Excessing Railcard Discounted Tickets Used at an Invalid Time

[AdamWW]

No I’m not. As said, I’m looking to understand what changes could be made in the future that reduce confusion and people who have made an error don’t end up paying large fines or being prosecuted. I have agreed T&Cs should have been read. I do not suggest in my posts that it is unreasonable for people to read T&Cs, I’m merely saying not everybody reads the T&Cs. I have said we’ll go through the GWR process and pay the fine. Your ‘let me tell you’ and ‘you are, quite frankly’ comments are patronising and not in the spirit of my posts. Non of your comments are informative or helpful

You certainly have my sympathy.

Given that breaking the terms and conditions can lead to prosecution I would think that puts the railway in a position where it should be scrupulous about never misleading anyone into breaking them.

I don't think that the implications of the minimum fare are immediately obvious. The line in the T&Cs "During this time, the discount is applied to fares above the minimum fare." doesn't, in my view, obviously lead to someone realising they might therfore buy a ticket that looks valid before 10 but isn't. They could spell it out but they choose not to. It looks like information, not a warning.

I'd also point out that the railcard T&Cs themselves only mention prosecution once, and that's related to fraud. And while the railway might well argue that using a ticket on the wrong train consists of fraud, I don't think that's how most people would interpret it.

So I can't see how even someone diligently reading the T&Cs would realise that they might end up in court for a subtle error.

Finally, it seems to be unreasonable for the railway to take financial advantage of the fact that this error is so subtle that staff themselves often fail to spot it, leading to a passenger potentially mistakenly making multiple journeys with an invalid ticket and later being forced to pay for them again at punitive rates even though their ticket was checked and considered valid at the time.

You'd think that it wouldn't be too difficult for a website to flag up a ticket with a railcard discount that may have time restrictions as a result and change the message to "any time after 10am" (or whatever). The systems manage to apply these rules in the first place so why can't they create a flag?

The last time I questioned something like this* I got a response from someone who seemed to be involved explaining that it just couldn't be done because the system didn't work that way. When I tried to argue that it clearly could be done if the system was made to work in the correct way I was told that I just didn't understand how these things work.

Well I suppose I don't - if the information is available to the program then it must be that it could have been written to act on it. But it perhaps gives you an idea of the mindset that leads to this customer hostile approach.

* I think it was LNER providing text that was only relevant to their services for other operators, where the program clearly had acess to operator information because it knew when to show an LNER logo or not.

 

[Tedb]

You certainly have my sympathy.

Given that breaking the terms and conditions can lead to prosecution I would think that puts the railway in a position where it should be scrupulous about never misleading anyone into breaking them.

I don't think that the implications of the minimum fare are immediately obvious. The line in the T&Cs "During this time, the discount is applied to fares above the minimum fare." doesn't, in my view, obviously lead to someone realising they might therfore buy a ticket that looks valid before 10 but isn't. They could spell it out but they choose not to. It looks like information, not a warning.

I'd also point out that the railcard T&Cs themselves only mention prosecution once, and that's related to fraud. And while the railway might well argue that using a ticket on the wrong train consists of fraud, I don't think that's how most people would interpret it.

So I can't see how even someone diligently reading the T&Cs would realise that they might end up in court for a subtle error.

Finally, it seems to be unreasonable for the railway to take financial advantage of the fact that this error is so subtle that staff themselves often fail to spot it, leading to a passenger potentially mistakenly making multiple journeys with an invalid ticket and later being forced to pay for them again at punitive rates even though their ticket was checked and considered valid at the time.



The last time I questioned something like this* I got a response from someone who seemed to be involved explaining that it just couldn't be done because the system didn't work that way. When I tried to argue that it clearly could be done if the system was made to work in the correct way I was told that I just didn't understand how these things work.

Well I suppose I don't - if the information is available to the program then it must be that it could have been written to act on it. But it perhaps gives you an idea of the mindset that leads to this customer hostile approach.

* I think it was LNER providing text that was only relevant to their services for other operators, where the program clearly had acess to operator information because it knew when to show an LNER logo or not.

Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated.

 

[tspaul26]

No I’m not. As said, I’m looking to understand what changes could be made in the future that reduce confusion and people who have made an error don’t end up paying large fines or being prosecuted.

Very well. Here are some suggestions from me:

1. A redraft of the Conditions of Travel and sundry railcard conditions. The recent fashion for making contract drafting “more accessible” doesn’t work in practice and causes confusion. The conditions should be clear, succinct and consistent.
2. Removal of “your ticket is also valid on” features from ticket selling websites if (as has been reported on this forum) these do not take account of railcard time restrictions.
3. Potential standardisation of railcard discounts and benefits.

