Could ticket splitting be banned?

[CC 72100]

Stamped where? At a ticket office before you board?

At an electronic yellow "Compostage" machine, as seen in this link: http://www.sncf.com/fr/ressources/i.../img_b2c_services_billets_resa_composteur.jpg

This also applies to tickets booked in advance that are valid on booked train only, and so can never be reused which defeats the object for me personally but there we go!

Regional travel passes (like the Navigo pass in my previous example), despite being paid up in advance for unlimited use also have to be scanned at the start of every journey (and at the end when the station is gated) : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passe_Navigo#/media/File:Valideur_Navigo_Transilien.jpg

It is considered an infraction* to be travelling on a pass that covers your journey but having not 'validated' it at the start of the journey.

(*or if you encounter some RPIs from TER Bourgogne who have been let loose on Paris region trains without understanding the ticketing rules who threaten to call the police if English monsieur does not sign for the fine, walking away without apologising when corrected by their colleague )

 

[D6975]

More importantly, it will do nothing to prevent people doing what I normally do, which is splitting at a connectional point anyway, which means I can leave the station for a breath of air, or a drink, before resuming my journey later.

Snap.
That's what I always do. Makes sense to do it that way, particularly if your split point is somewhere interesting.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is considered an infraction* to be travelling on a pass that covers your journey but having not 'validated' it at the start of the journey.

Sounds like the Edinburgh tram. I have no idea why they didn't put validators on board by the doors instead.

 

[island]

This is how split ticketing cannot happen in France.

I did once see on SNCF Questions somebody who wanted to combine their Navigo (Paris area pass) with a mainline ticket. In effect, this pass works like a travelcard that is valid throughout the month, and so they may use it for commuting during the week and then leisure travel at the weekend. However, certain long-distance trains stop at a boundary limit station, so this person thought "Instead of buying a ticket for the central Paris terminal, I will use my Navigo to the boundary station (Already paid for it, may as well) and then purchase a normal ticket from there to my destination in Normandie.

Was told 'non' - all tickets must be stamped, so the only way of doing that would be to take a train to the boundary station before the long-distance one, do the deed, then go back on the platform for the initial train they wanted. In the end they said that they would not bother and just get a standard Paris - destination ticket.

This particular wrong has been put partially right – you can now load Boundary Zone type tickets to Navigo for use in combination with an abonnement – although the choice of destinations is limited I think to the Transilien area.

As mentioned above, using two paper tickets for a single journey is difficult in France as the tickets must be stamped in ticket gates (where fitted, mostly applicable on the Reseau Express Régional around Paris) or in ticket validation machines, at the station where the ticket starts to be used. In most cases these machines are not near enough to the platform to facilitate stamping a ticket and returning to the same train. The machines print the date, time and station in question so validating at the "wrong" station is readily detectable.

 

[neilmc]

I agree with Yorkie. I can see three scenarios which could be approached in different ways:

a) combining season ticket/individual journey at a point where the train doesn't stop as per NRCoC 19(c). This could be changed and there probably wouldn't be too much outcry as the number of people who actually do this is quite small and it would probably never occur to most ordinary passengers.
Possible.

b) making it difficult or illegal to use multiple tickets on the same train (as the Irish example) even if a stopping point is used as a split. This WOULD cause an outcry, be difficult to police and, if the French validation example was followed, involve an unnecessary expense in technology and causing extra harassment to passengers. Possible but very unlikely.

c) splits involving genuine changes of train e.g. Manchester to Birmingham involving catching a train to Stoke/Stafford, detraining and catching the next one forward. Easy to do when there's a relatively high frequency of trains and money matters more than time, in fact I used to think this is what "split ticketing" required as I expected ticket offices would refuse to sell an obvious split journey. This can never be prevented since each journey is quite separate, the answer is to not defraud the customers with ridiculous fare levels which can be circumvented with two local journeys (yes, I'm looking at you, Cross Country).

 

[Clip]

Sounds like the Edinburgh tram. I have no idea why they didn't put validators on board by the doors instead.

As has been said many times on various threads on here - having them on board by the doors wil lead to people not validating their ticket until they see someone coming to check their tickets so can encourage fare evasion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As has been said many times on various threads on here - having them on board by the doors wil lead to people not validating their ticket until they see someone coming to check their tickets so can encourage fare evasion.

