Complex Penalty Fare

[RJ]

I'm not trying to sue anyone - it sounds like they're making a sincere effort to turn things around now so I'll hold fire on anything other than alternate dispute resolution.

I had this from Customer Relations;

Dear [---]

Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to you. As you are
aware have been waiting for a definite answer from [---] regarding the feedback from ATOC.

East Midlands Trains are not involved in the appeals process and have no
influence over an initial appeal or outcome. However, communication may
take place if clarification is required.

I understand that you have recently had a telephone conversation with
[---] and have been informed that the validity of your tickets
and routing has been looked at by ATOC. A panel has sat and determined the
outcome.

I have been advised that the restriction for the Hertford ticket has been
changed so this won't be valid to use via London on Peak services.

However, the other combinations of tickets have all been valid. Members of
the Revenue Protection staff are trained under PACE and are aware of the
routing guide on our network. They do not however, due to the complexities
and enormity of the geographical area, have specific training for all Train
Operating routes. With your tickets incorporating other Train Operating
Companies this has led to uncertainty by staff who would not normally deal
with these matters. This is one area we will address in the future. Ideally
our first objective is to understand and address the issues you have raised.
[---] has advised me that [they have] been in contact with the Managers
responsible for the onboard staff and asked them not to issue UFNs or PFs
or question your ticketing choice. Instead, staff will take down the details of the ticket combinations you hold.

Thank you for getting in touch.

Kind regards

Anything in square brackets denotes an amendment by me to edit out any personal details. I accept this as a sincere explanation and am satisfied that the course of action outlined represents a valiant attempt to prevent any further instances of me being harshly accosted and unnecessarily chinged by on board revenue protection staff.

For anyone interested, I will explain the loophole. Restriction 5M is used by FCC for tickets originating in the GN area, also including a Cross London transfer. The text in restriction 5M contains a list of FCC GN stations. The ticket I purchased for the part of the journey from London to Bedford was a Hertford Stations to Bedford Stations ticket. I used Hertford because;

a.) It was the same price as a ticket from London Terminals, also allowing me two free trips on the Tube.

b.) The restriction text literally only contains GN stations. Depending on where you look, there is an entry for Hertford North but not Hertford East. As Tottenham Hale serves as an appropriate routing point, Hertford East was fair game to use. No time / Break of Journey restriction applicable from that station meant I was at liberty to use it out of St Pancras.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, there are two versions of this restriction. Avantix Traveller, Avantix Mobile, Tribute and the coding in the online journey planners favoured the version where the term "Hertford North" was used. After the incident, I was made aware that in The Manual, the term "Hertford Stns" was used in its version of 5M. This was used against me initially, but I told them that as a lay passenger, I was not privy to any information in The Manual so they could not use that to overrule any information in the public domain. This version was also shown in the PDF files on the NRE site. I discredited the NRE PDFs by pointing out that one of them was out of date and said that if they tried to use that against me, I would simply go back to using the Restriction BT Off Peak tickets by any train after 04:30 out of St Pancras, because one of the PDF files hadn't been updated to ban me from doing this. Swings and roundabouts.

Whilst I'm sceptical that the restriction text has been changed in any retail systems, or will be until NFM15, the NRE journey planner I presume is now coded to interpret "Hertford Stns" rather than just "Hertford North." It no longer shows Off Peak tickets from Hertford East as valid at any time. Had a brief look and the TTL and WebTiS journey planners now show tickets with 5M and Y4 restrictions as valid from Hertford East only after 09:17. Of course, there are a select number of people who still believe that concerns over loopholes being shut is pure paranoia!

In the meantime, I will be moving on to the next best alternative ticket so I look forward to being able to travel without any extra hassle!

 

[Robsignals]

Part of the truth?

As RJ says in his post after yours I was referring to ITAL giving his record but without saying he'd been found to be in the right every time - a half truth.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm surprised EMT haven't offered you a retainer to act as a consultant for them, or at least give a talk or two to their RPIs and Planners.

They probably feel they've 'paid' him in the form of cheap travel already!

Quite impressive that one person can eventually force a whole company bound up in historical practice and custom "kicking and screaming" into a major review and revision, respect RJ!

 

[fusionblue]

I have to wonder RJ, do any of these loopholes exist within travelling within any of the Southeastern Zonal areas (metro routes, not HS1) or has standardised fares/oyster put paid to all of that?

 

[island]

Yes, there are several very substantial loopholes in Southeastern-land.

