Going back on yourself with 'via' ticket to reduce price

[bathbuses]

I have spotted an interesting potential fare loophole on a line which I travel on from time to time and am wondering whether it can be safely used without breaking any rules

For those not familiar with the line, the stations between Wolverhampton and Telford are ordered as follows

Wolverhampton, Bilbrook, Codsall, Albrighton, Cosford, Shifnal, Telford Central

Say I want to travel from Wolverhampton to Telford Central using a simple off peak open return ticket. The price would be around £10.50

Now on the West Midlands Railway app they sell a Albrighton to Telford, VIA Wolverhampton off peak open return ticket for £5.60, with the suggestion of taking a train from Albrighton to Wolverhampton then changing and taking another from Wolverhampton to Telford (going back on yourself, basically)

Would I be able to buy this ticket, not take the journey from Albrighton to Wolverhampton but instead just use the leg from Wolverhampton to Telford? Then on the way back simply go from Telford to Wolverhampton, without then changing to go back to Albrighton?

If so this would save near enough half the fare, which seems too good to be true, so is there some kind of catch here? Thanks

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I'm surprised that the apps are showing Albrighton to Telford as valid via Wolverhampton.

In any event, it can't be used for entry/exit, it's for interchange only, but it won't be accepted at Wolverhampton gateline regardless.

Section D of the Routeing Guide rules:

Journeys may not double back except between stations which are members of a routeing point group for interchange or unless an easement permits it.

 

[toffeedanish]

In any event, it can't be used for entry/exit, it's for interchange only

Why not? It's a walk-on ticket with permitted break of journey.

Why the journey is permitted in the first place I will leave others to answer.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Why not? It's a walk-on ticket with permitted break of journey.

Why the journey is permitted in the first place I will leave others to answer.

Because it is not a permitted route except for interchange purposes. You cannot ordinarily double back on yourself. When a local double back is permitted, it is normally for interchange purposes only, regardless of the ticket type.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I can't see any Albrighton->Telford route "via Wolverhampton" fares. Just a route "." fare. That's it.

 

[bathbuses]

I can't see an Albrighton->Telford route "via Wolverhampton" fare. Just a route "." fare. That's it.

It does require that you go into advanced search options and add Wolverhampton as a via

See screenshots below

 

[toffeedanish]

Because it is not a permitted route except for interchange purposes. You cannot ordinarily double back on yourself. When a local double back is permitted, it is normally for interchange purposes only, regardless of the ticket type.

Putting myself in the position of a layman without knowledge of railway geography, how would I know I was doubling-back? I would just be following my itinerary. As far as I know, Wolverhampton is a station en-route. No station is called at twice in this example, which would be a definition of doubling-back. If I am prevented from breaking my journey then I am confused, as my ticket allows this.

 

[Merseysider]

Trying to use that ticket to exit at Wolverhampton is a great way to end up in the Disputes subforum

Assuming, of course, they actually bother to man the WVH gateline.

There are no fares routed ‘via Wolverhampton’. Whilst journey planners may offer you a change at that station as part of your journey, in this case, attempting to begin or end your journey there is highly inadvisable.

 

[toffeedanish]

attempting to begin or end your journey there is highly inadvisable.

Absolutely agreed. But not because it isn't valid.

 

[bathbuses]

Putting myself in the position of a layman without knowledge of railway geography, how would I know I was doubling-back? I would just be following my itinerary. As far as I know, Wolverhampton is a station en-route. No station is called at twice in this example, which would be a definition of doubling-back. If I am prevented from breaking my journey then I am confused, as my ticket allows this.

Furthermore the ticket restrictions explicitly state that the journey can be started/ended at any intermediate station. See below

 

[Merseysider]

Furthermore the ticket restrictions explicitly state that the journey can be started/ended at any intermediate station. See below
View attachment 163719

All I will say is, I think even Saul Goodman would struggle to argue Wolverhampton is “intermediate”, ie between, Telford and Albrighton

If you were taking the trains shown on your itinerary, into and out of Wolverhampton, fine, that’s contractually allowed.

Nobody on this forum can physically stop you from attempting to leave at Wolverhampton, but it is a bad idea and you will likely find yourself accused of short faring when (not if) it gets picked up.

 

[Starmill]

Putting myself in the position of a layman without knowledge of railway geography, how would I know I was doubling-back? I would just be following my itinerary. As far as I know, Wolverhampton is a station en-route. No station is called at twice in this example, which would be a definition of doubling-back. If I am prevented from breaking my journey then I am confused, as my ticket allows this.

There isn't a break of journey restriction.

However, the customer would be entitled to rely on the supplied schedule as per their booking confirmation. Arguably beginning or ending the journey at Wolverhampton is not doing this, so the customer can't do that.

If the customer wants to go from Albrighton to Telford Central on those trains, they can. But they can't go from Wolverhampton if they haven't come from Albrighton.