However, none of this really addresses the reality that the vast majority of fare evasion incidents are not ‘honest mistakes’. For example:

• No ticket held at all when purchasing facilities were available
• Ticket purchased from a closer station
• Lying about the journey made
• False name and address given
• Doughnutting
• Child tickets purchased by adults
• No railcard held at all
• Railcard expired - it is not unreasonable to expect passengers to check that the railcard is still in date before travelling
• Wrong railcard applied which almost invariably gives a higher discount
• Doctored railcards
• Doctored tickets
• ‘Pay when challenged’
• Attempting to buy an e-ticket onboard only when the ticket examiners appear
• The ‘phone ran out of battery’ lie
• Pushing through ticket barriers
• Assaulting rail staff and police officers

A very high proportion of cases which appear on this forum fall into these categories, even if only after the OP volunteers further information.

As a matter of public policy this kind of behaviour should be criminalised and discouraged. It is anti-social, undermines public confidence in the railway and the law and has significant economic implications. This mode of thinking and behaviour - including amongst professional people who are not struggling to make ends meet - is unacceptable and must be stamped out.

And the criminal justice process is meant to be ‘scary’ in order to discourage this kind of low level offending. This is by design and is why the courts are permitted to impose discharges at sentencing stage i.e. there is recognition that the process itself may well be sufficient punishment, but this is a matter for a plea in mitigation and not a defence to the substantive offences themselves.

And lest you think that I am unfeeling, I have personally been involved in the prosecution and defence of fare evasion cases through my work, including where the accused is clearly innocent and the proceedings accordingly without merit, where I have intervened to resolve matters. Such cases are unfortunately vanishingly rare.

In that light, my personal view is that current efforts by the rail industry to deal with rampant fare evasion are not hardline enough.

And without prejudice to that, I also remain of the view that private prosecution in England should be restricted in the same manner as it is in Scotland so please don’t think that I believe TOCs should simply be allowed to do whatever they want.

 

[Tedb]

Very well. Here are some suggestions from me:

1. A redraft of the Conditions of Travel and sundry railcard conditions. The recent fashion for making contract drafting “more accessible” doesn’t work in practice and causes confusion. The conditions should be clear, succinct and consistent.
2. Removal of “your ticket is also valid on” features from ticket selling websites if (as has been reported on this forum) these do not take account of railcard time restrictions.
3. Potential standardisation of railcard discounts and benefits.

However, none of this really addresses the reality that the vast majority of fare evasion incidents are not ‘honest mistakes’. For example:

• No ticket held at all when purchasing facilities were available
• Ticket purchased from a closer station
• Lying about the journey made
• False name and address given
• Doughnutting
• Child tickets purchased by adults
• No railcard held at all
• Railcard expired - it is not unreasonable to expect passengers to check that the railcard is still in date before travelling
• Wrong railcard applied which almost invariably gives a higher discount
• Doctored railcards
• Doctored tickets
• ‘Pay when challenged’
• Attempting to buy an e-ticket onboard only when the ticket examiners appear
• The ‘phone ran out of battery’ lie
• Pushing through ticket barriers
• Assaulting rail staff and police officers

A very high proportion of cases which appear on this forum fall into these categories, even if only after the OP volunteers further information.

As a matter of public policy this kind of behaviour should be criminalised and discouraged. It is anti-social, undermines public confidence in the railway and the law and has significant economic implications. This mode of thinking and behaviour - including amongst professional people who are not struggling to make ends meet - is unacceptable and must be stamped out.

And the criminal justice process is meant to be ‘scary’ in order to discourage this kind of low level offending. This is by design and is why the courts are permitted to impose discharges at sentencing stage i.e. there is recognition that the process itself may well be sufficient punishment, but this is a matter for a plea in mitigation and not a defence to the substantive offences themselves.

And lest you think that I am unfeeling, I have personally been involved in the prosecution and defence of fare evasion cases through my work, including where the accused is clearly innocent and the proceedings accordingly without merit, where I have intervened to resolve matters. Such cases are unfortunately vanishingly rare.

In that light, my personal view is that current efforts by the rail industry to deal with rampant fare evasion are not hardline enough.

And without prejudice to that, I also remain of the view that private prosecution in England should be restricted in the same manner as it is in Scotland so please don’t think that I believe TOCs should simply be allowed to do whatever they want.

