to Southport because ME don't operate any direct services - but Northern Rail do - so a Northern Rail Only ticket would be better?

I don't believe they should be available on a route where the TOC has such poor Sunday journey options.

I disagree. Sunday services are infrequent no matter whereabouts in the country you're travelling. If one is able to pick a definite departure time then TOC Only tickets are useful - you can set your plan accordingly. For example, there is a four hour gap between VT services Chester - Llandudno Junction in the early morning. So you wouldn't buy a VT Only ticket anyway unless you knew you would be travelling on one.

In this case I don't believe the tickets offer 'good value for money' as they are just too restrictive. Value for money and Cheap are quite different.

Yes, they are quite different. Do you believe the £32 LM Only return from Liverpool to London should be withdrawn because it's too restrictive?

Hint: the afternoon peak restrictions are less restrictive than the £82 Any Permitted, allowing departure between 1500 and 1630!

 

[Tracky]

I'm disappointed at the lack of agreement I'm finding here.

Then again, everybody here is an expert, or at least knowledgable and cannot see how hard "we" as an industry are making it for rail users.

 

[MKB]

Surely it's not beyond the ability of the poor souls who have to code the ORCATs distribution software to modify it so that, when a ticket is excessed:

- the revenue distribution from the original ticket is completely cancelled;
- the revenue distribution is re-done from the full excessed ticket.

Were that done, then the TOCs could be a little more passenger-focused and allow an excess that changes the revenue distribution.

On a related issue, what is the official reason why a railcard discounted fare can't be excessed to a non-discounted fare in advance of travel? That doesn't affect revenue distribution, and would be mighty useful where Two-Together passengers find they are no longer able to travel at the same time.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Surely it's not beyond the ability of the poor souls who have to code the ORCATs distribution software to modify it so that, when a ticket is excessed:

- the revenue distribution from the original ticket is completely cancelled;
- the revenue distribution is re-done from the full excessed ticket.

Were that done, then the TOCs could be a little more passenger-focused and allow an excess that changes the revenue distribution.

If that was a desired outcome I suspect it might be cheaper to write off the differences than to pay for software changes. It's essentially a zero-sum game anyway.

On a related issue, what is the official reason why a railcard discounted fare can't be excessed to a non-discounted fare in advance of travel? That doesn't affect revenue distribution, and would be mighty useful where Two-Together passengers find they are no longer able to travel at the same time.

• It would make it easier to transfer tickets, which is not allowed (although this argument holds less water with 2GETH railcards)
• £££££

Some staff will do this, of course.