Coast and peaks

[nedchester]

I have laid out the arguement over and over again.

• 
  The Northern leaflet is not an "official" document and is not an authoritative source for information for this ticket apart from when discussing their own particular services.

Sorry but if the leaflet is issued to the public then the validity is what it says. End of!

• 
  I doubt this will ever become a widescale issue, unless EMT were to discover they were receiving no revenue from the product, but their services were still listed on the map, finally then obviously informing guards to reject them.

If a member of the public has hold of the leaflet and shows it to the guard then the guard cannot reject a Coast and Peaks and charge an excess. It is an internal matter between Northern and EMT.

I would also say that the validity cannot be changed until the end of the year because the leaflet is valid until 31/12/09.

 

[glynn80]

Sorry but if the leaflet is issued to the public then the validity is what it says. End of!

As I have stated previously, if a passenger purchased their ticket from a Northern ticket office or guard and were given the leaflet, of course you would have a very strong legal argument that you were missold the product. This leaflet however does not act over and above the information listed within National Rail website and the FRPP, as it is not official. It is not an argument to claim the ticket is definitely valid on EMT, when the two authoritative source of information are stating the ticket is not valid.

If a member of the public has hold of the leaflet and shows it to the guard then the guard cannot reject a Coast and Peaks and charge an excess. It is an internal matter between Northern and EMT.

Not sure in a legal sense, whether this is the case. I agree Northern and EMT are linked through ATOC but whether they are interlinked to such an extent that one TOC is forced to take liability for another TOC's errors, is another question.

 

[nedchester]

As I have stated previously, if a passenger purchased their ticket from a Northern ticket office or guard and were given the leaflet, of course you would have a very strong legal argument that you were missold the product. This leaflet however does not act over and above the information listed within National Rail website and the FRPP, as it is not official. It is not an argument to claim the ticket is definitely valid on EMT, when the two authoritative source of information are stating the ticket is not valid.

Doesn't matter where the passenger bought it. I would probably buy the ticket from a Merseyrail/ ATW station; why is that any different from buying it from a Northern station? I am not saying that the National Rail website and the FRPP are any less valid sources of information but I am saying that when there is any conflict then any legal ruling will find in favour of the customer. Rover tickets have 'As Advertised' on them. The leaflet is an 'advertisement' and so the ticket is valid

However, as I have said earlier I suspect the whole thing is an error which came about when Central was split up into EMT and LMT and EMT was inadvertently left off.

 

[glynn80]

Doesn't matter where the passenger bought it. I would probably buy the ticket from a Merseyrail/ ATW station; why is that any different from buying it from a Northern station?

Well it does matter where the passenger bought it, from the perspective of legal responsibility. I am not saying that if you were to purchase your ticket from Northern, that it would then be valid on EMT, only that if you were required to purchase a new ticket, that it would set you in good stead, legally, to claim a reimbursement from Northern.

I am not saying that the National Rail website and the FRPP are any less valid sources of information but I am saying that when there is any conflict then any legal ruling will find in favour of the customer.

No, but what you are doing is putting the Northern leaflet information on the same level as the information contained within National Rail website and the FRPP. I don't think you could claim in court, that an unofficial document produced by a completely separate company, is evidence enough for EMT to be faced with the legal responsibility for the separate company's errors.

Rover tickets have 'As Advertised' on them. The leaflet is an 'advertisement' and so the ticket is valid

The "Advertised" information must be official, I could knock up a leaflet stating the Coast & Peaks Rover is valid to Wick, show that to a guard, assert that the leaflet is an 'advertisement' for the C&P Rover and thus the ticket is valid on First Scotrail to Wick.

 

[nedchester]

The "Advertised" information must be official, I could knock up a leaflet stating the Coast & Peaks Rover is valid to Wick, show that to a guard, assert that the leaflet is an 'advertisement' for the C&P Rover and thus the ticket is valid on First Scotrail to Wick.

So leaflets for all sorts of products to be found in ticket offices up and down the country are not 'official'? Sorry but that is total crap. The leaflets are issued by a legitimate train company not an individual with a laptop and a printer!!! Good on Northern for promoting these products (and introducing new ones) that were hidden away in fares manuals for years.