 

[RJ]

I have to wonder RJ, do any of these loopholes exist within travelling within any of the Southeastern Zonal areas (metro routes, not HS1) or has standardised fares/oyster put paid to all of that?

If you think outside of the box, there are some savings to be had on season tickets in this area despite SE's best efforts at using negative easements to stamp out any anomalies.

Standardised fares actually increase the scope for anomalies exponentially and make them easier to find. Once you know your stations and zones, no need to mess around with fares checks and the like.

To be honest, the only areas I know about are those which I've looked at in detail for a palpable purpose - the area in which I live (South London) and commute along - London to East Mids via MML, WCML south and ECML south. Other than that, I don't spend any time looking for anomalies unless I have a reason to make the journey.

There are loopholes you can exploit whilst using an Oyster card but I'd only recommend that those who feel they fully understand the system make use of them.

 

[NotDeadYet]

However, the other combinations of tickets have all been valid. Members of
the Revenue Protection staff are trained under PACE and are aware of the
routing guide on our network. They do not however, due to the complexities
and enormity of the geographical area, have specific training for all Train
Operating routes. With your tickets incorporating other Train Operating
Companies this has led to uncertainty by staff who would not normally deal
with these matters. This is one area we will address in the future. Ideally
our first objective is to understand and address the issues you have raised.
[---] has advised me that [they have] been in contact with the Managers
responsible for the onboard staff and asked them not to issue UFNs or PFs
or question your ticketing choice. Instead, staff will take down the details of the ticket combinations you hold.

A cynical translation of this might go as follows:

The fares system is complex and we acknowledge that neither our staff nor the appeals body fully understand it and so inevitably we will sometimes wrongly apply penalties or take action against innocent customers.

Fortunately, in those cases where our staff are wrong, the great majority of customers will nevertheless pay the penalty or settle when threatened with court action. If the case should go to court then our opinion on validity is usually accepted. However, we accept that Mr RJ will strongly contest our errors so we are now making special arrangements to ensure that incorrect penalties are not applied in his case.​

 

[thedbdiboy]

A cynical translation of this might go as follows:

The fares system is complex and we acknowledge that neither our staff nor the appeals body fully understand it and so inevitably we will sometimes wrongly apply penalties or take action against innocent customers.

Fortunately, in those cases where our staff are wrong, the great majority of customers will nevertheless pay the penalty or settle when threatened with court action. If the case should go to court then our opinion on validity is usually accepted. However, we accept that Mr RJ will strongly contest our errors so we are now making special arrangements to ensure that incorrect penalties are not applied in his case.​

That is a little cynical - fair play to RJ but how many other people on board a London-Leicester service are going to present an Enfield Town - Bedford ticket alongside a Peartree - Loughborough ticket? I'm not for a minute suggesting that he shouldn't use them but the combinations are unlikely to be held by just anyone....

 

[RJ]

As RJ says in his post after yours I was referring to ITAL giving his record but without saying he'd been found to be in the right every time - a half truth.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


They probably feel they've 'paid' him in the form of cheap travel already!

Quite impressive that one person can eventually force a whole company bound up in historical practice and custom "kicking and screaming" into a major review and revision, respect RJ!

Thanks. If I know that I'm right about something and it can be backed up, I will persist regardless of the experience or seniority of anyone who tries to say otherwise. If it's there in black and white, it's only a matter of time before those with the misconceptions have to take notice.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That is a little cynical - fair play to RJ but how many other people on board a London-Leicester service are going to present an Enfield Town - Bedford ticket alongside a Peartree - Loughborough ticket? I'm not for a minute suggesting that he shouldn't use them but the combinations are unlikely to be held by just anyone....

Just to make it clear that I have never, or would never do that. Any combinations of tickets I use are 100% valid and cover the entire journey. I wouldn't use a combination of tickets with any gap in validity, let alone one the size of Bedford to Loughbrough.

 

[bb21]

Just to make it clear that I have never, or would never do that. Any combinations of tickets I use are 100% valid and cover the entire journey. I wouldn't use a combination of tickets with any gap in validity, let alone one the size of Bedford to Loughbrough.

I believe it was a typo on his part. I am sure he did not mean Loughborough.

 

[RJ]

Never bought a ticket from Enfield Town/Stations either. Where is this information coming from?

 

[Tomonthetrain]

I think its a example he's given

 

[AndyLandy]

Never bought a ticket from Enfield Town/Stations either. Where is this information coming from?

I suspect they're arbitrary tickets, cited to suggest that your own choice of tickets would look similarly arbitrary to the untrained eye...

