Cross London transfer but no "Maltese Cross" on ticket ?

[clagmonster]

For reference, Yorkie's Routeing Guide extract can be found on page 4 of http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/instructions.pdf

 

[sheff1]

LU staff are not trained on the National Routeing Guide (indeed why should they be?). The information that LU give to their staff is simple and straightforward - if it's got a maltese cross, then it's ok; if not, then passengers have to buy a separate ticket.

It's up to the ATOC members (and specifically TOC setting the fare to make) sure that the + appears on appropriate tickets.

It might be simple and straightforward, but it is incorrect.

Surely it should be up to LU to train their staff properly. If they are responsible for checking tickets they need to know which ones are valid.

 

[lyesbkz]

the ticket is missing the 'Maltese Cross' sign and in its place is an asterisk

What is the first symbol in the "route" field?

Indeed, I'm wondering this too. when you say the asterisk is "in place of the Maltese Cross", is it actually in the ROUTE field or is it after the From/To station?

I hope one of these new TVMs doesn't print an asterisk instead of a Maltese Cross however it wouldn't surprise me..
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Surely it should be up to LU to train their staff properly. If they are responsible for checking tickets they need to know which ones are valid.

The point of the Maltese Cross is so that they don't have to learn everything and can simply identify valid/non-valid tickets. Therefore I agree that it is the responsibility of the TOC printing the ticket to ensure that the symbol appears correctly.

 

[transmanche]

It might be simple and straightforward, but it is incorrect.

Incorrect under whose rules? As LU is not part of the National Rail network, it doesn't matter what the routeing guide may say.

Their system, their rules!

Surely it should be up to LU to train their staff properly. If they are responsible for checking tickets they need to know which ones are valid.

They do train their staff properly, to their rules. It's up to ATOC (and the ticket issuers) to ensure that tickets carry the correct markings.

 

[junglejames]

Incorrect under whose rules? As LU is not part of the National Rail network, it doesn't matter what the routeing guide may say.

Their system, their rules!

They do train their staff properly, to their rules. It's up to ATOC (and the ticket issuers) to ensure that tickets carry the correct markings.

You could also say its up to LU to ensure the staff understand all the types of ticket that could be seen on the underground. If they are only going by a little cross, then they do not understand the tickets well enough, hence they are not trained properly. It may be fine by the LU rules, but it isnt properly.
If you arent sure of where a destination is, you ask someone else. Then you look at the routeing. Does it say 'Any permitted' or 'via london'?
The extra training takes 10mins max, as thats all that is needed.

 

[transmanche]

You could also say its up to LU to ensure the staff understand all the types of ticket that could be seen on the underground.

But clearly that would be nonsensical. Hence the 'maltese cross' symbol system of showing validity.

As I said before, LU isn't part of National Rail. If ATOC expect their tickets to be accepted on another system, they need to show the appropriate markings. Simple.

Solve the problem, not the sympton.

 

[yorkie]

Incorrect under whose rules? As LU is not part of the National Rail network, it doesn't matter what the routeing guide may say.

Their system, their rules!

If you buy a ticket and part of the contract is that carriage will be provided by LU, then I would consider that binding. LU have agreed to carry such passengers, and my understanding is that a lump sum is paid rather than accounting for each individual ticket. This is just looking for excuses. Internal disputes between the rail industry and its partners are of no concern to the customer.

They do train their staff properly, to their rules.

The training given to LU staff on ticketing is woefully inadequate. Senior managers are not knowledgeable and I know of one case where an eagle-eyed and conscientious CSA spotted a forged ticket and yet the manager told him off saying it was real. I looked at it, and it was definitely a forgery. With managers like that, well, no wonder the training is poor.

It's up to ATOC (and the ticket issuers) to ensure that tickets carry the correct markings.

Yes, but the rules do say that sometimes the correct markings are not present, and the customer is still allowed to cross London. Someone on the salary that LU CSAs are paid should be able to use their brains when someone presents an itinerary and reservations for a cross-London journey and allow travel. If they can't do that they're in the wrong job.

