Maltese Cross / cross-London dagger

[Edvid]

I am somewhat confused by the following (from Section A of NFM98 ):

Ticket prices in Section C, for journeys routed for travel ’via London’ and marked with the symbol (Maltese Cross), include the cost of transfer across London by London Underground, DLR or First Capital Connect train services on the Thameslink route. Tickets displaying the ’cross-London’ marker †, are valid for travel between any two of the following stations appropriate to the route of the through rail journey being made.

[List of relevant stations]

I would have referred to NFM99 were it not for the fact that ATOC can't be arsed to publish all of what is publicly available in NFM98 (with NFM99 updates of course).

Surely any ticket that permits a cross-London transfer would be priced to include the cost of such transfers, yet one could imply from the NFM that a cross-London ticket (†) can be issued without a Maltese Cross and therefore not include the cost of a cross-London transfer. How does that work? :?

While we're at it, why not have just one symbol to indicate that cross-London transfers are permitted and paid for?

 

[yorkie]

Yes, some tickets include routeing via London but do not have the + symbol.

How does it work? by arguing your case with LU barrier staff!

 

[dan_atki]

I am somewhat confused by the following (from Section A of NFM98 ):

Ticket prices in Section C, for journeys routed for travel ’via London’ and marked with the symbol (Maltese Cross), include the cost of transfer across London by London Underground, DLR or First Capital Connect train services on the Thameslink route. Tickets displaying the ’cross-London’ marker †, are valid for travel between any two of the following stations appropriate to the route of the through rail journey being made.

[List of relevant stations]

I would have referred to NFM99 were it not for the fact that ATOC can't be arsed to publish all of what is publicly available in NFM98 (with NFM99 updates of course).

Surely any ticket that permits a cross-London transfer would be priced to include the cost of such transfers, yet one could imply from the NFM that a cross-London ticket (†) can be issued without a Maltese Cross and therefore not include the cost of a cross-London transfer. How does that work? :?

While we're at it, why not have just one symbol to indicate that cross-London transfers are permitted and paid for?

Firstly, just to clarify - most of the public sections (if not all) of NFM99 are available from the ATOC site (just they are well hidden - I'm sure someone will give the links).

Regarding your question, though, I believe the symbol applies solely to journeys where you have to change trains in the travelcard zones and get to a different station to complete your journey - this is normally the case with non-local rail travel in the south east: to get from A to B you get a train from A to the London Terminal that line reaches, interchange in London to another London Terminal whereby you can get a service to B.

The Maltese Cross symbol shows that you have paid for the interchange in London. However, say if you want a ticket from West Hampstead to London Blackfriars then you will not get the symbol to show up on the ticket. Why is this? Surely this would be so when both West Hampstead and Blackfriars are on the list of stations?

Put simply, most of the time the reason the cross doesn't appear is when there are two separate services you can use - those of a TOC - in this case FCC, and those of LU, who have more expensive fares. But the cross also shows the ticket is valid on FCC :? confused? Well most of the time this conflict occurs it is when there are only two services you can use (via the routeing guide) - those of FCC and those of LU.

There are other such cases where there is a direct route available and one would be going out of their way (and probably exploiting their ticket) if they were to use LU services and hence the cross does not appear.

It also used to be the case that on an APTIS, there was a Maltese Cross button, whereby pressing it for a ticket routed 'Any Permitted' would add the cross for. Problem with the APTIS is that it required most fares to be inputted manually from the fares manuals as the time came to issue a ticket. The price of the cross London connection was meant to be added to the cost where it was added but this was sometimes forgotten...

By todays' TISs this is no longer available and all prices are preloaded into them (hence the decline of the Fares Manuals). Where a ticket with a journey which requires a cross London Transfer is needed then it will be issued with the cross and there is no way to remove it (that I am aware).

As far as I aware that wording you quote from section has not been altered for quite a while (with the exception of Thameslink becoming FCC). It would also appear to be the case the Maltese Cross is not there for staff purposes but more a customer's. Having the cross on the ticket shows them (and LU staff) that the ticket is valid on LU services.

 

[yorkie]

...Where a ticket with a journey which requires a cross London Transfer is needed then it will be issued with the cross and there is no way to remove it ...

Some tickets, eg. Stroud to Grantham, have via London as a valid route, but do not have the + symbol. The RG states that these tickets are valid via London. I have even got York-Grantham + Grantham-Stroud combinations at York and been given reservations York-London and London-Stroud. I had to argue my case with LU, but Paddington is rarely manned. If you have time to spare you can avoid arguments by going via Finsbury Park.

