Gatwick express to Brighton and tickets

[Merseysider]

Today I purchased a Super Off Peak Day Single (with Gold Card discount) for £9.55 from Brighton to London. The ticket says "NOT GATWICK EXP". I did not know that Gatwick Express fares south of Gatwick Airport were different. At Victoria I was told by a surly GatEx RP person that on this occasion she would not charge me the full fare but I would have to pay the difference as Gatwick Express has a higher fare. She was patronising. I asked who the MD of her company was and she said she didn't have a clue. What is the situation here? Are GTR allowed to charge higher fares or not? If they are, it is utterly bonkers and I am writing to Claire Perry MP, the Rail Minister, to complain.

You are entitled to a full refund (as long story short: Gatwick Express is not a TOC, it is a brand name, and TOC restrictions on tickets are just that, TOC restrictions). GTR are not allowed to charge higher fares for their 'Gatwick Express' crapcarts than they charge for their 'Southern' or 'Thameslink' trains. All three brands are part of one TOC.

If you don't receive an apology and a full refund within, say, 10 working days of your correspondence being received by Customer Service, I would be slightly tempted to add an admin charge of £10, but such fees would be unenforceable unless they refuse to pay up. This is an ongoing issue with GatEx.

 

[sarahj]

You are entitled to a full refund (as long story short: Gatwick Express is not a TOC, it is a brand name, and TOC restrictions on tickets are just that, TOC restrictions). GTR are not allowed to charge higher fares for their 'Gatwick Express' crapcarts than they charge for their 'Southern' or 'Thameslink' trains. All three brands are part of one TOC.

If you don't receive an apology and a full refund within, say, 10 working days of your correspondence being received by Customer Service, I would be slightly tempted to add an admin charge of £10, but such fees would be unenforceable unless they refuse to pay up. This is an ongoing issue with GatEx.

Some folks make my head spin. Gatex was not extended to Brighton to charge folks more money, but to clear up capacity on the line. This issue is going to have to be confronted soon. The other day I was on a Thameslink train that was in Southern colours, and said, welcome aboard this southern service to London bridge. What ticket enforcement could be done on that train. I've also worked Gatwick Express's 442 that were a Southern service. A punter asked is this a southern service? I said yes. She looked confused, but boarded.

There was more, but I read it again and thought, no.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

You are entitled to a full refund (as long story short: Gatwick Express is not a TOC, it is a brand name, and TOC restrictions on tickets are just that, TOC restrictions). GTR are not allowed to charge higher fares for their 'Gatwick Express' crapcarts than they charge for their 'Southern' or 'Thameslink' trains. All three brands are part of one TOC.

If you don't receive an apology and a full refund within, say, 10 working days of your correspondence being received by Customer Service, I would be slightly tempted to add an admin charge of £10, but such fees would be unenforceable unless they refuse to pay up. This is an ongoing issue with GatEx.

Are you saying Gatwick Express is not a Train Company (as defined by the National Rail Conditions of Carriage) for the purposes of National Rail Conditions of Carriage Condition 10? Or are you saying that as one Train Operating Company Franchise any restrictions that specifically name Gatwick Express, Thameslink or Southern apply to all services operated by GTR regardless of which is used?

 

[yorkie]

Gatwick Express clearly isn't a train company; the NRCoC doesn't say it is. The NRCoC states Govia Thameslink Railway is a train company and that it uses multiple brand names. Condition 10 of the NRCoC allows train companies to restrict tickets to those of a particular train company. It does not permit brand restrictions. They can't redefine train company; it's a term with an inalienable meaning.

The Ticketing Settlement Agreement (TSA) allows an operator to set operator specific fares; there is no provision within the TSA to allow an operator to set brand specific fares. The definition of operator is very clear; Govia Thameslink Railway is an operator.

Govia Thameslink Railway are obliged to comply with the TSA; failure to do so would be a very serious matter indeed.