Appreciate your comments above and more context is very helpful. Thanks. Sorry if I appeared rude at all, I have a vulnerable child (don’t want to go into detail) who 100% made a mistake. (completely biased but if people met him I think/hope they’d agree). I might have veered away from the objective view along the way. I completely agree with your bullet points around people trying to avoid paying the correct fair

 

[slicedbread]

The rules for the network card seem to be either an excess or penalty fare for travelling before 10AM

4.7. You will be asked to pay the difference between the price of your discounted ticket and the full price applicable fare (or the Penalty Fare if travelling in the Penalty Fares area) if you travel:

4.7.1. beyond the station for which your ticket is issued; or
4.7.2. to a destination beyond the area shown on the Network Railcard map (network-railcard.co.uk/map), without having first obtained the correct ticket for your journey; or
4.7.3. on a route to which a higher fare applies or at a time when reduced fares do not apply.

 

[AdamWW]

The rules for the network card seem to be either an excess or penalty fare for travelling before 10AM

I think you may have fallen into one of the railway's little traps.

The railcard T&Cs may only mention these possibilities, but the Conditions of Transport (NRCoT) apply when you buy a ticket and the railway seems to take the view that this entitles them to treat anyone with a ticket with an invalid discount as if they had no ticket at all.

Though the wording (term 8.5) I can find is:
"If you are travelling with a Railcard discounted Ticket and are unable to present the Railcard when asked by the staff or authorised agents of a Train Company, you will be treated as having joined a train without a valid Ticket..."

This clearly applies when you can't show a railcard, but I'm not sure that it's relevant to a railcard discounted ticket where the minimum fare applies.

Maybe I've missed something elsewhere in the NRCoT.

 

[BongoStar]

Can advances be excesses? That is a starting point to understand why Railcard discounted tickets can't be excesses.

Advances have more restrictions and go a step further from any eligible train/route to a specific train and route.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can advances be excesses? That is a starting point to understand why Railcard discounted tickets can't be excesses.

Advances have more restrictions and go a step further from any eligible train/route to a specific train and route.

Advances can indeed be excessed provided they are excessed before departure of the first booked train. A common one is to excess one to a walk up fare. In some cases a £10 fee will apply, and as with walk up fares a TOC restriction cannot be excessed away.

 

[AdamWW]

Can advances be excesses? That is a starting point to understand why Railcard discounted tickets can't be excesses.

Advances have more restrictions and go a step further from any eligible train/route to a specific train and route.

I can't see what relevance this has at all.

In any case advances can indeed be excessed so long as it's before the departure time of the first compulsory leg of the journey.

I appreciate that in practise the railway can pretty much do what it likes, but I wouldn't say the situation is clear.

How about this argument:

If you buy a ticket affected by the minimum fare, then the railway could argue that either the ticket is invalid, or somehow the discount is.

If it's the ticket that is invalid by nature of the time it's used, then an excess must apply as below:

9.5 Where you:
9.5.1 are using a time-restricted Ticket (such as an “off-peak” or “super-off-peak” Ticket) that is correctly dated but invalid for the service on which you are travelling....
you will be charged the difference between the fare that you have paid and the lowest price Ticket that is valid for the train you are using.

If it's the discount, then what is the offence?

The only one specifically mentioning railcard discounts is

8.5 If you are travelling with a Railcard discounted Ticket and are unable to present the Railcard when asked by the staff or authorised agents of a Train Company, you will be treated as having joined a train without a valid Ticket and Conditions 9.1 – 9.5 will apply.

which clearly doesn't apply.

The other rules (and the law) refer to invalid tickets.

So to apply a penalty the railway must argue that the ticket itself is invalid.
And now 9.5 applies.

 

[BongoStar]

Advances can indeed be excessed provided they are excessed before departure of the first booked train. A common one is to excess one to a walk up fare. In some cases a £10 fee will apply, and as with walk up fares a TOC restriction cannot be excessed away.

So an advance can't be excesses on the train either. Atleast we agree that PF for someone using an advance at a time they are not meant to is a fair outcome.

I can't see what relevance this has at all.

In any case advances can indeed be excessed so long as it's before the departure time of the first compulsory leg of the journey.

I appreciate that in practise the railway can pretty much do what it likes, but I wouldn't say the situation is clear.

How about this argument:

If you buy a ticket affected by the minimum fare, then the railway could argue that either the ticket is invalid, or somehow the discount is.