 

[dan_atki]

Some tickets, eg. Stroud to Grantham, have via London as a valid route, but do not have the + symbol. The RG states that these tickets are valid via London. I have even got York-Grantham + Grantham-Stroud combinations at York and been given reservations York-London and London-Stroud. I had to argue my case with LU, but Paddington is rarely manned. If you have time to spare you can avoid arguments by going via Finsbury Park.

I now see the problem you raise. I would say that there must be anomalies for some reason as to why certain tickets do not have the Maltese Cross when they clearly should. Maybe an e-mail to ATOC about this matter and get their stance on it...

 

[yorkie]

ATOCs stance is to do nothing. I can't quote the RG now as I am on a mobile device, but it's on the 'instructions' page where they accept that such tickets exist, are valid yet do not have the symbol.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

All tickets routed 'via london' are assumed to have validity on LUL services to cross London, regardless of the presence of the + symbol. The + symbol is for LUL staff to indentify that you are entitled to use there services (there used to be an encoding issue with APTIS where tickets did not include the +).

Tickets for use on 'Thameslink' services across London will either be valid on LUL services as above or be route 'Not Underground'.

 

[Edvid]

Just to clarify (this query is for everyone): by + do you mean the cross-London dagger (†) or the Maltese Cross?

[N.B. To recreate the dagger, just copy and paste it]

 

[A60K]

Just to clarify (this query is for everyone): by + do you mean the cross-London dagger (†) or the Maltese Cross?

[N.B. To recreate the dagger, just copy and paste it]

AFAIK those are just three names/symbols for the same thing!

 

[Edvid]

That's not the impression I got from the NFM, which explicitly illustrates two symbols - the dagger and what actually looks like a Maltese Cross. But now that I think about it, I have seen valid cross-London tickets with the dagger but never a proper Maltese Cross, so you're right.

Looks like I misinterpreted that part of the NFM somewhat...

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The maltese cross is used in the paper form NFM, or atleast it was untill the paper form was stopped. This is what I mean by +. Tickets, generally, could not show the maltese cross during APTIS days and thus a + symbol (or similar) next to the route was used on tickets.

 

[dan_atki]

All tickets routed 'via london' are assumed to have validity on LUL services to cross London, regardless of the presence of the + symbol. The + symbol is for LUL staff to indentify that you are entitled to use there services (there used to be an encoding issue with APTIS where tickets did not include the +).

Looks like the LU Revenue training could be done better then. Saying that, though, they're very up on their tickets when it comes to Thameslink blockades in Central London... they instantly know all the valid tickets (staff passes included!).

Another problem with the +, not yet mentioned, is it is sometimes on tickets it should not be on. Such as London Blackfriars to West Hampstead Thameslink, route '+Not Underground'. Here it is sketchy as to what the meaning of the + actually is. I'm sure one argument will be 'cross London Thameslink service' but judging it's 'Not Underground' how else are you actually meant to complete this journey without using a direct FCC service? (i.e. 'Not Underground' would be sufficient by itself).

Or maybe it's for break of journey? I.e. barrier staff at Farringdon (a permitted break) will then know they should let the person out/in.

The problem (as things currently stand) is that the routeing guide and fares manuals have too many 'anomolies' in them (I use that term very loosely - because to someone, somewhere there is a reason they are the way they are - unless they were put together in a completely random fashion!).

There are cases the cross appears where it shouldn't, and cases it doesn't appear when it should (examples of both cases in this thread). 'Via London' isn't sufficient in itself to warrant the use of the Underground (after all, all 'Via London' means is that you are permitted to travel via a London Terminal for your journey. Say Penge East to East Croydon - has two routes 'Any Permitted' and the more expensive 'London Not Und' - without looking I assume the appropriate interchange for the 'Any Permitted' would be Herne Hill. With the 'London Not Und' you'd be permitted to change at Victoria if you so wish for, say, better connections).

Slightly off topic but related to what I have just said 'London' and 'Not London' are very ambiguous terms - after all a 'Not London' ticket is valid at Clapham Junction - but where is CLJ if it's not in London? It is true, however, that all 'London' refers to are the main London Terminals (as stated in section A of the NFM - of which I think some of them such as 'Vauxhall' are weird). Anything (even in the travelcard zones) outside of these is still 'Not London'.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The London Blackfriars - W. Hampstead TLK 'Not Underground' fare does not carry the Maltese cross.