 

[glynn80]

So leaflets for all sorts of products to be found in ticket offices up and down the country are not 'official'? Sorry but that is total crap. The leaflets are issued by a legitimate train company not an individual with a laptop and a printer!!!

They are not official in terms of being authorised by ATOC. The only official sources of information are the FRPP (Staff) and the National Rail Website and National Rail Enquiries (Public).

Good on Northern for promoting these products (and introducing new ones) that were hidden away in fares manuals for years.

No one is disputing that introducing new Rover/Ranger products and promoting existing ones, is a good idea. The dispute is about the accuracy of said information within the promotion material. The statement listed within the material is pretty sweeping and perhaps not comprehensively researched.

 

[John @ home]

it does matter where the passenger bought [the ticket], from the perspective of legal responsibility.

Not agreed.

INTRODUCTION
When you buy a ticket to travel on the National Rail Network you enter into an agreement with the Train Companies whose trains you have the right to use. That agreement gives you the right to make the journey or journeys between the stations or within the zones shown on the ticket you have bought. These Conditions are also part of that agreement and they apply to all domestic (non-international) journeys by scheduled passenger trains of the Train Companies on the National Rail Network.
It is a condition of the Passenger Licence granted to each Train Company by the Office of Rail Regulation that these Conditions apply to tickets sold for journeys involving its services and those of other Train Companies.

John

 

[glynn80]

Not agreed.

INTRODUCTION
When you buy a ticket to travel on the National Rail Network you enter into an agreement with the Train Companies whose trains you have the right to use. That agreement gives you the right to make the journey or journeys between the stations or within the zones shown on the ticket you have bought. These Conditions are also part of that agreement and they apply to all domestic (non-international) journeys by scheduled passenger trains of the Train Companies on the National Rail Network.
It is a condition of the Passenger Licence granted to each Train Company by the Office of Rail Regulation that these Conditions apply to tickets sold for journeys involving its services and those of other Train Companies.

John

I am unsure what new perspective this gives to the debate with your NRCoC quote?

The point I was trying to make, was that if you were to purchase your Coast & Peaks Rover at an ATW ticket office, then travel to Leeds and pick up a Northern leaflet, then travel to Matlock but are told your C&P Rover is invalid. You can hardly go back to ATW or EMT and say that a separate TOC- Northern- made a mistake. But if you were to purchase your ticket from Northern, you can go back to them and explain that they themselves made an error and therefore you would like a reimbursement for the new ticket you were required to purchase on EMT.

 

[John @ home]

if you were to purchase your Coast & Peaks Rover at an ATW ticket office, then travel to Leeds and pick up a Northern leaflet, then travel to Matlock but are told your C&P Rover is invalid. You can hardly go back to ATW or EMT and say that a separate TOC- Northern- made a mistake.

Yes, you can.

It is a condition of the Passenger Licence granted to each Train Company by the Office of Rail Regulation that these Conditions apply to tickets sold for journeys involving its services and those of other Train Companies.

John

 

[glynn80]

Yes, you can.



John

As I stated previously I am unsure what new perspective this gives to the debate with your NRCoC quote, could you elaborate? Where in the Conditions of Carriage does it state that unofficial leaflets produced by one TOC are binding to all other TOCs.

If the National Rail website or the FRPP were to display the ticket would be valid on EMT, then you would have a case, but not an unofficial leaflet produced by Northern.

 

[nedchester]

The point I was trying to make, was that if you were to purchase your Coast & Peaks Rover at an ATW ticket office, then travel to Leeds and pick up a Northern leaflet, then travel to Matlock but are told your C&P Rover is invalid. You can hardly go back to ATW or EMT and say that a separate TOC- Northern- made a mistake. But if you were to purchase your ticket from Northern, you can go back to them and explain that they themselves made an error and therefore you would like a reimbursement for the new ticket you were required to purchase on EMT.

But the Northern leaflets are available at stations all over. For example Chester (ATW) stocks the Northern Rail Rover leaflet.

 

[glynn80]

But the Northern leaflets are available at stations all over. For example Chester (ATW) stocks the Northern Rail Rover leaflet.