If it's the ticket that is invalid by nature of the time it's used, then an excess must apply as below:

9.5 Where you:
9.5.1 are using a time-restricted Ticket (such as an “off-peak” or “super-off-peak” Ticket) that is correctly dated but invalid for the service on which you are travelling....
you will be charged the difference between the fare that you have paid and the lowest price Ticket that is valid for the train you are using.

If it's the discount, then what is the offence?

The only one specifically mentioning railcard discounts is

8.5 If you are travelling with a Railcard discounted Ticket and are unable to present the Railcard when asked by the staff or authorised agents of a Train Company, you will be treated as having joined a train without a valid Ticket and Conditions 9.1 – 9.5 will apply.

which clearly doesn't apply.

The other rules (and the law) refer to invalid tickets.

So to apply a penalty the railway must argue that the ticket itself is invalid.
And now 9.5 applies.

I think we have noted in posts above that it is not possible to buy a discounted ticket for a route/time it is not valid from ToC website, TVM or counter. Given they don't sell such tickets, anyone claiming to have one is probably holding an invalid ticket.

Now I agree that Trainline is misleading customers who buy on the website (as opposed to their App), but that is something an affected customer needs to take up with Trainline. Having read through a few posts, no other third party vendor's customers have faced this issue.

From ToC perspective, the customer is presenting a ticket which cannot exist if issued in accordance with the rules - therefore the ticket is invalid.

 

[AdamWW]

I think we have noted in posts above that it is not possible to buy a discounted ticket for a route/time it is not valid from ToC website, TVM or counter. Given they don't sell such tickets, anyone claiming to have one is probably holding an invalid ticket.

This makes no sense to me.

An anytime (or off peak) ticket is valid for a particular day. Not time.

It might come with a reservation, or just an itinerary for a particular train, but that is not a property of the ticket - there is no such thing as any anytime (or off peak) ticket "for" a particular time or train.

I can go to a non itinerary TVM or ticket counter and buy a non advance ticket without having to specify a time. I can perfectly legitimately buy a ticket with a railcard discount for tomorrow and I now have a ticket which (if affected by the minimum fare) is valid after 10 but not before. [Edit: well not today because tomorrow is Sunday.]

Now I agree that Trainline is misleading customers who buy on the website (as opposed to their App), but that is something an affected customer needs to take up with Trainline. Having read through a few posts, no other third party vendor's customers have faced this issue.

No. I know this is a common view in the industry, but if someone has been sold a ticket in misleading circumstances by an accredited third party, the correct response isn't to take the passenger to court. The TOC needs to take it up with the seller.

From ToC perspective, the customer is presenting a ticket which cannot exist if issued in accordance with the rules - therefore the ticket is invalid.

As above - this just isn't true.

 

[slicedbread]

I think you may have fallen into one of the railway's little traps.

The railcard T&Cs may only mention these possibilities, but the Conditions of Transport (NRCoT) apply when you buy a ticket and the railway seems to take the view that this entitles them to treat anyone with a ticket with an invalid discount as if they had no ticket at all.

Maybe but you'd hope "the railway" would want to be clear and unambiguous rather than lay traps.

I'm not sure that when the T&C says one thing relying on what, to most passengers would be, an obscure document (the NRCoT) to prosecute them would be that well received by the court. But then I've never been to court and I'm no lawyer.

Flicking through the T&C of the various railcards (is this what my life has come to?) I've only spotted that condition allowing for an extra payment or penalty fare for the network railcard. Most of the others say something on the lines of discounts don't apply at the various times or dates they list. The two together even goes so far as to say the tickets are not valid, but seems to be only card to be explicit about it.

Why the various T&Cs for the different cards vary in what they say you'd have to wonder. You'd have thought they would all be written to be as similar as possible.

 

[AdamWW]

Maybe but you'd hope "the railway" would want to be clear and unambiguous rather than lay traps.

You'd hope indeed. But the evidence suggests otherwise.

I'm not sure that when the T&C says one thing relying on what, to most passengers would be, an obscure document (the NRCoT) to prosecute them would be that well received by the court. But then I've never been to court and I'm no lawyer.

I agree.

The 16-25 railcard conditions have near the top:
"In addition to the Railcard Conditions, the National Rail Conditions of Travel (“NRCoT”) apply to any journey on the rail network. Where the NRCoT conflict with these Railcard Conditions, the NRCoT override the Railcard Conditions. Copies of the NRCoT are available online at nationalrail.co.uk/nrcot or at staffed National Rail stations."

which perhaps strengthens their case a bit, but of course doesn't prevent them from putting the information all in the wording you get when you buy a railcard.