W HAMPSTEAD STNS 0265
rte NOT UNDERGROUND 208

 

[dan_atki]

The London Blackfriars - W. Hampstead TLK 'Not Underground' fare does not carry the Maltese cross.

I used Avantix Traveller 95 for my enquiries into the above post. Whilst things may have changed in subsequent versions of the NFM, there were/are fares such as those mentioned with unusual uses of the cross.

 

[Edvid]

They're very up on their tickets when it comes to Thameslink blockades in Central London... they instantly know all the valid tickets (staff passes included!).

It's just as well because the said blockades will be active for a few years!

Another problem with the +, not yet mentioned, is it is sometimes on tickets it should not be on. Such as London Blackfriars to West Hampstead Thameslink, route '+Not Underground'. Here it is sketchy as to what the meaning of the + actually is. I'm sure one argument will be 'cross London Thameslink service' but judging it's 'Not Underground' how else are you actually meant to complete this journey without using a direct FCC service? (i.e. 'Not Underground' would be sufficient by itself).

Or maybe it's for break of journey? I.e. barrier staff at Farringdon (a permitted break) will then know they should let the person out/in.

What intrigues me is that tickets from Thameslink North stations to the London Thameslink group were once route ANY PERMITTED, and last January they changed to route NOT UNDERGROUND but the corresponding fares have not fallen to compensate for it.

That said, some of my tickets were route †NOT UNDERGROUND; notably the London Blackfriars-Luton CDS before last January and for a short time after that the Luton-London Thameslink CDR/7DS. This happened intermittently if they were collected from Shere machines but not if collected from Scheidt & Bachmann machines.

On a related note, I would expect Luton-Ashford International tickets (e.g. CDR/SDR) to be route †ANY PERMITTED or †LONDON if the journey planner permutations and the discussion on another thread are anything to go by; journey planners also reckon that Luton-Brighton tickets are good for the tube but are they routed to permit that? I'm asking because direct FCC services exist for that journey.

 

[dan_atki]

What intrigues me is that tickets from Thameslink North stations to the London Thameslink group were once route ANY PERMITTED, and last January they changed to route NOT UNDERGROUND but the corresponding fares have not fallen to compensate for it.

I can understand why you'd expect the fare to fall for these tickets with what would seem to be a less lenient routeing on them. In truth, though, these tickets are exactly the same and hence the price did not fall for them.

On a related note, I would expect Luton-Ashford International tickets (e.g. CDR/SDR) to be route †ANY PERMITTED or †LONDON if the journey planner permutations and the discussion on another thread are anything to go by; journey planners also reckon that Luton-Brighton tickets are good for the tube but are they routed to permit that? I'm asking because direct FCC services exist for that journey.

At a check (again using Avantix 95), the available routeing on tickets from Luton to Ashford Int is '+Any Permitted' allowing you to take a train to Ashford from either Victoria, Charing Cross, Waterloo East (a strange choice admittedly), or London Bridge (with no LU service required).

Funnily enough one ticket I checked earlier for a response to this thread was actually LUT-BTN. Again, as with the Ashford ticket, this is routed '+Any Permitted'. I believe (without checking the NRG), that 'LONDON' is given as valid for this journey, so you are, in fairness, allowed to get an Electrostar from Victoria to Brighton (despite a through train existing for the journey).

And face it, a fast, air conditioned 377 is much better than a 319!

In essence I personally believe such tickets are split into 3 portions:
1) Luton - London Terminals
2) Cross London transfer
3) London Terminals - Brighton

 

[hairyhandedfool]

What intrigues me is that tickets from Thameslink North stations to the London Thameslink group were once route ANY PERMITTED, and last January they changed to route NOT UNDERGROUND but the corresponding fares have not fallen to compensate for it.

That said, some of my tickets were route †NOT UNDERGROUND; notably the London Blackfriars-Luton CDS before last January and for a short time after that the Luton-London Thameslink CDR/7DS. This happened intermittently if they were collected from Shere machines but not if collected from Scheidt & Bachmann machines.

The 'Not Underground' fare was around when I was working in London around 2004/5. and I seem to remember an issue with using the underground when the 9 month blockade was happening.

And face it, a fast, air conditioned 377 is much better than a 319!

Yeah, then a hot and stuffy tube to St Pancras and a choice of HST/Meridian every half hour (or whatever the service frequency is now) or.......a 319!!!