And...

It's not where the leaflet is stocked, it is who produced the information within the leaflet that would be left with the responsibility for it's content.

 

[nedchester]

If the National Rail website or the FRPP were to display the ticket would be valid on EMT, then you would have a case, but not an unofficial leaflet produced by Norther.

How can it be UNOFFICIAL? Even if it was; how are the public supposed to know especially as the leaflets are freely available from many stations not just Northern ones.

You seem to keep saying that any publicity issued by a TOC is not official; so why do they bother?

 

[glynn80]

How can it be UNOFFICIAL? Even if it was; how are the public supposed to know especially as the leaflets are freely available from many stations not just Northern one.

You seem to keep saying that any publicity issued by a TOC is not official; so why do they bother?

I have already answered this question above, but I will repeat it for you again.

"They are not official in terms of being authorised by ATOC. The only official sources of information are the FRPP (Staff) and the National Rail Website and National Rail Enquiries (Public)."

 

[nedchester]

I have already answered this question above, but I will repeat it for you again.

"They are not official in terms of being authorised by ATOC. The only official sources of information are the FRPP (Staff) and the National Rail Website and National Rail Enquiries (Public)."

BANGS HEAD AGAINST WALL!!!

HOW ARE THE PUBLIC SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT ANYHOW AND WHY SHOULD THEY HAVE TO ACCESS THE INTERNET TO GET THE INFO??

You seem to be in a minority of......er...one on this one?

 

[glynn80]

BANGS HEAD AGAINST WALL!!!

Now you know exactly how I feel when I have to repeat things that I have already posted above.

HOW ARE THE PUBLIC SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT ANYHOW AND WHY SHOULD THEY HAVE TO ACCESS THE INTERNET TO GET THE INFO??

Not sure what point you are trying to make here. Are you trying to say that a passenger could search the internet and come across the leaflet? If so they are also going to come across the National Rail site which is the authoritative and official source of information on UK ticketing. Infact the Northern site is the eighth result on Google (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=co...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a), even this topic is the third result!

You seem to be in a minority of......er...one on this one?

I agree I am in a minority and I would expect that to be the case when it is in passenger's interests for the opposing view of mine to be taken. In general, on the forum, the side taken is that of the passenger, on forum's such as Railchat the opposite is true and the side of the TOC is usually taken, it just depends on the forum membership.

 

[nedchester]

Not sure what point you are trying to make here. Are you trying to say that a passenger could search the internet and come across the leaflet

No, the passenger may be at their local station and happen to pick up a leaflet (I know I did!).

 

[glynn80]

No, the passenger may be at their local station and happen to pick up a leaflet (I know I did!).

So why did you mention the word internet then?

What are you trying to add to the debate with this point?

 

[nedchester]

So why did you mention the word internet then?

What are you trying to add to the debate with this point?

Because only via the Internet may the public get the slightest inkling that a C&P may not be valid (National Rail site) whereas picking up a leaflet at a railway station the information is different. The National Rail info is only available via the net (OK and by phone as well) whereas Northern Rail leaflets are available at stations all over thanks to their excellent publicity department (no I don't work for them nor the railway in general)

As I have said previously the 'error' is probably due to an omission rather than EMT not wanting the ticket to be valid.

 

[t0ffeeman]

Zzzzzz. The ticket is valid over the lines on the map given. It always was and it will be now. Its up to ATOC to update their bloody website , which they can't do properly.

Rover tickets haven't changed ever in the last 20 years. The Virgin/NXEC restrictions on the West Midlands RANGER & the East Mids RANGER were about in Intercity days.

It'll be better if someone asks ATOC about their omission rather than this silly squabble....

 

[EltonRoad]

Agreed. Can't see the wood for the trees ..

Passengers don't know about FRPP or even the National Rail web site if they don't have Internet access.

The Northern leaflet is more than enough to support your use of the C & P Rover.

 

[Max]

Passengers don't know about FRPP or even the National Rail web site if they don't have Internet access.