I don't suppose it's designed to deliberately confuse and trap passengers. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't try harder not to do so. If they'd really rather prevent fare evasion rather than punish it after the event, they could try harder in my view.

The whole situation seems rather unusual to me in that normally breaking the terms of a contract won't lead to prosecution.

I suspect that some of it wouldn't hold up if scrutinised too carefully, e.g. if the NRCoT - as it claims - is a contract that comes into force when you buy a ticket, how can the terms giving permission to board without a ticket in some circumstances have any meaning when at that point you haven't entered into the contract?

But I don't think when such cases go to court there is generally much time or interest in looking at much beyond the fact that the railway considers there to have been an offence committed.

Flicking through the T&C of the various railcards (is this what my life has come to?) I've only spotted that condition allowing for an extra payment or penalty fare for the network railcard. Most of the others say something on the lines of discounts don't apply at the various times or dates they list. The two together even goes so far as to say the tickets are not valid, but seems to be only card to be explicit about it.

Interesting.

Why the various T&Cs for the different cards vary in what they say you'd have to wonder. You'd have thought they would all be written to be at similar as possible.

Quite.

 

[BongoStar]

I can go to a non itinerary TVM or ticket counter and buy a non advance ticket without having to specify a time. I can perfectly legitimately buy a ticket with a railcard discount for tomorrow and I now have a ticket which (if affected by the minimum fare) is valid after 10 but not before. [Edit: well not today because tomorrow is Sunday.]

I think we are saying the same thing here. You cannot buy a railcard discounted ticket valid before 10am in the first place (our examples are all based on Network card). And given that you can't buy it to begin with

All cases on the forum of Railcard misuse, when dug deeper, are a result of someone selecting a later itinerary and travelling on earlier trains.

Unless a genuine case comes up where someone tries to use the excuse that "I travelled before railcard validity because I was sold a ticket that said I was allowed to", we are just discussing hypothetical scenarios.

Hypothetical because any responsible railcard user will know what the terms and conditions are and two, because getting hold of a ticket which says you are allowed to is near impossible.

The defence an "Anytime ticket" with railcard discount for 1/3 less than "Anytime ticket" without the discount have exactly the same rights will be good to see in court.

 

[bunnahabhain]

In my experience people have obtained the fully discounted ticket by selecting a service for travel after 10am, in full knowledge that they are travelling before this time.

They have falsely represented the time they are travelling to obtain a discount to which they are not entitled to. In short, it is fraud.

 

[AdamWW]

I think we are saying the same thing here. You cannot buy a railcard discounted ticket valid before 10am in the first place.

No, we're poles apart.

My view is that if someone buys a ticket which specifically says "Valid at all times" it is unethical to prosecute them for using it at the wrong time.

because getting hold of a ticket which says you are allowed to is near impossible.

It's very easy to buy a railcard ticket which isn't valid before 10 and says you're allowed to use it at any time.

The defence an "Anytime ticket" with railcard discount for 1/3 less than "Anytime ticket" without the discount have exactly the same rights will be good to see in court.

Well obviously there's no reason in principle that a railcard discounted ticket should have fewer rights than a full fare one. Some railcard have no additional restrictions.

The defence is very straightforward - at the time of purchase the purchaser was told that the ticket was valid at any time.

Unless a genuine case comes up where someone tries to use the excuse that "I travelled before railcard validity because I was sold a ticket that said I was allowed to", we are just discussing hypothetical scenarios.

To quote from the thread that this one spun off from (my bold):

He purchased an 'Anytime' day single for the date of his journey and the train he took was 8:21am (before 10am). The ticket shows the two stations he's traveling between (and he was on that route, not travelled beyond final station) and it clearly shows a Railcard is associated to the ticket. The ticket conditions confirm it is a flexible ticket with no restrictions and that you can use a railcard. Terms that he is used to from previously using trains are 'peak' and 'off peak' but this purely said 'Anytime

 

[Adam Williams]

You'd think that it wouldn't be too difficult for a website to flag up a ticket with a railcard discount that may have time restrictions as a result and change the message to "any time after 10am" (or whatever). The systems manage to apply these rules in the first place so why can't they create a flag?

It doesn't excuse it, but the fares engine logic that's involved in evaluating minimum fares and e.g. NSE peak times (for the Senior Railcard) tends to be very far away from the UI layer.