 

[Edvid]

I can understand why you'd expect the fare to fall for these tickets with what would seem to be a less lenient routeing on them. In truth, though, these tickets are exactly the same and hence the price did not fall for them.

I see...so prior to last January why were season tickets from Thameslink North issued to specific London Thameslink stations (route ANY PERMITTED) beforehand whereas singles/returns were not? If TfL got no share of the revenue for the latter I can't see why they would get any for the former as both types were given identical routings (and generally no † either); if my interpretation of Tom C's post on another thread is correct then TfL was apparently entitled to some revenue from the former.

At a check (again using Avantix 95), the available routeing on tickets from Luton to Ashford Int is '+Any Permitted' allowing you to take a train to Ashford from either Victoria, Charing Cross, Waterloo East (a strange choice admittedly), or London Bridge (with no LU service required).

Ah yes, forgot about London Victoria. Though I prefer Electrostars to Notworkers so I'll most likely travel via London Charing Cross.

Funnily enough one ticket I checked earlier for a response to this thread was actually LUT-BTN. Again, as with the Ashford ticket, this is routed '+Any Permitted'. I believe (without checking the NRG), that 'LONDON' is given as valid for this journey, so you are, in fairness, allowed to get an Electrostar from Victoria to Brighton (despite a through train existing for the journey).

That's good. And in addition:
An off-peak Victoria Line journey between London St Pancras and London Victoria only takes 9 minutes, whereas an off-peak Thameslink journey between London St Pancras and London Bridge takes 17 minutes. The overall difference will depend on the speed of connections at STP and VIC if the former option is chosen.

Next time I travel to Brighton I'll be riding the Gatwick Express as well.

And face it, a fast, air conditioned 377 is much better than a 319!

Indeed. Mind you it won't be long before 377s can take you either way.

Yeah, then a hot and stuffy tube to St Pancras and a choice of HST/Meridian every half hour (or whatever the service frequency is now) or.......a 319!!!

The semi-fast EMT services to/from London operate every 30 minutes but call alternately at LTN and LUT.

 

[dan_atki]

I see...so prior to last January why were season tickets from Thameslink North issued to specific London Thameslink stations (route ANY PERMITTED) beforehand whereas singles/returns were not? If TfL got no share of the revenue for the latter I can't see why they would get any for the former as both types were given identical routings (and generally no † either); if my interpretation of Tom C's post on another thread is correct then TfL was apparently entitled to some revenue from the former.

Before the main central London blockade, tickets were always issued to certain London Thameslink stations. However, for the blockade, this was changed to 'London Thameslink' to allow flexibility of routes to be used whilst cross-London journeys were ceased. After the blockade this was changed back so as to prevent 'fraudulent' use of tickets.

Regarding Tom C's post about LUL sharing revenue, this is due to (I presume) arrangements between FCC and TfL due to Barbican and Moorgate being a peak only service (Barbican itself only being reached from Farringdon and NOT from Moorgate hence people with season tickets to 'Barbican Und' are, therefore allowed to use LU between Barbican and Farringdon - hence a share of revenue). What will happen in March 09 owing to the closure of this branch, I don't know (although it's pretty certain tickets to these destinations will cease to exist).

Apperently, from what I'm told, season tickets to non-specific London Thameslink stations was 'stamped out' to force people into getting travelcards to give them the flexibility they wanted...

The 'Not Underground' fare was around when I was working in London around 2004/5. and I seem to remember an issue with using the underground when the 9 month blockade was happening.

Although I'm not totally clear on what your issue with LU was, what I will say is that Thameslink (as it then was) and TfL agreed specific valid routes that could be used during the blockade. I believe TfL was very strict about these. Also many people complained that 'I'm getting the Circle line from St Pancras to Blackfriars anyway why can't I just get off at Tower Hill?' TfL rightly, I must add, issued penalty fares when customers did break their journey against the conditions on their ticket at non Thameslink stations.

Yeah, then a hot and stuffy tube to St Pancras and a choice of HST/Meridian every half hour (or whatever the service frequency is now) or.......a 319!!!

I'd much sooner take the 377 BTN-VIC (faster than the 319 anyway), then get the Victoria Line to STP (as Edvid has said time it right and this is quicker than the cross London TL route too) to get a Meridian to LUT (again much faster than a 319) - it's a much nicer journey and a better, more pleasant experience.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Although I'm not totally clear on what your issue with LU was, what I will say is that Thameslink (as it then was) and TfL agreed specific valid routes that could be used during the blockade. I believe TfL was very strict about these.