 

[Robsignals]

That is a little cynical - fair play to RJ but how many other people on board a London-Leicester service are going to present an Enfield Town - Bedford ticket alongside a Peartree - Loughborough ticket? I'm not for a minute suggesting that he shouldn't use them but the combinations are unlikely to be held by just anyone....

How reasonable is it to expect all revenue staff to be trained in every possible obscure valid combination they might encounter, and if they are given a briefing to remember it when they happen to meet RJ? Even he has to research and check every new combination and knows nothing about possible routes elsewhere.

 

[34D]

How reasonable is it to expect all revenue staff to be trained in every possible obscure valid combination they might encounter, and if they are given a briefing to remember it when they happen to meet RJ? Even he has to research and check every new combination and knows nothing about possible routes elsewhere.

I don't think anyone is requesting staff be 'trained' in obscure tickets - purely that if they are given a ticket from A to B that they know how to look up the different map combinations to determine validity.

 

[maniacmartin]

I agree with 34D. Obviously its unreasonable to suggest that all revenue staff know the validity of every ticket. But they should know how to use the Routeing Guide and how to find a ticket's time restrictions, and should consult this before reporting a passenger for fare evasion.

At the very least, the backoffice staff should research this before threatening to prosecute. Just because one doesn't know something does not mean one cannot find out!

 

[AndyLandy]

I don't think anyone is requesting staff be 'trained' in obscure tickets - purely that if they are given a ticket from A to B that they know how to look up the different map combinations to determine validity.

I'm curious to know what particular skills RJ deploys to work out these validities. Clearly what's needed on the other side is rail staff who have the same skill sets and know how to determine validity. If it's "simple enough" for RJ to manage it, it's probably safe to say that others could be trained in it too. But I don't know how much thought process is involved with RJ's creative ticketing.

 

[LexyBoy]

I think it's partly knowing "the rules" in and out, and partly looking at things differently.

Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.

Neo: What truth?

Spoon boy: There is no spoon.

Neo: There is no spoon?

Spoon boy: Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

In other words, don't look for creative ways of using a ticket, look at where you want to go and find a ticket that suits.

For example, pick maps that cover the route you want, look for possible shorter journeys which can be traced using this map and then find which of these have permitted routes using the required maps.

...Or I could be talking arse.

 

[talltim]

It should be easier to check the validity of a ticket/combo than it is to think up the combos in the first place. To check validity you have to look up only the rules that apply. To make up a combo you have to have a good idea of possibilities before picking the most likely and checking them against the rules. Thus EMT (or whoever) actually have an easier job than RJ

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I don't think anyone is requesting staff be 'trained' in obscure tickets - purely that if they are given a ticket from A to B that they know how to look up the different map combinations to determine validity.

I agree with 34D. Obviously its unreasonable to suggest that all revenue staff know the validity of every ticket. But they should know how to use the Routeing Guide and how to find a ticket's time restrictions, and should consult this before reporting a passenger for fare evasion....

Part of the problem is on-train staff having access to the Routeing Guide, nevermind knowing what to do with it. Even ticket office staff have to go online, click through some links and then manually interpret the maps and easements (which are written for a computer to understand). Using a journey planner is much easier (as I'm sure most ticket office and retail control staff do), but they are prone to error on convoluted routes or where there are few services on a given line.

I can't honestly see staff being told to carry around a 1,000 page document just to check the minority of tickets shown to them when in reality most aren't going to have the time to use it, not to mention that mobile internet access and trains aren't always a good combination.

....At the very least, the backoffice staff should research this before threatening to prosecute. Just because one doesn't know something does not mean one cannot find out!

There are issues with that, but essentially it is a good idea, though it really shouldn't be checked at that stage, it should be checked earlier and so we end up back at square one.

 

[Tibbs]

The railway, due to its special treatment via bye laws and the RoR Act are in a unique position to give the travelling customer the benefit of the doubt. They have the power to take your name and address and come after you for punishment long after the event. The guards don't have to know all of the obscure routes, because there is no need for them to make an on the spot judgement.

If the questioned traveller is adamant that his (or her) combination of tickets is correct, they should be given the benefit of the doubt on the spot and the details taken for investigation by someone who has the tools to hand to investigate fully. This will prevent the customer from being unfairly put out of pocket by being forced to buy a ticket they don't need or PF'd.

IANAL, but it does get me thinking whether RJ has a legitimate complaint of fraud to make against the TOCs concerned, and possibly even the guards/RPIs concerned. He has to hand the details of why his tickets are valid, but the railway employees choose to ignore that and punish him anyway by taking money off him to which they are not entitled..