 

[AM9]

Gatwick Express clearly isn't a train company; the NRCoC doesn't say it is. The NRCoC states Govia Thameslink Railway is a train company and that it uses multiple brand names. Condition 10 of the NRCoC allows train companies to restrict tickets to those of a particular train company. It does not permit brand restrictions. They can't redefine train company; it's a term with an inalienable meaning.

The Ticketing Settlement Agreement (TSA) allows an operator to set operator specific fares; there is no provision within the TSA to allow an operator to set brand specific fares. The definition of operator is very clear; Govia Thameslink Railway is an operator.

Govia Thameslink Railway are obliged to comply with the TSA; failure to do so would be a very serious matter indeed.

Just out of interest, is it OK for GTR to restrict the use of a Thameslink Daysave tickets to TL trains only, i.e. on the BML, are they valid on GX or Southern services between East Croydon and Brighton?

 

[PermitToTravel]

I think it depends on whether you believe the NRCoC applies to such tickets, which is a matter pm which we've reached no consensus in the past

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Gatwick Express clearly isn't a train company; the NRCoC doesn't say it is. The NRCoC states Govia Thameslink Railway is a train company and that it uses multiple brand names. Condition 10 of the NRCoC allows train companies to restrict tickets to those of a particular train company. It does not permit brand restrictions. They can't redefine train company; it's a term with an inalienable meaning....

I do believe I was asking JakeF, sorry if that wasn't clear to you. Oh, and condition 10 simply states that some tickets have Train Company (defined term) restrictions and that where those apply it must be noted on the ticket.

....The Ticketing Settlement Agreement (TSA) allows an operator to set operator specific fares; there is no provision within the TSA to allow an operator to set brand specific fares. The definition of operator is very clear; Govia Thameslink Railway is an operator....

Can you point me at the section of the TSA which prohibits an Operator from introducing a brand restricted fare? It's quite a long document.

Strange that no-one stripped, or threatened to strip, Southern of their franchise when they sold the Daysave fare though, don't you think?....

http://www.southernrailway.com/tickets-and-fares/ticket-types/daysave-terms-and-conditions

....Govia Thameslink Railway are obliged to comply with the TSA; failure to do so would be a very serious matter indeed.

Well we can at least agree on this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could not a TOC get away with a "brand restricted fare" (other than Anytime) by simply implementing a ticket restriction with all the trains that it is not valid on barred?

In reality, though, GTR seem to be officially tolerated doing this for a short period as the other option would just be to delete all the "TOC specific" fares thus causing a significant fare rise straight away. They are instead to be phased out?

 

[yorkie]

Just out of interest, is it OK for GTR to restrict the use of a Thameslink Daysave tickets to TL trains only, i.e. on the BML, are they valid on GX or Southern services between East Croydon and Brighton?

They can produce a map and restrict tickets to those on that map, and/or restrict trains at particular times, but I don't see how they can introduce a brand restriction, unless the NRCoC doesn't apply to them!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Can you point me at the section of the TSA which prohibits an Operator from introducing a brand restricted fare? It's quite a long document.

Fares cannot be sold except where permitted by the TSA. So surely it's the other way round: if you believe they have the right to have a particular fare, the onus is arguably on you to prove it!

Main Agreement (Volume 1)

4-15 DEDICATED FARES

Subject to Clause 4-25 below (where this applies), each Operator may Create Dedicated Fares in respect of journeys on its own trains.

On page 28 we have a definition for: “Dedicated Fare” means a Fare which entitles the Purchaser to use the trains of a single Operator only.

As for the operators, see The Schedules (Volume 2) (where it is made clear that Govia Thameslink Railway is the operator)

Strange that no-one stripped, or threatened to strip, Southern of their franchise when they sold the Daysave fare though, don't you think?....

http://www.southernrailway.com/tickets-and-fares/ticket-types/daysave-terms-and-conditions

I'm aware of many passengers who used Southern's Gatwick Express route on Daysaves, very few were charged, and those who were charged were refunded in full, therefore they did not need to report a franchise breach.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Could not a TOC get away with a "brand restricted fare" (other than Anytime) by simply implementing a ticket restriction with all the trains that it is not valid on barred?

