Do onboard ticket scanners check route validity

[zero]

I have an eticket for a journey which is routed via a certain station, but the train will not actually pass that station. As I have an itinerary and seat reservations I believe I will be OK.

The journey planner only suggests this route on days when the trains are diverted due to engineering (and an ordinary passenger wouldn't know which route the train was taking). As this ticket is still for sale by all retailers and there are further days when the diversion is planned, I don't wish to reveal it yet - although maybe it is intended and not a loophole. The ticket is definitely not valid on the train's normal route.

I am just wondering if my ticket is scanned on board, would the scanner reject it because it's not valid on the train's normal route? Or would the scanner use the same logic as the journey planners, if it does route checking at all?

 

[Deafdoggie]

With an itinerary the ticket is valid.

Without knowing the stations it's impossible to say for certain, but it's most likely there's an easement if the line is closed for some reason. For example, Exeter to London via Honiton tickets are usually valid for travel via Taunton if the line via Honiton is closed for engineering.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have an eticket for a journey which is routed via a certain station, but the train will not actually pass that station. As I have an itinerary and seat reservations I believe I will be OK.

The journey planner only suggests this route on days when the trains are diverted due to engineering (and an ordinary passenger wouldn't know which route the train was taking). As this ticket is still for sale by all retailers and there are further days when the diversion is planned, I don't wish to reveal it yet - although maybe it is intended and not a loophole. The ticket is definitely not valid on the train's normal route.

I am just wondering if my ticket is scanned on board, would the scanner reject it because it's not valid on the train's normal route? Or would the scanner use the same logic as the journey planners, if it does route checking at all?

If a train is diverted for temporary reasons, it is generally considered to run via its original planned route for ticketing purposes as well as the temporary one. Easements are often inserted into the routeing data in order to allow for this. We can't check unless you let us know what it is, but it looks like this is the situation.

It would therefore be valid even without an itinerary on one of the diverted trains, however as you have one, as others have said, the fact it was issued against one makes it valid anyway.

 

[bakerstreet]

Out of interest, and to refer to the original post/thread title, how accurate are on train scanner accept/reject decisions when a ticket is scanned?

Do they analyse more than a ticket barrier does?

Do they know and implement the routing guide?

Do scanners provide accurate results to the user?

Do they completely accept or reject a ticket’s validity or refer to the staff to make a manual decision?

Are they more likely to reject valid tickets or pass invalid ones?

 

[zero]

Yes I appreciate it's hard to answer without naming specifics.

Ok so say the train runs non-stop A-B. The usual route is A-X-B, on diversion it's A-Y-B. Y is not a station, but it is near to station Z.

There's an any permitted ticket and a ticket via Z. Normally to get the cheaper fare you need to go A-Z, change, Z-B.

However I have been sold a via Z ticket with an itinerary for the direct non-stop train on the diversion day. As the train does not actually pass Z, only Y (near Z), I am not sure if it is valid without an itinerary.


When the train runs via its normal route a via Z ticket should be rejected. Will the scanner reject it normally?

Then my questions are 1) would the scanner account for the diversion and 2) if it does have some routing logic, what would it make of theY/Z situation?

 

[L401CJF]

The onboard scanners we use (Zebra) will come up with a yellow warning saying "Not valid via Wolverhampton" or "route via Hereford" etc for any route restrictions.

You'd be fine if there are engineering works in place and your itinerary tells you to use that service.

We get emails for ticket acceptance or engineering work ticket information via our work phones that may affect the routes we operate, so in theory staff should be aware and should accept the ticket.

@bakerstreet the machines we use will show a restriction code which we have to look up manually. Plus any route restriction in yellow at the top. We get given the option to accept the ticket or reject, or place a warning on the ticket. For example we can mark as "Warn (or reject) Wrong Route" or not activated, no railcard etc. We tell the machine which journey we are on so it knows which advance tickets are for that service and which are not, but again if its rejected due to wrong service ie too early or too late we can still accept it for example a connecting service was cancelled and so on.