 

[BestWestern]

I'm curious to know what particular skills RJ deploys to work out these validities. Clearly what's needed on the other side is rail staff who have the same skill sets and know how to determine validity. If it's "simple enough" for RJ to manage it, it's probably safe to say that others could be trained in it too. But I don't know how much thought process is involved with RJ's creative ticketing.

I would argue that what is needed is the complete shag-up that is ticket validity to be totally overhauled and a large dose of common sense added. Highly unlikely though of course

 

[telstarbox]

And in the meantime, it would be overkill to expect guards to know the Routeing Guide back to front, but TOCs could prevent this sort of situation by including something in training along these lines:

"Due to the way the ticketing system has developed, sometimes a ticket will be valid for a journey which you wouldn't necessarily expect it to be valid for. Unless you are sure that a questionable ticket is invalid, assume it is and issue a TIR/follow it up with the TOC rather than penalising the passenger."

 

[AndyLandy]

I would argue that what is needed is the complete shag-up that is ticket validity to be totally overhauled and a large dose of common sense added. Highly unlikely though of course

I think that would help, but agreed, highly unlikely. I also wonder if that would break more things than it would fix.

 

[BestWestern]

I think that would help, but agreed, highly unlikely. I also wonder if that would break more things than it would fix.

I don't think it would cause too many issues. It would require a major change of attitude from the industry, but that is long overdue. For example; 06.00 - 09.00, Peak tickets. Other times, Off Peak tickets. There may be a SMALL number of necessary restrictions for busy evening trains out of some stations where it is genuinely essential to control passenger flows, however these would be clearly and simply advertised both at the station concerned and when the ticket is issued. For example, "This ticket is not valid departing Reading between X and X Sir". Equally, there may be a few sensible easements where a service departs a station 08.59 for example. Each of these stations would display a required notice, in a large size and a standardised format, giving all of this information. Simple, really simple. We also need to ensure that every journey has a standard range of ticket types available; Peak and Off Peak, Single, Day Return and Month Return - including Month Return fares for shorter journeys, the lack of which is a frequent irritation for many rail users. You can still flog Advance tickets, but all these bizarre "TOC only" fares and other assorted confusing randomness need to be knocked on the head. One railway, one standardised ticketing structure please.

What we have now, quite frankly, is ****. The industry needs to pull it's finger out and make things far better. It is achievable.

 

[island]

So you would remove all super off-peak tickets and increase the price paid by people who use them? And offer period return tickets for short journeys where they would be used again and again by fraudulent travellers? Make someone from south-east London unable to get to Manchester off-peak until lunchtime? Those are just three issues, but isn't the aim to improve the railway service, rather than bankrupt it?

 

[Ferret]

Tibbs - speaking as a guard, that's exactly how you should deal with a disputed routeing. Withdraw or take details of tickets, get name and address, and do a TI Report.

Sure, RJ is up to some pretty random stuff, but I can't help but feel that somebody should be disciplined over the way he's been treated.

 

[AndyLandy]

For example; 06.00 - 09.00, Peak tickets. Other times, Off Peak tickets.

CrossCountry have done something like this. No matter where you start your journey, it's not off-peak until 0930. So, if you're heading North from Southampton, you'd have to wait until 0946 for the first off-peak train, so can't reach Birmingham before noon. Conversely, you can get an 0930 to London and be there before 11am on an off-peak ticket. Clearly this isn't what the system is meant to be achieving, and it opens the door to encourage even more split ticketing.

Interestingly, if you go to Birmingham/Crewe/Manchester via London, the tickets have an easement that means you can't leave Euston until 0930, so you can travel up to London on the 0730 train with an off-peak ticket, to connect with an 0930 departure.

To cut a long story short, if it was easy to restructure fares in a logical, simple and coherent way, someone would have done it already.

 

[RJ]

I'm curious to know what particular skills RJ deploys to work out these validities. Clearly what's needed on the other side is rail staff who have the same skill sets and know how to determine validity. If it's "simple enough" for RJ to manage it, it's probably safe to say that others could be trained in it too. But I don't know how much thought process is involved with RJ's creative ticketing.

Mainly heuristic methods. I do something called validity manipulation - if I happen upon a fare that looks vaguely usable (often when hammering through Avantix Traveller,) I find a way to validate it for the journey I wish to undertake. Knowledge of the relevant conditions and also having an appreciation of the geography of the areas to be travelled through helps to streamline the process. It might seem complicated and sound as if I spend a lot of time on it. In reality, it only takes a few seconds after finding the flow to run vet for potential use. Backwards analysis of the NRG can take a few minutes, but I only bother doing this ticketing thing when I'm actually on the train, commuting.