Some people were denied entry/exit from Barbican, Moorgate and (alledgedly) Farringdon by some LUL staff because their tickets had 'not underground' on them.

 

[Tom C]

Before the main central London blockade, tickets were always issued to certain London Thameslink stations. However, for the blockade, this was changed to 'London Thameslink' to allow flexibility of routes to be used whilst cross-London journeys were ceased. After the blockade this was changed back so as to prevent 'fraudulent' use of tickets.

There are now London Thameslink season tickets from certain stations on the Brighton mainline which again makes it much easier as you can get off anywhere between Elephant & Castle/London Bridge and St Pancras.

Apperently, from what I'm told, season tickets to non-specific London Thameslink stations was 'stamped out' to force people into getting travelcards to give them the flexibility they wanted...

The advice that was always given at the booking office when seasons were still issued through to a specific station was to buy your ticket to the one furthest away so for example from BDM, LUT or SAC you would buy it to London Bridge as it allowed break of journey at Kings Cross Thameslink, Farringdon, City Thameslink and Blackfriars. The one which often caught people out was tickets to Farringdon as it is very clearly marked on the gateline at Farringdon that tickets to London Terminals were not valid there in either direction and it often ment people would have to buy a U1 single from the excess window (or a Penalty Fare if revenue were there) to get out of the gateline.

Although I'm not totally clear on what your issue with LU was, what I will say is that Thameslink (as it then was) and TfL agreed specific valid routes that could be used during the blockade. I believe TfL was very strict about these. Also many people complained that 'I'm getting the Circle line from St Pancras to Blackfriars anyway why can't I just get off at Tower Hill?' TfL rightly, I must add, issued penalty fares when customers did break their journey against the conditions on their ticket at non Thameslink stations.

Thameslink issued a map (Travel Buddy I think it was called) which clearly showed you the routes around the blockade. Trains from the south were still going to Kings Cross Thameslink at the time however the 2O services from Wimbledon always turned at Blackfriars which ment you would have to wait for the 2V from Sutton. Easiest way was to jump on the 63 bus which Thameslink did get acceptance for however people saw the Underground acceptance as a free for all which is still clamped down on today, even for staff passes.

\At a check (again using Avantix 95), the available routeing on tickets from Luton to Ashford Int is '+Any Permitted' allowing you to take a train to Ashford from either Victoria, Charing Cross, Waterloo East (a strange choice admittedly), or London Bridge (with no LU service required).

You also forgot Cannon Street which still has the quickest train to AFK. It goes fast from Cannon Street to West Malling then I think its Maidstone East, Bearsted, Lenham and Ashford and its hourly. The 94 off VIC is generally very slow and calls at most if not all stations beyond Otford and some still stop at Herne Hill and Beckenham Junction.

 

[dan_atki]

Some people were denied entry/exit from Barbican, Moorgate and (alledgedly) Farringdon by some LUL staff because their tickets had 'not underground' on them.

That would appear to be an LU revenue training issue during the blockade, a polite letter to either Thameslink or TfL would have resolved the matter as the tickets were, at that time, valid.

It is also true that staff at Farringdon are notorious for their non accepting of NR tickets, valid or otherwise...

Saying that, though, the tickets should have worked the barriers. Understandably some people wish to retain their tickets and went to the manual gate where they were, incorrectly, denied.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The advice that was always given at the booking office when seasons were still issued through to a specific station was to buy your ticket to the one furthest away so for example from BDM, LUT or SAC you would buy it to London Bridge as it allowed break of journey at Kings Cross Thameslink, Farringdon, City Thameslink and Blackfriars. The one which often caught people out was tickets to Farringdon as it is very clearly marked on the gateline at Farringdon that tickets to London Terminals were not valid there in either direction and it often ment people would have to buy a U1 single from the excess window (or a Penalty Fare if revenue were there) to get out of the gateline.

Yeah, that makes sense.

You also forgot Cannon Street which still has the quickest train to AFK. It goes fast from Cannon Street to West Malling then I think its Maidstone East, Bearsted, Lenham and Ashford and its hourly. The 94 off VIC is generally very slow and calls at most if not all stations beyond Otford and some still stop at Herne Hill and Beckenham Junction.