Because it is not a permitted route except for interchange purposes.

I think that's something you've just invented, without any evidence to support it.

You cannot ordinarily double back on yourself.

This only applies to journeys where the customer is relying on a mapped route. Not if they're relying on following the supplied schedule.

 

[bathbuses]

All I will say is, I think even Saul Goodman would struggle to argue Wolverhampton is “intermediate”, ie between, Telford and Albrighton

If you were taking the trains shown on your itinerary, into and out of Wolverhampton, fine, that’s contractually allowed.

Nobody on this forum can physically stop you from attempting to leave at Wolverhampton, but it is a bad idea and you will likely find yourself accused of short faring when (not if) it gets picked up.

Im certainly not going to risk any bother, and will be paying the normal full fare. The very reason I asked the question here was because it all seemed a bit too good to be true.

 

[Hadders]

Now this has been exposed on here I expect the Routeing Guide will be 'fixed' in the next few days....

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

There isn't a break of journey restriction.

However, the customer would be entitled to rely on the supplied schedule as per their booking confirmation. Arguably beginning or ending the journey at Wolverhampton is not doing this, so the customer can't do that.

If the customer wants to go from Albrighton to Telford Central on those trains, they can. But they can't go from Wolverhampton if they haven't come from Albrighton.

I think that's something you've just invented, without any evidence to support it.


This only applies to journeys where the customer is relying on a mapped route. Not if they're relying on following the supplied schedule.

I copied the Routeing Guide wording. Some routes are only permitted for interchange purposes.

 

[Watershed]

I'm surprised that the apps are showing Albrighton to Telford as valid via Wolverhampton.

I can't say I'm surprised at all. The circumstances mean that journey planners do not detect any double-back here - Albrighton, Codsall and Bilbrook aren't mandatory timing points, so non-stop trains don't contain those stations in their schedules.

It's also one of many journeys where the Routeing Guide rules explicitly permit a double-back to and from a common Routeing Point, so even if it were a mandatory timing point it should still be offered (although some journey planners add in doubling-back filters that the Routeing Guide rules don't require).

Of course, a lot of staff - probably the vast majority - don't understand the Routeing Guide or even know it exists. I'm aware of a dispute regarding a ticket that was valid in this way, in which the guard's misconduct ended up costing their employer a three-figure sum in compensation...

In any event, it can't be used for entry/exit, it's for interchange only

The information provided by the retailing sites doesn't state any such restriction. Nor is there any such restriction in the Routeing Guide rule that permits this.

but it won't be accepted at Wolverhampton gateline regardless.

Whether or not a ticket will be accepted is different from whether or not it is valid, as my above example illustrates.

Section D of the Routeing Guide rules:

Section D of the Routeing Guide is for when you are tracing mapped routes. Albrighton to Telford is a 'local' journey under the Routeing Guide, so mapped routes do not apply.

There is a common misconception that the Routeing Guide has some kind of general bar on doubling back; this is simply not the case. Doubling back is permitted in some circumstances but not in others - you need to investigate the individual circumstances to work out whether or not it is permitted.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Now this has been exposed on here I expect the Routeing Guide will be 'fixed' in the next few days....

Unlikely. This isn't particularly problematic if it is used correctly and people don't abuse it by attempting to do what the poster was suggesting.

If it comes in via a revenue protection report, it will be 'resolved'.

It's a myth that these sorts of "loopholes" are being shut down - "just because". There is effort required to do it, and at the moment, adverse changes to fares/routeing requires DfT approval, especially outside of a fares change round, which is not especially quick. Everyday people using them because of timetable quirks is perfectly acceptable.

However, most unusual fares/routeing discussion on this forum usually focuses on exploiting such an example to the maximum - to undercut a specific fare etc - and those are the ones which are quickly shut down. Almost always, some sort of irregular event has occured that triggers the change, not simply the discussion which normally comes afterwards.

 

[Watershed]

Unlikely. This isn't particularly problematic if it is used correctly and people don't abuse it by attempting to do what the poster was suggesting.

If it comes in via a revenue protection report, it will be 'resolved'.

It's a myth that these sorts of "loopholes" are being shut down - "just because". There is effort required to do it, and at the moment, adverse changes to fares/routeing requires DfT approval, especially outside of a fares change round, which is not especially quick. Everyday people using them because of timetable quirks is perfectly acceptable.

However, most unusual fares/routeing discussion on this forum usually focuses on exploiting such an example to the maximum - to undercut a specific fare etc - and those are the ones which are quickly shut down. Almost always, some sort of irregular event has occured that triggers the change, not simply the discussion which normally comes afterwards.

There have been many instances where reported 'loophole' fares have been closed down almost immediately after a thread has been created on this forum. In one case, a forum member found what they thought was a cheaper season ticket and was asking about its validity - the Routeing Guide was changed to close it before they even had a chance to buy the season ticket!