Delay repay when walking across London on split tickets? Help?

[robbeech]

Ok, I understand there’s a fixed link between the two but you say it’s the itinerary that matters here, as there wasn’t a through itinerary, neither of them included an itinerary for a fixed link. It wasn’t made at the time that the fixed link was ‘walking’ so I still don’t quite follow how the two tickets are joined together.

 

[yorkie]

I think there is not going to be any single 'right' answer here.

I would reject any argument that the tickets "don't join up"; they clearly do (at London Terminals)

But it's true to say that a through itinerary cannot be generated, at the time the passenger made the journey, without using the "TUBE" fixed link.

Without knowing what the booked and actual arrival/departure times at the respective London Terminals were, it's difficult to comment.

But this does highlight an issue that I've recommended for a long time: I strongly recommend using a National Rail accredited retailer that offers split tickets; you will be provided a valid through itinerary, and be fully protected in the event of delays, or changes to the timetable between the dates of booking and travel, as well as (I'd expect) support from the retailer if required. I would then suggest sticking to the itinerary, unless specifically advised not to.

 

[MotCO]

I know if you use the TfL website to plan a journey, you can specify which modes of transport to include or exclude. Thus, if you can't stand travelling by boat or Tube, you can exclude these options and get a journey which meets your needs. If you cannot travel by Tube (e.g. due to claustraphobia), can you exclude this from an option on any NR train itinerary? Can the OP use this to provide a valid train itinerary for his journey?

 

[yorkie]

I know if you use the TfL website to plan a journey, you can specify which modes of transport to include or exclude. Thus, if you can't stand travelling by boat or Tube, you can exclude these options and get a journey which meets your needs. If you cannot travel by Tube (e.g. due to claustraphobia), can you exclude this from an option on any NR train itinerary?

Yes, on some journey planners you can do this.

But that doesn't mean the journey planner will used a fixed link at a time when the fixed link does not apply.

Can the OP use this to provide a valid train itinerary for his journey?

You cannot get an itinerary with a 'TRANSFER' between London Terminals at a time when the relevant 'TRANSFER' fixed link is not enabled

 

[robbeech]

I would reject any argument that the tickets "don't join up"; they clearly do (at London Terminals)

I think this is my point. London terminals is dependant upon your origin and destination. It offers more flexibility to passengers so they can use a variety of routes but doesn’t include ANY London terminal, there at least used to be a list floating around that showed the available London terminals from every station although I think there were some questionable entries. Of course it is very much route dependant.
as Liverpool to London terminals is not valid to Paddington via the WCML and Euston (it is if you go via Reading but that throws the entire journey to reading up in the air) and as London Terminals to Reading isn’t valid from Euston then this is where I cannot see how the journey is joined, or indeed in railway terms, a journey. I hope the toc doesn’t see it that way and pays out but as they spend so much tome rejecting absolutely, unquestionably valid tickets I would be surprised if they even acknowledge the delay at all.

 

[packermac]

But the OP says they did the journey within the 53 minutes allowed, so your comment isn't directly relevant.
IMO the full amount is eligible for repay - after all, most people (who don't walk!) will use Oyster/contactless for the tube/bus part - but this forum has frequently advised people to book split tickets including the tube to avoid any problem, so I've no idea what the outcome will be

I seem to remember on a thread sometime back that Chiltern were arguing that Oyster use meant that it was not a through booking. (I think in that case from somewhere near Redhill to the Midlands). That may of course be just them trying it on.

 

[yorkie]

If you were to plan a journey from Liverpool to Reading arriving into Euston too late for the last tube (if such an itinerary is possible) then you would get an itinerary via Euston & Paddington, with a TRANSFER, on a combination of tickets issued to/from London Terminals. This would be a valid itinerary for a valid combination of tickets.

So it isn't that the tickets are not valid; it's that the itinerary isn't valid.

I seem to remember on a thread sometime back that Chiltern were arguing that Oyster use meant that it was not a through booking. (I think in that case from somewhere near Redhill to the Midlands). That may of course be just them trying it on.

That was an incorrect statement by Chiltern, and they paid out in the end.

 

[hkstudent]

Trainsplit often offers me a London Terminals to London Zone 1-3 ticket even for a St Pancras to Euston transfer presumably for this reason.

