Doubling back on the Caledonian Sleeper

[Eagle]

Quick question.

Is a ticket (off-peak) between Coventry and Edinburgh, or similar, valid to take a train south to Watford and pick up the Lowland sleeper? Booking engines do seem to suggest this itinerary.

(Would be useful for me because I want to travel overnight, both ways, and the only other alternative is to pick up the Highland Sleeper at Crewe and bail at Inverkeithing or Falkirk or something at 5am and buy a ticket back to Edinburgh.)

 

[yorkie]

I can't see an easement listed in the Easements section of the Routeing Guide.

As always, if you book a ticket with such an itinerary, then you have entered into a contract and I would fully expect it to be honoured. There's absolutely no obligation to go looking for easements as the booking engines are supposed to take all that into account.

 

[Eagle]

I can't see an easement listed in the Easements section of the Routeing Guide.

I thought perhaps it would be permitted by one of the ...+ZZ combinations of maps.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
TL+TV+ZZ appears to allow it, if I go via Nuneaton.

I'm using the fact that map ZZ doesn't have any stations between Watford and Crewe on it.

 

[yorkie]

It's still doubling-back though. There should be an easement. In fact, there may be one, but it's not publicly visible. There's all sorts of easements (some positive but most negative) that are not listed on the Easements page.

If you can book a ticket with reservations then that's valid.

 

[Eagle]

The thing is, technically I can't know it's doubling back unless I know what route it's booked (which I can't be assumed to know).


Rather annoyingly I can get an itinerary for it but NRE tells me that there are no tickets available.

 

[calc7]

I thought perhaps it would be permitted by one of the ...+ZZ combinations of maps.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
TL+TV+ZZ appears to allow it, if I go via Nuneaton.

I'm using the fact that map ZZ doesn't have any stations between Watford and Crewe on it.

As you say, ZZ has the following commentary:
Doubling back because of the train running pattern is permitted. Published easements describe these extended permissions.

Combined with what Yorkie mentions, it appears as if this sort of route is intentional, and doubling back via WFJ is a reasonable interpretation of the RG imo.

NRE is a pain. I had to go to extreme lengths with via points etc to get it to offer a certain itinerary that WebTIS was happy to throw up.

 

[Oscar]

There should be an easement. In fact, there may be one, but it's not publicly visible. There's all sorts of easements (some positive but most negative) that are not listed on the Easements page.

So can what appears to be an valid route according to the Routeing Guide be invalid because of a negative easement which isn't public? This suggests that a route is not valid just because the Routeing Guide says so - I struggle to believe that this is the case. That suggests that if travelling on a route which appears permitted by the Routeing Guide but which booking engines do not offer your ticket may not be valid via that route.