There are various concepts I utilise to find pricing anomalies, including;

• Useful maps and map combinations
• "Inappropriate" ARPs
• Unheralded shortest routes
• Errors and omissions in restriction codes
• Benign restriction codes
• Use of Advance tickets with long unreserved "& Connections" legs
• Use of walk up "& Connections" fares
• Anomalies produced by zonal fare structures
• Useful easements
• Fares whereby a Pricing Manager has applied fares policies intended to restrict passenger's options for a given flow in one direction, but not the other.

Sometimes I mix and match these factors. There are some things I don't like using, including;

• Excess fares
• Inexplicable results produced by online booking engines
• Anomalies shared with me by other people
• Anything I cannot explain off the top of my head
• Anything that is reasonably open to interpretation. I work with unequivocal rules laid down in black and white

Once I find a useful ticket, more often than not I choose less well known stations in the same fare cluster to reduce the chance of conflict with on board staff. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. For example, with this ticket, the guard had no idea where either station was, evidently as one of the stations is only served by EMT services. She also had no idea which lines the ticket was valid on, despite being adamant that it was only valid "on the other line." She was also unwilling to check the restriction code, which was helpfully printed on the ticket. Still, she proceeded to issue an Unpaid Fare Notice anyway, citing a breach of time restriction (I was on the 05:45 stopper from St Pancras,) breach of route restriction (I also had a season ticket from London to West Hampstead) and the ticket not being valid at all on the MML or EMT services as the reasons. I have a sound recording of part of the conversation on my laptop somewhere. There are risks associated with playing around with the station names so one has to excise caution when using NRG or shortest route anomalies. Stations being in the same fares cluster doesn't necessary mean they have the same ARPs. In the case of that ticket, selecting stations a mile of two south of the origin invalidates the ticket as the shortest route would then be via Peterborough rather than via Frognal. The Pricing Manager seems to have been aware of this as a few miles south, the restrictive route option changes to forbid travel via the MML.

Meticulousness is of the essence. Once I find a ticket, I check the validity and check again, then ask trusted friends to provide their opinion on whether or not they're valid. Some TOCs might not know on how to determine validity, but experience has shown that they would rather use trial and error with every possible channel in an attempt to uphold a penalty, rather than learn how to calculate the validity properly. Therefore, the work I put into finding the tickets is only the tip of the iceberg - I also have to know how to deal with on board staff and subsequently back office staff. I have had staff attempt to detrain me and also physically prevent me from boarding, but I cite certain legal loopholes which override their powers granted by the Railway Byelaws so they couldn't get me into trouble for non compliance even if they wanted to.

As for fixing the ticketing system so that this cannot be done - I don't think so. I don't just take advantage of technical NRG anomalies - I also make full use of the rights/"easements" bestowed upon passengers by the NRCoC. To stop the practice of creative ticketing, they would have to completely forbid starting/stopping short, break of journey and using more than one ticket for a journey. The only way they can get me to stop trying to save money completely is to only offer Anytime/Advance Single fares, with only one route available for each flow and a complete ban on break of journey. I doubt anyone would be foolhardy enough to implement such policies as standard.

 

[furryfeet]

Looking on brfares.com I see that ticket code BT now has additional codes CI and CJ applied if travel is via Luton or London.
This restricts the departure time from London to be
DEPART ST PANCRAS
INTERNATIONAL
Between 1026 & 1515(inclusive)
and at or after 1859

ARRIVE ST PANCRAS
INTERNATIONAL
At or after 1129

So have these additional restrictions been added after you made your journey in May 2012 ?

So was the combination valid under condition 19, despite the ticket being marked "not via london", because you had a season ticket covering the journey part from st. pancras to west hampstead, thus making the saver ticket effectively "start" at west hampstead ?

 

[RJ]

Yes, those additional codes were added to BT at the beginning of NFM13 from September 2012. They did not like it because it was significantly cheaper than the price of an Anytime Return from London or routed +Any Permitted which costed around 3 times as much, so they shut the loophole by adding that sentence to restriction code BT. Hence I moved on to the Hertford East ticket, which they have also picked up on and seen to, so I will be moving onto the next one as and when I need to travel early in the morning.

Condition 19c merely states that the entire journey needs to be covered and that one ticket should be a season and the other(s) not. Both stipulations were met.