And as I've also said in response, the usual approach in places like Germany and the Netherlands is that when (or just before) the inspectors board, they disable them so that can't happen. Same on London buses, I believe.

A much better system that inconveniences only the fare dodgers.

 

[Clip]

We are not those countries though so we cant compare them but if I must then in places like Greece and such like the validators are very far from the platforms- we all know we already suffer from massive fare evasion so why would anyone want to encourage it?

. And I don't believe the buses do in London as they board by the driver and generally after everyone at the stop has got on. From my experience anyway.

 

[CC 72100]

This particular wrong has been put partially right – you can now load Boundary Zone type tickets to Navigo for use in combination with an abonnement – although the choice of destinations is limited I think to the Transilien area.

That's correct the "Complément de parcours" means that If say I held a zones 1-3 pass, but one day I had to go somewhere in zone 5, by going to a ticket office in advance I could 'load' onto my pass a station-to-station ticket from the last stop in zone 3 to my intended stop in zone 5, staying on the train throughout. As you correctly say however, this only works for stops inside the Paris area.

But the main argument is the same - by having to validate/stamp/mark every ticket at the station it is valid from before use means that split ticketing just isn't viable.

 

[sheff1]

This is how split ticketing cannot happen in France.

?? I used split tickets in France earlier this year.

There's a difference between something, being able to enforce restrictions effectively, and making doing something not worthwhile. The latter is probably the simplest and easiest approach to take.

It is indeed, but I have learnt that raising the matter on here is not welcomed

 

[CC 72100]

?? I used split tickets in France earlier this year.

With or without changing trains?

 

[Tim R-T-C]

I used a print at home ticket on the Turino TGV last week. No need to validate.

In Italy there are no physical tickets at all on advances. Just a reference # - moving to validators etc in the UK will just be a move away from this far more convenient approach.

 

[CC 72100]

That's a fair point, and one that I had overlooked - print at home tickets that do not require (and cannot be) validation could still be used, as the QR code is only scanned onboard.

Oversight there on my part, I hold my hands up!

 

[anme]

We are not those countries though so we cant compare them but if I must then in places like Greece and such like the validators are very far from the platforms- we all know we already suffer from massive fare evasion so why would anyone want to encourage it?

I've read this post several times and I'm still not sure what point it's trying to make. Are you saying we should not encourage fare evasion (agree), or that having validators encourages fare evasion (disagree - do you have any evidence that systems with validators have more fare evasion than those without?), or that having validators far from the platform encourages fare evasion (not sure - but would recommend that ticket gates act as validators, in addition to any other validators you might put around a station!).

As a mere passenger, I have found it very useful to be able to buy undated tickets and validate them on use - even ignoring any benefits from 'carnet'-type schemes. I do appreciate the problems this would cause for split ticketing if we required all tickets to be validated (which need not necessarily be the case).

 

[Clip]

I've read this post several times and I'm still not sure what point it's trying to make. Are you saying we should not encourage fare evasion (agree), or that having validators encourages fare evasion (disagree - do you have any evidence that systems with validators have more fare evasion than those without?), or that having validators far from the platform encourages fare evasion (not sure - but would recommend that ticket gates act as validators, in addition to any other validators you might put around a station!).

if you had read the previous post then you would see that I am against the idea of having validators on trains/trams by doors as this will encourage fare evasion for reason I outlined.

Having validators far from the platforms also makes fare evasion harder as people will not have the time to hop off, validate and then hop on again. A problem encountered on Chiltern to name one.

I fear you didn't read all of my posts correctly

 

[anme]

if you had read the previous post then you would see that I am against the idea of having validators on trains/trams by doors as this will encourage fare evasion for reason I outlined.

Having validators far from the platforms also makes fare evasion harder as people will not have the time to hop off, validate and then hop on again. A problem encountered on Chiltern to name one.

I fear you didn't read all of my posts correctly

Please can I refer you to post #37 above, regarding having validators on trains/trams? In any case, most rail systems that I know don't have validators on trains.

Regarding having validators far from the platforms, if this makes fare evasion harder, maybe it's a good solution?

 

[Clip]

did you read my first post in this thread or not? You seem to have missed my point completely

 

[Deerfold]

. And I don't believe the buses do in London as they board by the driver and generally after everyone at the stop has got on. From my experience anyway.

How does that stop them disabling validators?