Ah yes, Cannon Street . At a check, however, the Ashford trains from Cannon Street also call at London Bridge. The fastest I can find is the xx53 (off peak weekday) from CHX which is Waterloo East, Tonbridge, Ashford Int and takes exactly an hour - compared to the 74 minutes of the direct xx14 from Cannon Street.

 

[Edvid]

Regarding Tom C's post about LUL sharing revenue, this is due to (I presume) arrangements between FCC and TfL due to Barbican and Moorgate being a peak only service (Barbican itself only being reached from Farringdon and NOT from Moorgate hence people with season tickets to 'Barbican Und' are, therefore allowed to use LU between Barbican and Farringdon - hence a share of revenue). What will happen in March 09 owing to the closure of this branch, I don't know (although it's pretty certain tickets to these destinations will cease to exist).

I am aware that one of the conditions that DfT stipulated in relation to the closure is that Thameslink North passengers may continue to purchase tickets to Barbican/Moorgate as per existing arrangements until 2 years into the closure.

Which reminds me - one of my relatives used to work near St Giles Circus and would mostly travel between LTN and STP with EMT. He was fortunate enough to be able to get a 10-car service with plenty of seats in the morning peak, although on occasion he used FCC to travel between LTN and ZFD.

However, the firm he works for recently relocated their offices to the edge of the City and now he uses Moorgate services (with a London Thameslink ticket that works the gates!)* in both directions, as STP is now somewhat further away.

[* It does say route NOT UNDERGROUND (as expected), and I know that working the barriers does not automatically mean that a ticket is valid. Between ZFD and ZMG he doesn't use the ticket for travel on LUL services but what if he was gripped on a FCC service?]

I'd much sooner take the 377 BTN-VIC (faster than the 319 anyway), then get the Victoria Line to STP (as Edvid has said time it right and this is quicker than the cross London TL route too) to get a Meridian to LUT (again much faster than a 319) - it's a much nicer journey and a better, more pleasant experience.

I agree, but I'm wondering what proportion of passengers actually do that. I would imagine most stick with the direct service, and the refreshed 319/4s are actually half-decent provided you're not having to play footsie with other pax.

It is also true that staff at Farringdon are notorious for their non accepting of NR tickets, valid or otherwise...

Really? The biggest problem I've had there was actually finding gateline staff when I had a valid airline-style ticket and no gate-pass a couple of years ago. Other than that single occasion, I've had no problems when I required the manual gate there.

On the other hand, the automatic gates were incapable of reading National Rail tickets earlier this year, albeit only for a short period, during which I used the station twice.

 

[dan_atki]

However, the firm he works for recently relocated their offices to the edge of the City and now he uses Moorgate services (with a London Thameslink ticket that works the gates!)* in both directions, as STP is now somewhat further away.

[* It does say route NOT UNDERGROUND (as expected), and I know that working the barriers does not automatically mean that a ticket is valid. Between ZFD and ZMG he doesn't use the ticket for travel on LUL services but what if he was gripped on a FCC service?]

You are correct in querying this. I can confirm that using a 'London Thameslink' ticket to Barbican or Moorgate is not allowed and if he was to have an RPI on his train he'd receive a Penalty Fare for not having a valid ticket.

Saying that, though, I have only ever experienced an RPI on a Central London TL service once in about six years of using the service. Even he was clueless about my staff pass despite the fact he'd have one exactly the same...

I agree, but I'm wondering what proportion of passengers actually do that. I would imagine most stick with the direct service, and the refreshed 319/4s are actually half-decent provided you're not having to play footsie with other pax.

Yeah, the 319s are very bad when on medium-heavy load and I guess 99.9% would stick to the direct service available despite the alternative being ever so slightly faster if timed correctly! And a more comfortable journey too!

I think one of the problems with such journeys is the alternative routeings are not known to passengers and they are unsure as to the validity of them. After all, how many rail users do you know who routinely check the Routeing Guide before commencing their journey, especially so if there is already a direct service available?!

Really? The biggest problem I've had there was actually finding gateline staff when I had a valid airline-style ticket and no gate-pass a couple of years ago. Other than that single occasion, I've had no problems when I required the manual gate there.

Whilst they will open the manual gate eventually after thorough inspection, they always seem extremely reluctant to do so. It has been reported that the staff there have also forbode permitted break of journey there simply because the ticket does not have 'To: Farringdon Und' or 'From: Farringdon Und' on it!

 

[Edvid]

You are correct in querying this. I can confirm that using a 'London Thameslink' ticket to Barbican or Moorgate is not allowed and if he was to have an RPI on his train he'd receive a Penalty Fare for not having a valid ticket.