There is no provision in the NRCoC or TSA for a brand restricted fare.

TOCs can implement time restrictions; I'd like to see GTR try that method

In reality, though, GTR seem to be officially tolerated doing this for a short period as the other option would just be to delete all the "TOC specific" fares thus causing a significant fare rise straight away. They are instead to be phased out?

They are going to be withdrawn yes, this article has been posted in previous threads:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...2/Rail-passengers-hit-with-664-fare-rise.html

...The route, one of the busiest in the south-east, will phase out cheaper fares under new ‘super franchise’ arrangements introduced this week, according figures released by the Labour party....

They shouldn't exist right now; all they are doing is delaying the inevitable harmonisation of fares that should occur. Fares currently are a mess. The highest priced fares are clearly too high, but the really cheap ones are arguably too low.

I suspect they are waiting until the London Bridge works are complete, and they will then abolish the cheaper fares and retain the higher fares, and claim the effective rise is justified because of the improved service.

However, while they exist, those fares are valid throughout all of Govia Thameslink Railway, who are obliged to accept them as to do otherwise is a breach of the TSA, NRCoC and consumer law.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....Fares cannot be sold except where permitted by the TSA. So surely it's the other way round: if you believe they have the right to have a particular fare, the onus is arguably on you to prove it!...

When referring to things passengers can, or cannot, do the commonly spouted drivel on this forum usually claims "you can do anything that is not specifically outlawed", has this philosophy changed recently? Or does it not apply to Train Companies and the rules they seek to apply?

Perhaps, if it is not specifically outlawed, GTR are perfectly fine to do it and it is you who should prove otherwise, after all, you are one of those asserting that they are in the wrong.

....On page 28 we have a definition for: “Dedicated Fare” means a Fare which entitles the Purchaser to use the trains of a single Operator only.....

So Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Southern are now different Operators?

....I'm aware of many passengers who used Southern's Gatwick Express route on Daysaves, very few were charged, and those who were charged were refunded in full, therefore they did not need to report a franchise breach.

Ah, so people complaining about it shouldn't stop the TOC from selling it, or get them stripped of the franchise, so long as the people who do complain get their money back? Can't say I've seen that in the TSA either.

 

[yorkie]

....commonly spouted drivel on this forum ....

I think it's pretty obvious who is responsible for spouting drivel!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I think it's pretty obvious who is responsible for spouting drivel!

So can I take it you have no answer to the points made then?

 

[yorkie]

So can I take it you have no answer to the points made then?

Points? I made points backed up by evidence, which I am not even required to do, and you have made ill-informed comments backed up with no evince, which only serve to prove you've not read (or understood) the relevant material.

When referring to things passengers can, or cannot, do the commonly spouted drivel on this forum usually claims "you can do anything that is not specifically outlawed", has this philosophy changed recently? Or does it not apply to Train Companies and the rules they seek to apply?

It wasn't my quote, if I recall correctly it was a quote from a Pricing Manager along the lines "If the NRCoC doesn't prohibit passengers from doing something, then they can do it" or similar. Unfortunately I can't find the primary source right now. But, given that contract law applies, I don't think I need to worry too much about that.

The rules on what products Operators (or Train Companies; same thing) can sell is defined in the Ticketing Settlement Agreement. It's quite restrictive. If you think this is unfair, that's fine. Don't be part of any franchise bids

Perhaps, if it is not specifically outlawed, GTR are perfectly fine to do it and it is you who should prove otherwise, after all, you are one of those asserting that they are in the wrong.

No, you are making things up. As I said before, an operator has to adhere to the rules in the TSA regarding any fare made available for sale. This is stated in the TSA:

4-4 REQUIREMENT TO CREATE FARES PRIOR TO SELLING THEM

An Operator may not offer any Fare for Sale, or authorise another person to do so, unless that Fare has been Created in accordance with this Chapter (and has not been discontinued or replaced).

So, if you think they have the right to sell these fares, the onus is on you to explain where in the TSA it gives them the right to sell brand restricted fares.