If we place a Warning or a Reject on the ticket for whatever reason, it'll flag up when checked at barriers or by revenue staff. Obviously this is only for the barcode tickets/mobile tickets - card magstrip tickets are just a visual inspection.

I've found them to be very accurate (providing the conductor remembers to change the journey details to the service they on and havnt left it set up for the previous trip!)

 

[m00036]

With an itinerary the ticket is valid.

This is referenced on lots of these threads so thought I'd ask where this is explicitly permitted by the NRCoT? Presumably it's implicit in Section 13 by the information boxes but I can't see anything clear-cut (such as in cases where none of 13.1.1, 13.1.2 or 13.1.3 are met, or is otherwise restricted by the general 13.1 clause like in this case, but the journey planner still permits it).

 

[tspaul26]

This is referenced on lots of these threads so thought I'd ask where this is explicitly permitted by the NRCoT? Presumably it's implicit in Section 13 by the information boxes but I can't see anything clear-cut (such as in cases where none of 13.1.1, 13.1.2 or 13.1.3 are met, or is otherwise restricted by the general 13.1 clause like in this case, but the journey planner still permits it).

It’s not in the NRCOT. It’s a facet of general contract law as to the incorporation of terms by implication or, failing that, pre-contractual misrepresentation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes I appreciate it's hard to answer without naming specifics.

Ok so say the train runs non-stop A-B. The usual route is A-X-B, on diversion it's A-Y-B. Y is not a station, but it is near to station Z.

There's an any permitted ticket and a ticket via Z. Normally to get the cheaper fare you need to go A-Z, change, Z-B.

However I have been sold a via Z ticket with an itinerary for the direct non-stop train on the diversion day. As the train does not actually pass Z, only Y (near Z), I am not sure if it is valid without an itinerary.


When the train runs via its normal route a via Z ticket should be rejected. Will the scanner reject it normally?

Then my questions are 1) would the scanner account for the diversion and 2) if it does have some routing logic, what would it make of theY/Z situation?

Ah. So to use an example, WCML trains appear to be diverting via Brum today (and calling at New St*), so your example is similar to that you were sold a "route Birmingham" ticket for London to Manchester (no such thing exists, but let's say it did) on a direct Euston to Manchester service, which would normally not be valid because that service does not normally go via Birmingham?

That is valid, unquestionably so if you have and are travelling on an itinerary. Though the usual thing applies - never go as far as an Unpaid Fares Notice on an argument about validity because these often go to badly informed organisations like TIL. If asked for an excess and the guard insists, pay it and pursue a refund afterwards.

* This does not normally matter with regard to route validity, but normally if diverted WCML services don't call at New St they run via Bescot, which would mean a "route Birmingham" ticket not being valid, so was put in so as not to break the example

 

[ABB125]

It’s not in the NRCOT. It’s a facet of general contract law as to the incorporation of terms by implication or, failing that, pre-contractual misrepresentation.

Even so, I'm sure I've seen a copy of an official letter from National Rail stating that an itinerary is always valid somewhere on this forum, but I can't remember where. Does anyone know where this letter is/have a copy?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even so, I'm sure I've seen a copy of an official letter from National Rail stating that an itinerary is always valid somewhere on this forum, but I can't remember where. Does anyone know where this letter is/have a copy?

It is a matter of general consumer law as if it was sold against that itinerary it is evidence of a contract.

 

[Fokx]

I am just wondering if my ticket is scanned on board, would the scanner reject it because it's not valid on the train's normal route? Or would the scanner use the same logic as the journey planners, if it does route checking at all?

Yes your ticket will flag up any route restrictions. At my TOC we use clipper on a zebra scanner and if the route is NOT valid it will come up with an error message that has to be manually accepted or rejected.

I wouldn’t imagine you would run into issues however on this occasion so long as you purchased your ticket prior to the advertised route change, your ticket would still be valid.