The other complication you have is that the electronic restrictions used for journey planning and the readable restrictions for e.g. an Off-Peak ticket are not the same thing. So, trying to convey to the customer "what restrictions actually apply to my SRN-discounted Anytime ticket" in a way which is clear is actually incredibly difficult.

It's not just the Anytime tickets to consider either, if we set aside the Senior Railcard example for a moment and imagine the customer picks an Off-Peak ticket that - without a YNG railcard discount - might be valid within the window of 04:30–09:59, but is below the minimum fare then you need to somehow tell the customer the intersection of the 2T and the R1 (YOUNG PERSONS RAIL CARD) restrictions is what determines when they can travel. Life would be much easier if the customer just selected the services they wanted! The journey planner could then just work all of this out (and likely just offer the undiscounted ticket).

For the simpler railcards, I think there probably is some room for improvement for a lot of retail apps/channels in terms of flagging up restrictions caused by an applied Railcard fare. Is Trainline the worst offender? I'm not sure; they probably have the greatest market share, which I'd wager is a factor in why these cases usually involve Trainline.

The latest TrainSplit site currently steer clear of "Also valid on services departing at..." messaging, and slaps a "Railcard restrictions apply" label on railcard-discounted fares. It's not super precise and it's not really ideal, but it's better than nothing.

Frankly, railcards are a mess. We have railcards which you can use before a specific time, but only if you meet minimum fare requirements (unless it's July or August, obviously? But only if you're 16-25, we don't care about those months if you're 26). We have railcards where the services you can board are calculated using ✨ magic ✨, and then we have railcards you can't use at all at certain times.

 

[AdamWW]

It doesn't excuse it, but the fares engine logic that's involved in evaluating minimum fares and e.g. NSE peak times (for the Senior Railcard) tends to be very far away from the UI layer.

The other complication you have is that the electronic restrictions used for journey planning and the readable restrictions for e.g. an Off-Peak ticket are not the same thing. So, trying to convey to the customer "what restrictions actually apply to my SRN-discounted Anytime ticket" in a way which is clear is actually incredibly difficult.

It's not just the Anytime tickets to consider either, if we set aside the Senior Railcard example for a moment and imagine the customer picks an Off-Peak ticket that - without a YNG railcard discount - might be valid within the window of 04:30–09:59, but is below the minimum fare then you need to somehow tell the customer the intersection of the 2T and the R1 (YOUNG PERSONS RAIL CARD) restrictions is what determines when they can travel. Life would be much easier if the customer just selected the services they wanted! The journey planner could then just work all of this out (and likely just offer the undiscounted ticket).

For the simpler railcards, I think there probably is some room for improvement for a lot of retail apps/channels in terms of flagging up restrictions caused by an applied Railcard fare. Is Trainline the worst offender? I'm not sure; they probably have the greatest market share, which I'd wager is a factor in why these cases usually involve Trainline.

The latest TrainSplit site currently steer clear of "Also valid on services departing at..." messaging, and slaps a "Railcard restrictions apply" label on railcard-discounted fares. It's not super precise and it's not ideal, but it's better than nothing.

That's interesting, and I can see that off peak tickets pose a challenge.

But I don't think it explains why the text for an Anytime can't be changed to mention the possibility of railcard time restrictions rather than just saying "Valid at any time", which seems to be a major culprit (including in the thread that started all of this).

 

[Adam Williams]

But I don't think it explains why the text for an Anytime can't be changed to mention the possibility of railcard time restrictions rather than just saying "Valid at any time", which seems to be a major culprit (including in the thread that started all of this).

I'd say the answer to "Is it possible to mention that somewhere?" is yes and no.

Some of the wording comes from NRE. So, if you see the sentence:

"Anytime tickets allow you to travel at any time of the day. You may need to travel by a specific route or train company but the ticket will state this. You are allowed to break your journey."

That hasn't come from the retailer, it's been pulled in from the National Rail ticket type details entry. It is an accreditation requirement to use the data from this feed to explain the product restrictions to the customer.

There are also restrictions that are placed upon retailer's API clients with respect to changing any of it:



In other parts of the UI, if you're trying to present some sort of summary, is there probably more scope to add bespoke wording? Yes.

 

[P Binnersley]

Life would be much easier if the customer just selected the services they wanted! The journey planner could then just work all of this out (and likely just offer the undiscounted ticket).

Life would be so much easier if:
- You knew exactly what time your meeting/shopping would finish.
- The journey to the station always takes the same time.
- Journey planners included options to break journeys.
- Plans don't change.
- Trains (and other transport) always ran on time.
Having to waiting until I get to the station to buy a ticket is NOT making my life easier.

