I came across this reddit thread and was wondering who was at fault here: Trainline, GWR or both. Who would you go about complaining to?
The passenger bought an eticket (Off-Peak Single) from the trainline on the 07.15 train from Paddington to Bristol, but was then on the train they were charged £59 to upgrade their ticket.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/comments/bqs0vu/bought_a_invalid_ticket_from_trainline_what_are/
GWR were wrong, and not for the first time.
The Guard acted incorrectly and the company is now in breach of contract and consumer laws as a result.
However it may still be simpler to claim from the train line...
This is incorrect; Trainline are not liable and I'd expect them to direct the customer to GWR.
That said, if GWR refuse to issue a refund, I'd expect Trainline would assist.
If the Trainline site offered any suggestion that the ticket was valid on the 07.15 (and say gave a reservation on that train) then it's the Trainlines fault (you'd prob need a screengrab to proove it maybe, or replicate it for another day).
Why do youthink is it Trainline's fault?
To be clear, it isn't.
If the purchaser 'circumvented that' to buy a ticket valid later then used it at a peak time, it's their own fault.
It is not possible for a purchaser to circumvent this.
Only if the ticket is in fcat valid on the 07.15 is it GWRs fault (for falsely charging the upgrade - which I doubt).
The data said the ticket was valid, so Trainline were correct to sell it; this is GWR's liability.
The Guard should have honoured the contract, as per the itinerary.
The advice to post is to never buy from the Trainline, as they are a 3rd party and best avoided on that basis, but to buy from at least a company that operates trains (all train companies sell tickets after all), preferably one that operates one of the trains on the journey you are making.
Why?
It would have made absolutely no difference to the outcome in this case.
PS - when I posted my comment the itinerary screenshot now clearly showing with the OP was not visible to me, for which apols for any confusion.
I have just read this after typing the above; no worries , hopefully it is clear now
This is bad advice and is not correct.
If a ticket is sold against an itinerary then it is de facto valid - simple contract law - whether there is a glitch in the matrix or not.
Absolutely spot on.
If the middle rule were to somehow "go missing", it would allow departure from Paddington on the 07:15 service. Additionally, this data is specifically for this week only, even though the rules are unchanged for future dates. The fact that the middle rule makes the others redundant is rather strange. I'd suspect that something went wrong with Thetrainline's copy of this data or its interpretation of it. It seems too much of a coincidence that the issue was with the 07:15 departure and that the data is set up this way.
You are right that it's a data issue, but it's the train companies who specify this.
I am reminded of some recent occurences where members of this forum were issued with itinearies for trains which were not honoured by GWR; they had to fight hard to get a refund but were eventually successful.
It's an ongoing issue.
Data issues are understandable, but Guards incorrectly breaching contracts is absolutely not excusable.
Trainline successfully sold a few off peak day travelcards from Banbury the other week with itineraries getting into Marylebone before 1000. Chiltern refused then, made up some utter tripe on the spot and showered the passengers (with valid tickets) with arrogance and smugness. They’re not backing down, but neither are the passengers.
So this proves that Trainline (and anyone else) can get things wrong and data can be misinterpreted leading to these situations.
Yes retailers
can get it wrong; c2c were issuing loads of time restricted tickets (Off Peak, Super Off Peak etc) at invalid times which was later fixed. But this is very rare. It's
much more common that the retailer are correctly interpreting the data, but the data isn't what the TOC (or the Guard) thinks it should be and/or wants it to be.