Trainsplit cannot offer Oyster PAYG information, so they need to sell a much expensive London Zone ticket.
Sometimes they even offer LU only ticket, which is at least double the price than Oyster PAYG fare.

 

[maniacmartin]

I know if you use the TfL website to plan a journey, you can specify which modes of transport to include or exclude. Thus, if you can't stand travelling by boat or Tube, you can exclude these options and get a journey which meets your needs. If you cannot travel by Tube (e.g. due to claustraphobia), can you exclude this from an option on any NR train itinerary? Can the OP use this to provide a valid train itinerary for his journey?

I don't think TfL's journey planner is National Rail accredited. It doesn't respect the National Rail tube transfer times, but instead gives tighter connections that usually work out OK.

 

[Belperpete]

I don't think TfL's journey planner is National Rail accredited. It doesn't respect the National Rail tube transfer times, but instead gives tighter connections that usually work out OK.

You also need to be very careful when using TfL's journey planner. For most journeys between two locations, it gives you door to door times. However, if you ask for a journey between two TfL stations, the time given will be for TfL platform to TfL platform, with no allowance for the time needed to get to and from the platforms at the start and end of journey, which in many cases may be longer than the transit time. Anyone who wants to know how long it will take to get from Euston mainline to Paddington mainline needs to ask exactly that, not how long it will take to get from Euston TfL to Paddington TfL.

 

[Haywain]

Anyone who wants to know how long it will take to get from Euston mainline to Paddington mainline needs to ask exactly that, not how long it will take to get from Euston TfL to Paddington TfL.

Even that should be treated cautiously as it will not necessarily include the full interchange time for the mainline stations.

 

[Hadders]

TfL do now pad out their journeys with an allowance to reach the platform which has been done to try and slow down journeys and discourage passengers from using the tube in this covid world.

Their journey planner should not be replied on to be compliant with National Rail minimum interchange times.

 

[Kilopylae]

As a brief aside, is there any requirement that a TUBE link be made by Tube? Would it be permissible for a passenger to make the journey from Euston to Paddington by other means, provided that they did so within 18 or 13 minutes?

An eighteen-minute transfer from Euston to Paddington would probably be possible by bicycle, for example. Would cycling be an acceptable way to make a 'TUBE' link between 19.01 and 23.59 / 5.29 and 6.59?

And for the record, travelling on foot from Paddington to Euston in 23 minutes, whilst probably possible, is ridiculous. That's a short run, not something most passengers would expect to do in the middle of a long rail journey.

 

[Hadders]

Remember you have to add on 15 minutes for the station interchange time at Euston and a further 15 minutes interchange time at Paddington so the minimum interchange time for Euston to Paddington is actually 43 minutes.

 

[Belperpete]

Remember you have to add on 15 minutes for the station interchange time at Euston and a further 15 minutes interchange time at Paddington so the minimum interchange time for Euston to Paddington is actually 43 minutes.

For an interchange like Euston to St Pancras, you probably could walk it as quickly as taking the tube. But not Euston to Paddington. According to google maps, it takes 47 minutes to walk from Euston concourse to Paddington concourse. While you could probably do it quicker if you are a fast walker, you still need to allow time for getting off the train and getting through the barriers at Euston (particularly if you are at the rear of the train), and likewise time for getting onto the train at Paddington. 43 minutes is not a realistic connection time if walking.

I would expect the TOC to look at the time the OP actually arrived in Euston, and then use the journey planner to work out what time he should have arrived at his destination by taking the fastest route (i.e. the tube) to Paddington, and the next available train from there. If the OP deliberately delayed himself any further, by catching a later train from Paddington (for whatever reason), then I would not expect them to use that further delay in the calculation.

 

[robbeech]

I would expect the TOC to look at the time the OP actually arrived in Euston, and then use the journey planner to work out what time he should have arrived at his destination by taking the fastest route (i.e. the tube) to Paddington, and the next available train from there. If the OP deliberately delayed himself any further, by catching a later train from Paddington (for whatever reason), then I would not expect them to use that further delay in the calculation.

There’s an official transfer time between the two, which has been mentioned several times in this thread. That is the only detail the toc would be interested in. They won’t be looking at anything other than that. And that’s if they even entertain the idea of looking at this claim.