Usually on services with 3-door boarding they board at all three doors so spot anyone who suddenly decides they need to get off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How does that stop them disabling validators?

Usually on services with 3-door boarding they board at all three doors so spot anyone who suddenly decides they need to get off.

I once had a lot of fun with an inspector in Hamburg because of that. I did indeed need to get off quickly (as I wasn't paying attention and so almost missed my stop), and so rushed off past the plain clothes inspector, who stopped me as I did, stepping off the train. The doors closed, and off the train went, with the inspector standing there ready to pounce on his quarry. Unfortunately for him, I presented him with a valid ticket and went off on my way, leaving him looking like a twit on the platform.

 

[yorksrob]

Please can I refer you to post #37 above, regarding having validators on trains/trams? In any case, most rail systems that I know don't have validators on trains.

Regarding having validators far from the platforms, if this makes fare evasion harder, maybe it's a good solution?

If it makes it impossible to use valid split tickets or for people to use season tickets that they've already paid for, then it's a crap solution.

 

[RJ]

In Italy it's necessary to put paper tickets into a validator, which stamps it with the time and date. Necessitating this in this country would put a stop to it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In Italy it's necessary to put paper tickets into a validator, which stamps it with the time and date.

Only for regional tickets, which are kilometric anyway so you wouldn't gain from a split (unless I suppose tacking onto a season ticket).

All long-distance services are compulsory reservation and (unlike France) compostage is not required.

 

[Greenback]

It's a different situation in Italy to here. There's no advantage in splitting for the majority of journeys.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed, although even though splitting tickets might be less worthwhile on a mileage based system, using one's season for part of the journey might actually be more worthwhile than at present. !

 

[strowger]

In Italy it's necessary to put paper tickets into a validator, which stamps it with the time and date. Necessitating this in this country would put a stop to it.

A fascinating variation on this would be for the stamping of the ticket to trigger the ORCATS revenue allocation, ensuring that the revenue went in all cases to the operator which actually carried the traffic.

 

[PermitToTravel]

In Spain ticket gates stamp tickets automatically where provided, and there are wall-mounted composters where they're not

 

[Clip]

How does that stop them disabling validators?

Usually on services with 3-door boarding they board at all three doors so spot anyone who suddenly decides they need to get off.

I didn't say it did stop them from disabling them, I said I don't believe they do disable the Oyster readers, I said the inspectors got on AFTER everyone else to check tickets.

. And Im pretty sure we don't have 3 door boarding in London anymore since we got rid of the bendys.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A fascinating variation on this would be for the stamping of the ticket to trigger the ORCATS revenue allocation, ensuring that the revenue went in all cases to the operator which actually carried the traffic.

That would require on-board validators (with the issue, as some have mentioned, that fare dodgers will just touch in when they see inspectors). But it's an interesting option when smartcards come along.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And Im pretty sure we don't have 3 door boarding in London anymore since we got rid of the bendys.

The Bozza buses operate open boarding at any door if you have Oyster/CPC, though if you have a paper ticket you are meant to board at the front and show it to the driver. Which is quite ironic given that open boarding was a supposed reason to get rid of the bendies[1], then the new buses operate near enough the same system.

[1] A non-reason, more like; the bendies could have been switched to front boarding only if they wanted - a good number of regional bus operators operate them in exactly that manner.

 

[anme]

did you read my first post in this thread or not? You seem to have missed my point completely

And did you read post #37, which proposed a solution to this problem?
BTW, although there do seem to be solutions to this particular issue, I'm not necessarily in favour of on board validation, especially on trains. My point was that a system where updated tickets are sold in advance and validated on use can be very passenger friendly.

 

[Clip]

That would require on-board validators (with the issue, as some have mentioned, that fare dodgers will just touch in when they see inspectors). But it's an interesting option when smartcards come along.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The Bozza buses operate open boarding at any door if you have Oyster/CPC, though if you have a paper ticket you are meant to board at the front and show it to the driver. Which is quite ironic given that open boarding was a supposed reason to get rid of the bendies[1], then the new buses operate near enough the same system.

[1] A non-reason, more like; the bendies could have been switched to front boarding only if they wanted - a good number of regional bus operators operate them in exactly that manner.

Wow I totally didn't think of the Boris buses though they do have a conductor on them which I guess is something

And did you read post #37, which proposed a solution to this problem?
.

But that's a solution for a problem that does not exist so why create one?