WillPS
Established Member
I guess you didn't buy an additional Norwich - Thetford ticket after all then
I thought that was what was being suggested here? Getting a Birmingham - Wolverhampton single?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Megatrain (Virgin) Journey
- Thread starter Butts
- Start date
- Status
I thought that was what was being suggested here? Getting a Birmingham - Wolverhampton single?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,151
If I understood correctly, the OP wanted to go to Sandwell & Dudley (SAD, who thought of the code?
). He has in possession a Megatrain booking to Birmingham New Street and a single for Wolves to SAD. He plans to disembark his Birmingham-bound train at Wolves and switch to the single ticket which he will use to get to SAD.I don't see any suggestion in this thread that the OP get a single Birmingham - Wolves.
WillPS
Established Member
My bad.
In which case, I suggest purchasing a Birmingham - Wolverhampton single.
But just as in my case, if you're only changing platforms it's unlikely you'll be challenged...
In which case, I suggest purchasing a Birmingham - Wolverhampton single.
But just as in my case, if you're only changing platforms it's unlikely you'll be challenged...
Yes, that people are fed up with being ripped off by monopolistic companies!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Exactly... "not using a service that they had already paid for"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As an aside, what happens if one person has two valid tickets for a journey, one for a longer journey with a no-break clause, and one for a shorter journey that allows a break, over the end of such a journey?
John @ home
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2008
- Messages
- 5,148
I hope I am correct in interpreting Jonny's question to be
Firstly, the National Rail Conditions of Carriage (NRCoC) allow a passenger to use more than one ticket for one journey.
Then, megatrain.com Condition 20 confirms that the National Rail Conditions of Carriage apply to megatrain travel unless amended by the megatrain.com Conditions.
The remainder of the megatrain.com Terms & Conditions are silent on the subject of combining a Megatrain ticket with another railway ticket on one journey. It therefore seems to me that combining is allowed in accordance with NRCoC Condition 19.
Due to the perverse nature of the British railway fares system, it has become quite common for passengers to buy a combination of overlapping tickets for one journey. For example, when I travel to north Wales, I find that two overlapping tickets give me the best walk-on price.
A combination of overlapping tickets saves me £13.80.National Fares Manual NFM 09 said:
To attempt to answer Jonny's question, I can see no reason why the same approach cannot be used where one or more of the tickets forming the combination is a megatrain.com ticket.
To this extent, I agree with All Line Rover that the current megatrain.com Terms & Conditions do not prohibit starting/finishing short. Where I disagree with All Line Rover is in his assumption that Butts' proposal to travel from Edinburgh to Sandwell & Dudley involves a break of journey. It does not.
Leaving a station is a necessary, but not always sufficient, element of breaking a journey. Condition 16 does not define when starting or ending a journey at an intermediate station may be restricted. It may be that the train companies assume that starting or ending a journey carries the same restrictions as breaking a journey. A case such as Butts would test whether that is a valid assumption. My view is that a statement in the megatrain.com FAQs is unlikely to be given more weight than a right clearly set out in the NRCoC Conditions.National Rail Conditions of Carriage said:
In conclusion, my opinion is that it is more likely than not that the combination of tickets proposed by Butts forms a valid combination for an Edinburgh - Sandwell & Dudley journey. I recognise that this is a minority opinion among contributors to this thread.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
This is an absolute debacle and needs to be clarified by Megatrain, in all honesty!
I still advise against the OP alighting early, more out of concern that he'll end up in a mess rather than anything else!
I still advise against the OP alighting early, more out of concern that he'll end up in a mess rather than anything else!
Obviously the answer you'll get on this forum is that it's not valid (excepting John @ Home's interpretation - which I can't find fault with, although I think it's not intended that AP tickets can be combined in this way).
However, I think it's a bit OTT to be doom-mongering that the OP will have to pay a huge excess. AP tickets are a gamble by their very nature, and I think the chances of someone picking the OP up on it are (very) low. Additionally, if the OP bought a Birmingham-Wolverhampton ticket, they couldn't possibly be considered to be depriving anyone of income (although it wouldn't make the BoJ any more valid). I'd certainly do this with a clear conscience.
However, I think it's a bit OTT to be doom-mongering that the OP will have to pay a huge excess. AP tickets are a gamble by their very nature, and I think the chances of someone picking the OP up on it are (very) low. Additionally, if the OP bought a Birmingham-Wolverhampton ticket, they couldn't possibly be considered to be depriving anyone of income (although it wouldn't make the BoJ any more valid). I'd certainly do this with a clear conscience.
Smethwickian
Member
To go back and answer one of the OP's original queries, I've used the 1852 Edinburgh to Birmingham on several midweek days (yep, with Megatrain ranging from £1-£5) and it's never been very busy, especially south of Preston.