 

[father_jack]

In my experience people have obtained the fully discounted ticket by selecting a service for travel after 10am, in full knowledge that they are travelling before this time.

They have falsely represented the time they are travelling to obtain a discount to which they are not entitled to. In short, it is fraud.

I said this on the split off thread (why ?) and was told off !!!

 

[Adam Williams]

Life would be so much easier if:
- You knew exactly what time your meeting/shopping would finish.
- The journey to the station always takes the same time.
- Journey planners included options to break journeys.
- Plans don't change.
- Trains (and other transport) always ran on time.
Having to waiting until I get to the station to buy a ticket is NOT making my life easier.

Journey planners do include options to break your journey. The good ones, anyway :P

I think there's a few things that could be done here to ease things, if you buy walk-up tickets:

Retailers should let you "re-pick" your outward and return itineraries an unlimited number of times after purchase and tell you if the alternatives selected are still valid with your original tickets (including checking railcard restrictions). They should also release any no-longer-needed reservations from the customer doing this, and offer to make new ones for you free-of-charge. Customers should have their E-Tickets updated, wherever possible, with a new itinerary generated.

If this was possible, it'd be much easier to a) still rely on the customer actually selecting their services - even if some of the things you suggest go wrong and b) also means that customers don't need to try and understand the restrictions in full themselves.

 

[Kite159]

Playing Devil's Advocate, the simplest way is to bar use of the 16-25 (and 26-30) railcard for use before 10am, so there is no minimum fare element to deal with.

If someone buys a ticket with the 16-25 discount added and tries to use it before 10am, it is simply not valid, similar to a Network Railcard (or Gold Card). Have the restriction printed on the card itself, so the customers can't say they weren't aware of the time restriction.

Or even having that minimum fare restriction apply all-day (like the Network Railcard), so the customer can't simply select a train after 10am to get the discount applied and use that ticket before 10am when it's under £12.

Simples, no cause of confusion.

 

[Adam Williams]

Playing Devil's Advocate, the simplest way is to bar use of the 16-25 (and 26-30) railcard for use before 10am, so there is no minimum fare element to deal with.

If someone buys a ticket with the 16-25 discount added and tries to use it before 10am, it is simply not valid, similar to a Network Railcard (or Gold Card). Have the restriction printed on the card itself, so the customers can't say they weren't aware of the time restriction.

Or even having that minimum fare restriction apply all-day (like the Network Railcard), so the customer can't simply select a train after 10am to get the discount applied and use that ticket before 10am when it's under £12.

Simples, no cause of confusion.

This is always the problem with fares simplification though, isn't it. It might lead to something simpler, but at what cost?

I think if I was going to start with any changes, it'd be to the Senior Railcard. But we're maybe getting even more off-topic now!

 

[AdamWW]

I'd say the answer to "Is it possible to mention that somewhere?" is yes and no.

Some of the wording comes from NRE. So, if you see the sentence:

"Anytime tickets allow you to travel at any time of the day. You may need to travel by a specific route or train company but the ticket will state this. You are allowed to break your journey."

That hasn't come from the retailer, it's been pulled in from the National Rail ticket type details entry. It is an accreditation requirement to use the data from this feed to explain the product restrictions to the customer.

There are also restrictions that are placed upon retailer's API clients with respect to changing any of it:

View attachment 166856

In other parts of the UI, if you're trying to present some sort of summary, is there probably more scope to add bespoke wording? Yes.

Thanks. That's informative.

Thetrainline tells me: "Travel any time of day."
LNER says: "Valid at any time of day by the route and Train Operator shown."

Neither of them obviously show the RDG text you quote.

Anyway adding something shouldn't break the rule that you can't modify the data field or fail to display in full.

But in any case presumably the NRE wording itself could be changed to something less misleading given the will. As well as "You may need to travel by a specific route or train company but the ticket will state this." surely it could also have a line warning about possible railcard time restrictions?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

I said this on the split off thread (why ?) and was told off !!!

I think I'm not the only person here who thinks it unlikely that someone would be convicted under the fraud act for clicking on a service at 11:00 while intending to catch the 9:00 in order to buy a ticket described as being valid without time restrictions.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

Retailers should let you "re-pick" your outward and return itineraries an unlimited number of times after purchase and tell you if the alternatives selected are still valid with your original tickets (including checking railcard restrictions). They should also release any no-longer-needed reservations from the customer doing this, and offer to make new ones for you free-of-charge. Customers should have their E-Tickets updated, wherever possible, with a new itinerary generated.