 

[Brucey]

But clearly that would be nonsensical. Hence the 'maltese cross' symbol system of showing validity.

As I said before, LU isn't part of National Rail. If ATOC expect their tickets to be accepted on another system, they need to show the appropriate markings. Simple.

Solve the problem, not the sympton.

But I'm sure LU are more than happy to take the revenue they receive from these non-Maltese Cross tickets.

 

[transmanche]

This is just looking for excuses.

I could make the same point, why are you defending ATOC's incompetence in ensuring that all appropriate tickets carry the correct markings?

Internal disputes between the rail industry and its partners are of no concern to the customer.

It's really no different to purchasing a combined rail travel & attraction entry ticket. The third party is going to expect that the validity is shown in the appropriate manner - and if it's not, then are quite within their rights to deny entry. Or should their staff be trained on the NR ticketing system too?

Yes, but the rules do say that sometimes the correct markings are not present, and the customer is still allowed to cross London.

Although the wording on the ticket says cross-London transfer on LU is only available if the correct marking is present.

If the marking isn't present it means the TOC setting the fare/the ticket issuer has made a c**k-up. and the customer should request a correctly marked ticket from the issuer.

Surely it's better to solve the problem at source? Far better than expecting the employees of a third party to be trained on a different system?

 

[sheff1]

Although the wording on the ticket says cross-London transfer on LU is only available if the correct marking is present.

The wording on the tickets currently in my possession says no such thing.

I repeat, if LU staff are responsible for checking tickets they need to know which ones are valid. LU should be responsible for training their staff accordingly.

 

[lyesbkz]

Although the wording on the ticket says cross-London transfer on LU is only available if the correct marking is present.

If you are referring to:

'+' denotes ticket is valid for one journey across London by Underground/DLR services if required

then this does not say that the symbol must be present.

 

[transmanche]

The wording on the tickets currently in my possession says no such thing.

The ones I have say;

'+' denotes ticket is valid for one journey across London by Underground/DLR services if required - for details see www.nationalrail.co.uk/crossinglondon.​

That's pretty clear. And it doesn't go on to say;

Also some other tickets without the '+' are also valid for one journey across London by Underground/DLR services, but we can't be bothered to make our ticketing system work correctly, so you'd better just chance it.​

I repeat, if LU staff are responsible for checking tickets they need to know which ones are valid. LU should be responsible for training their staff accordingly.

So you don't think that the TOCs need to sort their act out and make sure that all tickets are correctly marked? You prefer to put the onus onto a third party instead?

If the agreement between the TOCs and LU is that LU accept tickets which have the maltese cross on them, then as far as I'm concerned (just like any other third party) they're quite within their right to refuse travel to those holding incorrectly marked tickets.

 

[yorkie]

...they're quite within their right to refuse travel to those holding incorrectly marked tickets.

Well, they aren't, because...

...In some instances (particularly long distance cross country journeys) the
Manual will show an "any permitted" fare but without the via London, Maltese
cross symbol. Reference to Section C (the “yellow pages”) may show via
London to be a permitted route for this journey and in such instances travel
via London to include cross-London transfer would be permitted.

Mistakes happen, and I believe the OPs ticket is the result of a TIS error (not quite the same issue described above, but the same principle). I am sure that someone on a salary of around £27k per year (more than many people on this forum get paid I'm sure, including me!) whose job it is to check tickets at ticket barriers, can apply common sense even if they are not aware of that particular rule, when a customer presents a ticket missing the "+" but with an itinerary and/or reservations via London.

 

[sheff1]

So you don't think that the TOCs need to sort their act out and make sure that all tickets are correctly marked? You prefer to put the onus onto a third party instead?

If that 'third party' is paid to accept all valid tickets then that is what they should do.

If the agreement between the TOCs and LU is that LU accept tickets which have the maltese cross on them, then as far as I'm concerned (just like any other third party) they're quite within their right to refuse travel to those holding incorrectly marked tickets.

The agreement is to accept valid tickets. Maltese cross tickets are valid, but so are other tickets without the symbol - as explained by yorkie earlier.