 

[Nottingham59]

The National Rail website states that "When you book your journey online, any ticket offered at that time, in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner will be accepted as a permitted route." See under Routeing Information here: https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/Train_Tickets.aspx

 

[tspaul26]

It is a matter of general consumer law as if it was sold against that itinerary it is evidence of a contract.

This is somewhat inexact and it is not a question of consumer law per se e.g. the contract law principles would apply even in a business to business context.

 

[bakerstreet]

The onboard scanners we use (Zebra) will come up with a yellow warning saying "Not valid via Wolverhampton" or "route via Hereford" etc for any route restrictions.

You'd be fine if there are engineering works in place and your itinerary tells you to use that service.

We get emails for ticket acceptance or engineering work ticket information via our work phones that may affect the routes we operate, so in theory staff should be aware and should accept the ticket.

@bakerstreet the machines we use will show a restriction code which we have to look up manually. Plus any route restriction in yellow at the top. We get given the option to accept the ticket or reject, or place a warning on the ticket. For example we can mark as "Warn (or reject) Wrong Route" or not activated, no railcard etc. We tell the machine which journey we are on so it knows which advance tickets are for that service and which are not, but again if its rejected due to wrong service ie too early or too late we can still accept it for example a connecting service was cancelled and so on.

If we place a Warning or a Reject on the ticket for whatever reason, it'll flag up when checked at barriers or by revenue staff. Obviously this is only for the barcode tickets/mobile tickets - card magstrip tickets are just a visual inspection.

I've found them to be very accurate (providing the conductor remembers to change the journey details to the service they on and havnt left it set up for the previous trip!)

Thank you @L401CJF that is a great summary

 

[zero]

Ah. So to use an example, WCML trains appear to be diverting via Brum today (and calling at New St*), so your example is similar to that you were sold a "route Birmingham" ticket for London to Manchester (no such thing exists, but let's say it did) on a direct Euston to Manchester service, which would normally not be valid because that service does not normally go via Birmingham?

* This does not normally matter with regard to route validity, but normally if diverted WCML services don't call at New St they run via Bescot, which would mean a "route Birmingham" ticket not being valid, so was put in so as not to break the example

Yes it's something like that - using your example, suppose LON-MAN is £100 any permitted, and LON-MAN route Via Bham is £50.

Normally all direct trains go by the Trent Valley and on the £50 ticket you would always have to change at New St. But the direct trains are diverted Stechford-Aston-Bescot, so they go near to New St but not through it, yet I have an itinerary on the diversion route for £50.



Anyway my ticket was scanned and the guard didn't say anything - though someone else had no railcard and he made them buy a new ticket and said they could show the railcard for a refund, so a by-the-book kind of guy

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes it's something like that - using your example, suppose LON-MAN is £100 any permitted, and LON-MAN route Via Bham is £50.

Normally all direct trains go by the Trent Valley and on the £50 ticket you would always have to change at New St. But the direct trains are diverted Stechford-Aston-Bescot, so they go near to New St but not through it, yet I have an itinerary on the diversion route for £50.

Does the train you are on not actually pass through the via station on the ticket? If not, then it is only valid because of the itinerary, which was probably issued in error.

That is why I added the note about Bescot. A route Birmingham ticket would be valid on a train passing through one of the Birmingham group (i.e. New St, Snow Hill or Moor St) whether it calls or not and regardless of whether it normally goes that way or not*, but not simply Bescot. Today all the diverted services appear to be running via and calling at New St, unusually.

* Possibly excepting emergency diversions, but this isn't applicable to the question and is a bit niche.

 

[Paul Kelly]

Aston is in Birmingham routeing group so that is perfectly valid; it's not an error. Fares groups (e.g. Birmingham Stations) are totally separate from the routeing guide.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Aston is in Birmingham routeing group so that is perfectly valid; it's not an error. Fares groups (e.g. Birmingham Stations) are totally separate from the routeing guide.