For what reason would that be - travelling beyond validity? [Again I have Tom C to thank for posting related material on another thread I found minutes ago]

Even so it seems rather odd because there is no price difference between tickets to London Thameslink and Barbican/Moorgate, although the latter apparently allow travel to/from City Thameslink via an easement (see the response to question 93 on the FCC website).

Saying that, though, I have only ever experienced an RPI on a Central London TL service once in about six years of using the service. Even he was clueless about my staff pass despite the fact he'd have one exactly the same...

I'm sure it was legend that FirstGroup TOCs were tough on fare-evasion, but I haven't seen many RPIs on board trains during the last 2 years myself...

Yeah, the 319s are very bad when on medium-heavy load and I guess 99.9% would stick to the direct service available despite the alternative being ever so slightly faster if timed correctly!

I would like to see you try! The distances between Vic Line and MML/BML platforms at STP/VIC are not what you would define as short!

I think one of the problems with such journeys is the alternative routeings are not known to passengers and they are unsure as to the validity of them. After all, how many rail users do you know who routinely check the Routeing Guide before commencing their journey, especially so if there is already a direct service available?!

Ha ha ha - point well made.

Whilst they will open the manual gate eventually after thorough inspection, they always seem extremely reluctant to do so. It has been reported that the staff there have also forbode permitted break of journey there simply because the ticket does not have 'To: Farringdon Und' or 'From: Farringdon Und' on it!

What if someone wanted to break their journey there with a ticket to/from London Thameslink? Would staff be right in refusing a BoJ then?

 

[dan_atki]

For what reason would that be - travelling beyond validity? [Again I have Tom C to thank for posting related material on another thread I found minutes ago]

Even so it seems rather odd because there is no price difference between tickets to London Thameslink and Barbican/Moorgate, although the latter apparently allow travel to/from City Thameslink via an easement (see the response to question 93 on the FCC website).

I think that would be the reason given - the last valid station on a ZMG train with a 'London Thameslink' ticket is ZFD. Of course, if the fares are the same then you're right in saying it's silly but that's what the NFM says in section A... anything ATOC write must be taken as gospel..

Talking of easements - you don't happen to be telepathic do you!? - I was looking through the routeing guide easements list myself earlier this afternoon for something else and I read every one of them listed (seems to have been updated because there are a lot more of them now) and not once did I see anything regarding dual availability such as what you mention.

I'm sure it was legend that FirstGroup TOCs were tough on fare-evasion, but I haven't seen many RPIs on board trains during the last 2 years myself...

They're probably all manning the new ticket barriers being installed...

I would like to see you try! The distances between Vic Line and MML/BML platforms at STP/VIC are not what you would define as short!

True but the extra 8 minutes you said yourself made up using the Victoria line instead of FCC should compensate! Then the SN will call at less stations than the FCC from BTN as will the EMT from STP

What if someone wanted to break their journey there with a ticket to/from London Thameslink? Would staff be right in refusing a BoJ then?

Eek, you really can read my mind can't you!? I was going to post a similar question earlier about break of journey on a London Thameslink ticket (although I chose City as that would be manned by FCC staff ) but I didn't want to take this too far off-topic!

To answer your question, though, they should treat the ticket as being valid to Elephant and Castle/London Bridge. As Farringdon is before those stations then the BoJ is permitted and it should be honoured. That said and with it being Farringdon the matter is entirely different. Although there are FCC staff at Farringdon in offices on p4...

 

[Edvid]

I think that would be the reason given - the last valid station on a ZMG train with a 'London Thameslink' ticket is ZFD. Of course, if the fares are the same then you're right in saying it's silly but that's what the NFM says in section A... anything ATOC write must be taken as gospel..

That doesn't stop Southern from selling tickets in their territory to London Terminals if you want to travel specifically to STP...

Talking of easements - you don't happen to be telepathic do you!?

If only - although on occasion I wonder if I'm dreaming the future. I think I'd better leave it there...

I was looking through the routeing guide easements list myself earlier this afternoon for something else and I read every one of them listed (seems to have been updated because there are a lot more of them now) and not once did I see anything regarding dual availability such as what you mention.

Are you referring to the PDF document or the pop-up Javascript RG? The latter has more easements and was last updated 8 months ago but I don't know when the former was last updated.

I would like to see you try! The distances between Vic Line and MML/BML platforms at STP/VIC are not what you would define as short!