This is pretty important in terms of the law. If the passenger in question does not have access to the internet, they have to rely on printed documentation, the Northern booklet being a freely available guide produced by a TOC. If EMT were to try and charge them for a new ticket in this situation, it could surely be deemed a breach of discrimination laws - without access to the internet, how would the passenger have known?

 

[glynn80]

Zzzzzz. The ticket is valid over the lines on the map given. It always was and it will be now. Its up to ATOC to update their bloody website , which they can't do properly.

The ticket is only valid on the TOCs who participate within the scheme, if they pull out of a particular rover, they lose all rights to revenue from said rover and thus are perfectly permitted to refuse to accept it. Of course it may not be the case that EMT have refused to accept it but both the FRPP and National Rail sites, who are administered by separate departments, omit them as a participant...

Rover tickets haven't changed ever in the last 20 years. The Virgin/NXEC restrictions on the West Midlands RANGER & the East Mids RANGER were about in Intercity days.

What about the changes Welsh rovers in 2007. The Freedom of Wales Rover was altered significantly, the 8 in 15 days Flexipass was withdrawn in favour of a 4 in 8 days Rover product. The North & Mid Wales Rover range of 7 days and 3 in 7 days varieties were also altered into one product, the North & Mid Wales Rover 4 in 8 days product.

The reality is that Rover tickets are evolving all the time, with new products introduced all the time. Even the Coast & Peaks itself has been altered since BR days. The validity map here (http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/p2231971.html) clearly shows the ticket used to be valid as far south as Church Stretton on the Marches (now only as far south as Shrewsbury) and also never used to include Kirkby on Merseyrail. It also previously used to be a 3 in 7 days product but has since changed to be a 4 in 8 days product.

I could go on listing changes if you so wish but your claim that the products have remained unchanged since BR days is completely untrue. It is of course correct that many of these products existed in BR days but privatisation has caused a few alterations to them.

It'll be better if someone asks ATOC about their omission rather than this silly squabble....

If you read above, I have already posted that I sent an email to ATOC earlier this afternoon regarding this exact issue.

This is pretty important in terms of the law. If the passenger in question does not have access to the internet, they have to rely on printed documentation, the Northern booklet being a freely available guide produced by a TOC. If EMT were to try and charge them for a new ticket in this situation, it could surely be deemed a breach of discrimination laws - without access to the internet, how would the passenger have known?

I was informed by ATOC when dealing with the WSMR issue that passengers in this situation can call into any booking office or telephone National Rail Enquiries for information on all their ticketing queries, this avoids any discrimination arguments that you talk of. They are not forced at any point into accepting the printed documentation of which there is none that is official.

 

[OwlMan]

Please accept my apologies for the inconvenience caused by this issue.
I sent an email to NRE

here is the reply:

I have sought clarification on the Coast and Peaks Rover from East Midlands trains, and I am pleased to confirm that it will be valid on their services.

In addition, I have passed these details onto our Technical Team in order that our website be updated with this information as soon as possible.

I hope this information is of use to you. Thank you for your eMail, and please accept my apologies once again for any inconvenience caused.

Regards,

Clare Cooper
Customer Services
www.nationalrail.co.uk

 

[glynn80]

Please accept my apologies for the inconvenience caused by this issue.
I sent an email to NRE

here is the reply:

I have sought clarification on the Coast and Peaks Rover from East Midlands trains, and I am pleased to confirm that it will be valid on their services.

In addition, I have passed these details onto our Technical Team in order that our website be updated with this information as soon as possible.

I hope this information is of use to you. Thank you for your eMail, and please accept my apologies once again for any inconvenience caused.

Regards,

Clare Cooper
Customer Services
www.nationalrail.co.uk

Excellent, looks like the debate was academic in the end.

My email to ATOC I doubt wouldn't have received a reply until mid week and they certainly don't work Sundays, but it does show that NRE aren't incompetent at everything.

Will be interesting to see how quickly the FRPP is updated with this information...

 

[krus_aragon]

As an aside, if you look up a Derby-Matlock fate on NRE, and click 'more fares' under off-peak, you'll see a number of rovers and rangers offered for that journey, but not the Coast and Peaks. Seems like this oversight had been programmed into the NRE database. Lets see when it gets updated...