If LU want to only accept tickets with a maltese cross, they need to come to a revised agreement with ATOC. If ATOC did not wish to include the symbol on those tickets which currently do not have it then, presumably, the revised agreement would involve a reduced payment to LU because none of the cost of these (now not valid on LU) tickets would be due to LU.

 

[transmanche]

Well, they aren't, because...

I'm not sure why you've attributed a quote to me which includes things I didn't write.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Mistakes happen, and I believe the OPs ticket is the result of a TIS error (not quite the same issue described above, but the same principle). I am sure that someone on a salary of around £27k per year (more than many people on this forum get paid I'm sure, including me!) whose job it is to check tickets at ticket barriers, can apply common sense even if they are not aware of that particular rule, when a customer presents a ticket missing the "+" but with an itinerary and/or reservations via London.

So how are the supposed to tell the 'not valid's from the 'issuing mistakes'?

And I'm still wondering why I'm the only one who thinks that its up to the TOCs to make sure that all appropriate tickets carry the correct markings? Surely that's got to be simpler (and cheaper) than training all LU CSA's on the NR Routeing Guide?

 

[sheff1]

And I'm still wondering why I'm the only one who thinks that its up to the TOCs to make sure that all appropriate tickets carry the correct markings?

Maybe because there is no such thing as 'correct markings' in the catch-all sense you are suggesting.

 

[transmanche]

If LU want to only accept tickets with a maltese cross, they need to come to a revised agreement with ATOC.

Some NR tickets are valid for travel on the underground. These tickets will have an R, U, or + on them.

• R is found on National Rail Travelcards and is followed by the zones where the ticket is valid e.g. R1 valid only in zone 1 or R2-6 valid for travel in zones 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6.
• U is for underground and is on single or return tickets.
• + is for cross London transfers and are valid for one unbroken journey on the underground for a single ticket. Return tickets will allow two unbroken journeys.

If these symbols are not on the National Rail ticket then the customer must be sent to the ticket office to pay for the underground part of their journey.

So as far as ATOC's public material (see www.nationalrail.co.uk/crossinglondon is concerned, the information printed on the ticket that I described earlier and the information given to LU CSA's in their training (see above) basically all agree, "no +, no go".

Now it may be because of an error made by a TOC/ticket issuer that a ticket which should bear the + symbol does not. But as far as LU is concerned, it means that the ticket is not valid for travel on their system.

As I said before, "their system, their rules".

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Maybe because there is no such thing as 'correct markings' in the catch-all sense you are suggesting.

I have provided details of the correct markings above.

So do actually you think it's a 'good thing' that some tickets which are valid for cross-London travel do not bear the + symbol? And you think this is helpful because...?

 

[sheff1]

So do actually you think it's a 'good thing' that some tickets which are valid for cross-London travel do not bear the + symbol? And you think this is helpful because...?

I have never said it is a 'good thing' and do not believe it is.

If I ever have cause to use a correctly issued non-maltese cross ticket via London and am sent to pay again I will let you know the outcome of the subsequent complaint. In the meantime I think we will have to agree to differ.

 

[transmanche]

Well the view of myself, and others, is that the text in the LU Training Material is incorrect.

If LU was part of the National Rail network, I'd agree with you 100%. But it isn't - and I don't.

In the meantime I think we will have to agree to differ

I think we shall.

I have never said it is a 'good thing' and do not believe it is.

Well at least we agree on one thing!

And on that positive note, I shall bow out from this thread.

 

[yorkie]

As I said before, "their system, their rules".

Do you mean "their", or do you mean "our"? And if you do work for LU, is that the view of LU? (I suspect you do, and I suspect it isn't).

Anyway as for the quote from the LU CSA manual, there are certainly exceptions to that! Such as tickets from anywhere north of Finsbury Park (inclusive) to London Terminals being valid between King's Cross and Moorgate, and journeys on routes such as the northern parts of the Bakerloo and Metropolitan Lines to give just two examples.

Does the manual also say that common sense should not be applied? I suspect not!