True but the extra 8 minutes you said yourself made up using the Victoria line instead of FCC should compensate! Then the SN will call at less stations than the FCC from BTN as will the EMT from STP

Ah yes, I forgot my brain when I wrote that

Eek, you really can read my mind can't you!?

Well in that case I'll be able to treat myself to an All Line Rover, thanks to your bank account!

I was going to post a similar question earlier about break of journey on a London Thameslink ticket (although I chose City as that would be manned by FCC staff ) but I didn't want to take this too far off-topic!

To answer your question, though, they should treat the ticket as being valid to Elephant and Castle/London Bridge. As Farringdon is before those stations then the BoJ is permitted and it should be honoured. That said and with it being Farringdon the matter is entirely different. Although there are FCC staff at Farringdon in offices on p4...

Glad to know my occasional breaks of journey at STP during LUT/LTN-ZFD journeys were legal after all.

 

[John @ home]

What if someone wanted to break their journey there (Farringdon) with a ticket to/from London Thameslink? Would staff be right in refusing a BoJ then?

It would have been allowed by National Fares Manual 98, which expired in May 2008:

Break of Journey, including starting or finishing a journey at an intermediate station between the origin and destination, is generally allowed as stated in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.
Break of Journey is not available:-
• with Advance Purchase tickets issued from a quota;
• for the outward journey with Saver, SuperSaver and Network AwayBreak tickets;
• for any ticket with a validity shown as not available at intermediate stations;
• At London Underground (LU) stations other than at LU stations on a Train Company route where Train Company trains are scheduled to call, and subject to the general terms and conditions of the ticket permitting break of journey.
EXAMPLE: with a Cheap Day Return from Luton to Brighton, break of journey is permitted at Kentish Town or Farringdon.

Unfortunately, Section A is not one of the parts of NFM 99 that we have been able to obtain, so I don't know if it is allowed now.

John

 

[hairyhandedfool]

..... That said and with it being Farringdon the matter is entirely different. Although there are FCC staff at Farringdon in offices on p4...

When I worked down there the staff at Farringdon were not Ticket trained, although they could phone STP or City to find out.

Section A still says

Break of Journey, including starting or finishing a journey at an intermediate station between the origin and destination, is generally allowed as stated in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage.

Break of Journey is not available:-

•with Advance Purchase tickets issued from a quota;

•for the outward journey with Saver, SuperSaver and Network AwayBreak tickets;

•for any ticket with a validity shown as not available at intermediate stations;

•At London Underground (LU) stations other than at LU stations on a Train Company route where Train Company trains are scheduled to call, and subject to the general terms and conditions of the ticket permitting break of journey.

EXAMPLE: with a Cheap Day Return from Luton to Brighton, break of journey is permitted at Kentish Town or Farringdon.


These conditions do not apply to:

1.Travelcards, which allow unlimited journeys within their zones of availability (see Section K).

2.Journeys made on LU tickets between LU-controlled stations on interavailable routes (see Section L).

Break of journey is always available for changing between trains and stations to continue the journey.

 

[dan_atki]

That doesn't stop Southern from selling tickets in their territory to London Terminals if you want to travel specifically to STP...

This should not be the case and if a specific fare for St Pancras does not exist - there have been problems with these tickets saying to 'London Terminals' as seen in another thread on here somewhere - then a fare to London Terminals should be issued and a ticket from London Bridge (most likely) to St Pancras too (I would think that's the logical way of doing it).

Are you referring to the PDF document or the pop-up Javascript RG? The latter has more easements and was last updated 8 months ago but I don't know when the former was last updated.

Definitely the latter, the PDF is way out of date (must be about 2-3 years now... someone should tell them!) and should not be used at all.

Well in that case I'll be able to treat myself to an All Line Rover, thanks to your bank account!

No chance!

Unfortunately, Section A is not one of the parts of NFM 99 that we have been able to obtain, so I don't know if it is allowed now.

Why ATOC have stopped putting even half the public parts of the fares manual online is beyond me... Section A rarely changes, though.

When I worked down there the staff at Farringdon were not Ticket trained, although they could phone STP or City to find out.

Indeed they're not (mainly clerical staff IIRC) but even they'd have a better idea about the tickets than some of the LU staff. It should not be down to them to phone STP or CTK, that job should fall to the gateline staff if they can't work out the validity of tickets... as I said before if they're reluctant to even open the manual gate what chance is there of them phoning anyone?