Indeed. A simple app to do that would go a long way to make up for the complexity of the ticketing system.

(And all without having to remove walk-up fares in the name of "simplicity").

 

[sheff1]

I think we have noted in posts above that it is not possible to buy a discounted ticket for a route/time it is not valid from ToC website, TVM or counter. Given they don't sell such tickets, anyone claiming to have one is probably holding an invalid ticket.

You have indeed stated that, but as I pointed out in post #58 it is not true.

Edit: I see you have repeated the false claim in #74. Continually repeating a falsehood does not miraculously make it true.

 

[BongoStar]

You have indeed stated that, but as I pointed out in post #58 it is not true.

Edit: I see you have repeated the false claim in #74. Continually repeating a falsehood does not miraculously make it true.

Are you saying that it is possible to buy a Network railcard discounted ticket valid for travel at 7am?

Or are you saying that it's possible at 7am to buy a ticket for travel after 10am?

 

[sheff1]

Retailers should let you "re-pick" your outward and return itineraries an unlimited number of times after purchase and tell you if the alternatives selected are still valid with your original tickets (including checking railcard restrictions). They should also release any no-longer-needed reservations from the customer doing this, and offer to make new ones for you free-of-charge. Customers should have their E-Tickets updated, wherever possible, with a new itinerary generated.

If this was possible, it'd be much easier to a) still rely on the customer actually selecting their services - even if some of the things you suggest go wrong and b) also means that customers don't need to try and understand the restrictions in full themselves.

No, No, No. Wherever possible I buy walk up tickets from retailers who do not insist you select a time.
When I do purchase, for some reason, from a retailer who does so insist I really do not want to be forced to not only select times at the outset but then, when plans are firmed up/changed, have to change the time(s) (possibly more than once) time to get another itinerary - I can see know certain ticket checkers claiming a walk up ticket is not valid if you do not have a corresponding itinerary. Such a system would also seem certain to make break of journey, planned or impromptu. more difficult if not impossible.

 

[Adam Williams]

No, No, No. Wherever possible I buy walk up tickets from retailers who do not insist you select a time.
When I do purchase, for some reason, from a retailer who does so insist I really do not want to be forced to not only select times at the outset but then, when plans are firmed up/changed, have to change the time(s) (possibly more than once) time to get another itinerary - I can see know certain ticket checkers claiming a walk up ticket is not valid if you do not have a corresponding itinerary. Such a system would also seem certain to make break of journey, planned or impromptu. more difficult if not impossible.

I think if you decided not to ever innovate because "some frontline staff might do their jobs wrong", you'd not get much done!

I don't think there's a justification to ever require a passenger holding walk-up tickets to change their itinerary in this way and I wouldn't support such a requirement - nor am I advocating for anything close to that. But if the passenger chooses to use this functionality, they can benefit from new seat reservations, push notifications for delays and correct in-app messaging that relates to the journey they've actually decided to now take. The rest of the travelling public benefit from pointless reservations not being left on on-train displays that are guaranteed to go unused.

There's no reason that this should adversely impact BoJ or a customer's ability to exercise their break of journey rights.

 

[sheff1]

Are you saying that it is possible to buy a Network railcard discounted ticket valid for travel at 7am?

Or are you saying that it's possible at 7am to buy a ticket for travel after 10am?

I am saying I could buy a Network Railcard discounted ticket at 0700 from some TVMs without specifying a departure time.

When I held a Network Railcard (I no longer do) I could also buy a discounted ticket from booking offices before 1000. Sometimes, but certainly not always, I might be asked what time I was intending to travel.

I note the thread started after an issue with a 16-25 Railcard holder. The ticketing purchasing situation with that railcard may differ from Network Railcards - no such railcard existed when I was that age.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

I think if you decided not to ever innovate because "some frontline staff might do their jobs wrong", you'd not get much done!

I don't think there's a justification to ever require a passenger holding walk-up tickets to change their itinerary in this way and I wouldn't support such a requirement - nor am I advocating for anything close to that. But if the passenger chooses to use this functionality, they can benefit from new seat reservations, push notifications for delays and correct in-app messaging that relates to the journey they've actually decided to now take. The rest of the travelling public benefit from pointless reservations not being left on on-train displays that are guaranteed to go unused.

There's no reason that this should adversely impact BoJ or a customer's ability to exercise their break of journey rights.

I read your post as introducing a requirement rather than an option. Pleased to see that I obviously misunderstood.