I stand corrected, though it was an example I proposed rather than the actual one the OP has, I think.

 

[johntea]

I was on a LNER service recently with a Grand Central only advance ticket ('valid' as LNER had accepted a train full of GC passengers due to a fault with the GC service) and the ticket scanner did make a different noise I think to what it would but the guard was aware of the ticket acceptance anyway

Wonder if the data from all these scans gets submitted to 'head office' eventually so they can keep a track on what percentage of passengers were travelling on an invalid ticket and the likes

 

[JB_B]

Aston is in Birmingham routeing group so that is perfectly valid; it's not an error. Fares groups (e.g. Birmingham Stations) are totally separate from the routeing guide.

There are 3 'I' (include-at-least-one-of) location records for route 00268 (Via Birmingham) specifying Moor Street,New Street or Snow Hill.

My understanding was that if any such record had its GROUP_MKR set to Y, then passing through any of the five Birmingham Routeing Point Group (G02) members (which also include Aston and Duddeston) would be sufficient to meet the Via Birmingham constraint...

... but they have GROUP_MKR = N ...?

 

[island]

There are 3 'I' (include-at-least-one-of) location records for route 00268 (Via Birmingham) specifying Moor Street,New Street or Snow Hill.

My understanding was that if any such record had its GROUP_MKR set to Y, then passing through any of the five Birmingham Routeing Point Group (G02) members (which also include Aston and Duddeston) would be sufficient to meet the Via Birmingham constraint...

... but they have GROUP_MKR = N ...?

Please can you expand upon what a "GROUP_MKR" is?

 

[Paul Kelly]

Please can you expand upon what a "GROUP_MKR" is?

It's in the electronic routeing guide data used by journey planners, and indicates whether a route restriction should be considered as referring to any station in a routeing group, or one or more individual stations.

There are 3 'I' (include-at-least-one-of) location records for route 00268 (Via Birmingham) specifying Moor Street,New Street or Snow Hill.

My understanding was that if any such record had its GROUP_MKR set to Y, then passing through any of the five Birmingham Routeing Point Group (G02) members (which also include Aston and Duddeston) would be sufficient to meet the Via Birmingham constraint...

... but they have GROUP_MKR = N ...?

Yes indeed, it seems you are correct. I think this must have changed relatively recently. I didn't check it prior to my reply in post #18, and was working from memory of what it used to be. In which case, I wonder is the website from which zero has got an itinerary, using out-of-date routeing guide data?

 

[JonathanH]

Wonder if the data from all these scans gets submitted to 'head office' eventually so they can keep a track on what percentage of passengers were travelling on an invalid ticket and the likes

In time, it would make sense for any irregularities to be linked directly to the prosecutions department and totted up for further investigation.

One of the great advantages of the Oyster / Contactless arrangements in London is that the point of confrontation is moved from the person making the ticket checks to a back office. Doing something similar for e-tickets may be better for staff.

 

[185]

'Ticket not valid for this route' does come up from time to time.

 

[Bungle965]

I was on a LNER service recently with a Grand Central only advance ticket ('valid' as LNER had accepted a train full of GC passengers due to a fault with the GC service) and the ticket scanner did make a different noise I think to what it would but the guard was aware of the ticket acceptance anyway

Wonder if the data from all these scans gets submitted to 'head office' eventually so they can keep a track on what percentage of passengers were travelling on an invalid ticket and the likes

LNER use TTK along with various other TOCs (Avanti, EMR, LNWR, GWR) the system will flag through the scanner if the customer has a TOC specific ticket that is not valid on your train, however if it is a ticket that is not one of the calling points or origin-destination then it will make a different beep and you will get a message to simply check the origin and destination, if you're happy you can carry on scanning.
I know this is the case with most of the TOC's listed, LNER might have it set up slightly differently though I'm unsure.
Lot's of TM's simply listen to the beeps that the scanner make, it emits different noises depending on the passenger and the class.