The TSA is very specific and restrictive about what fares may be offered.

So Gatwick Express, Thameslink and Southern are now different Operators?

The operator is Govia Thameslink Railway; this is clearly stated in the TSA.

Ah, so people complaining about it shouldn't stop the TOC from selling it, or get them stripped of the franchise, so long as the people who do complain get their money back? Can't say I've seen that in the TSA either.

Of course they shouldn't be acting in this way, but I'm not sure there's much we can do legally until a passenger is refused a refund. Maybe if someone has a load of cash they can try to get something done by taking them to court. But I can't see GTR wanting this to go to court, for obvious reasons.

 

[CyrusWuff]

The NRCoC also states that "A list of Train Companies is shown in Appendix C", and the list is broken down into individual brands, where appropriate...That the issue in question only affects three brands operated by the same company is for purely historical reasons.

Had Stansted Express been initially operated by InterCity rather than Network SouthEast, a similar situation may well have existed between Liverpool Street and Stansted Airport, with "Any Permitted" and "Not Stansted Express" fares (though there aren't currently any non-Express services due to capacity constraints).

But, as has been stated many times before, it's not in anyone's interest for the matter to go to Court, as losing would almost certainly result in GTR wanting to renegotiate franchise payments...Alternatively, passengers would end up losing out as the cheaper fares were removed, and other flows would see fares increased, to compensate.

Cynic, moi?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Points? I made points backed up by evidence, which I am not even required to do, and you have made ill-informed comments backed up with no evince, which only serve to prove you've not read (or understood) the relevant material...

Evidence? Okay, you point at a document, I read it, I'm not convinced it is evidence of what you say, infact I raise points that it might not be how you say it is and that it may infact not be evidence at all. I don't see how this makes your points "backed up by evidence" and mine "ill-informed".

....It wasn't my quote....

I didn't say it was.

....if I recall correctly it was a quote from a Pricing Manager along the lines "If the NRCoC doesn't prohibit passengers from doing something, then they can do it" or similar. Unfortunately I can't find the primary source right now. But, given that contract law applies, I don't think I need to worry too much about that....

I don't think I follow, are you denying that such a comment is ever used on this forum when a passenger is noted to be doing something that is not specifically prohibited?

....The rules on what products Operators (or Train Companies; same thing) can sell is defined in the Ticketing Settlement Agreement. It's quite restrictive. If you think this is unfair, that's fine. Don't be part of any franchise bids ....

Ah yes, but what does the TSA actually say? Or perhaps more importantly, what does it not say?

....No, you are making things up. As I said before, an operator has to adhere to the rules in the TSA regarding any fare made available for sale. This is stated in the TSA:...

So if something is not specifically forbidden, train operating companies can't do it?

....So, if you think they have the right to sell these fares, the onus is on you to explain where in the TSA it gives them the right to sell brand restricted fares....

I'm not saying they have a right to sell anything, I'm saying you could be wrong to say they are not permitted to set/sell the fares. You have provided what you believe to be evidence and I have commented on how you could be wrong, on how the "evidence" might not actually be evidence.

....The TSA is very specific and restrictive about what fares may be offered....

So show me where it says they cannot offer a "brand specific" fare.

....The operator is Govia Thameslink Railway; this is clearly stated in the TSA....

So, if they are the same operator, a 'brand specific' fare is a dedicated fare, because it is valid only on the services of one operator. Fares 'branded' "Not Gatwick Express" are clearly not a dedicated fare because they are not restricted to use on the services of one operator.

So what other "evidence" do you have?

....Of course they shouldn't be acting in this way, but I'm not sure there's much we can do legally until a passenger is refused a refund. Maybe if someone has a load of cash they can try to get something done.

So do you believe that the ticket should not have been set or sold according to the TSA? Surely the evidence that the fare was set and sold is simply a fare that was set up and sold, they don't seem to have been hard to get hold of and I'm sure there are plenty of them around. The condition of sale is/was advertised clearly on their own website for all to see. Is this not evidence of setting and selling a fare that you believe should not be sold?