And, purely as an observation based on those past journeys and not in any way whatsoever as a suggestion or inducement of future behaviour, I would add that I cannot recall any ticket checks south of about Preston (where I think the train manager changes) nor very many staff of any kind, let alone immediately checking tickets of people getting off trains, at Wolverhampton or Birmingham New Street.
The Megatrain T&Cs do state reasonably clearly (if a little ungrammatically) that "Bookings are only valid on the journey(s) and places stated." The FAQ quoted by bb21 is buried away somewhat obscurely and whilst you click during booking to state that you have read the T&Cs, there is nothing to suggest or insist passengers read every FAQ.
And, purely as an observation based on those past journeys and not in any way whatsoever as a suggestion or inducement of future behaviour, I would add that I cannot recall any ticket checks south of about Preston (where I think the train manager changes) nor very many staff of any kind, let alone immediately checking tickets of people getting off trains, at Wolverhampton or Birmingham New Street.
The Megatrain T&Cs do state reasonably clearly (if a little ungrammatically) that "Bookings are only valid on the journey(s) and places stated." The FAQ quoted by bb21 is buried away somewhat obscurely and whilst you click during booking to state that you have read the T&Cs, there is nothing to suggest or insist passengers read every FAQ.
Has anyone ever heard of such a thing, ever?
The nearest I can think of is when someone on uk.railway got his season ticket withdrawn because he was standing in First Class:
https://groups.google.com/group/uk.railway/browse_frm/thread/e8b2cf25a0de053c/f18618f528d6ac1a?
All Line Rover
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 5,222
An FAQ is not legally binding. Nowhere during the process of purchasing a ticket do I click: "I agree to the FAQ's."
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That is a very interesting viewpoint, though I doubt ATOC intended for the NRCoC and other related documents to be interpreted in that way. While I can't see any problem with applying this viewpoint to a Megatrain ticket (even though it is rather pointless since the T&C's don't currently prohibit starting/finishing short), I am not so sure whether it could be applied to an Advance ticket, due to the more stringent T&C's for such tickets.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Yes, of course it is an absolute debacle! Do I expect Megatrain to clarify this matter? No. Why?
In my opinion (and it is only an opinion, but a good one at that
), I suspect that Megatrain removed the term restricting a BoJ and starting/finishing short a few months ago - at the time when South West Trains withdrew a UPFN from a customer who was "caught" finishing short. (And yes, they were actually "caught" since the Megatrain T&C's did at that time prohibit finishing short. I'm not entirely sure whether the case went to court, so won't mention it so as not to confuse anybody.)Since they withdrew the UPFN, I suspect they realized that such a restriction could not be realistically enforced. So they just removed it from the T&C's and now keep quiet about it! (I also suspect that the FAQ's have not been updated for years - the Megatrain website is not very well maintained.)
As a general thought - and this applies to both Megatrain and Advance tickets - I still think that prohibiting a customer from alighting at a station when they are on a ticket that permits passing through that station is a restriction that defies common sense.
In the OP's case (I still don't recommend that the OP alights at WVH without asking the TM first), why would the OP theoretically need to buy a Birmingham to Wolverhampton SOS so as "not to deprive the railways from revenue?" If they simply alighted at Wolverhampton, how would they be depriving the railways from revenue since the ticket allows them to pass through that station?
Last edited:
IIRC, there used to be regular reports of people trying to get off WSMR trains at Wolverhampton being told to get back on by the Virgin platform staff as it was pick up only.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
1. You are potentially denying someone wanting to travel to the destination station a cheaper ticket. APs and Megatrain are quota controlled, based (in this case) on journeys to Birmingham New St. If the quota of fares to Wolverhampton is sold out or not available that should be that.
2. Follows on from 1. To benefit from the cheaper fare, you must travel from and to the stations on your ticket. If you want to travel to an intermediate station you either buy a through ticket at a higher fare, or a ticket from the destination to double back. Either way, the total journey fare is higher so alighting early must be denying revenue.
Last edited:
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
In my opinion (and it is only an opinion, but a good one at that
Since they lost the court case, I suspect they realized that such a restriction could not be realistically enforced. So they just removed it from the T&C's and now keep quiet about it! (I also suspect that the FAQ's have not been updated for years - the Megatrain website is not very well maintained.)
Are you sure it went to court? I thought Yorkie had posted that SWT merely removed the UPFN?
All Line Rover
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 5,222
Well whichever way it went, SWT/Megatrain clearly didn't see the restriction as being enforceable, which - in my opinion - is the reason why they removed it.
Perhaps Yorkie would be able to enlighten us on the matter?
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
Well whichever way it went, SWT/Megatrain clearly didn't see the restriction as being enforceable, which - in my opinion - is the reason why they removed it.
Perhaps Yorkie would be able to enlighten us on the matter?
They are two very different things. If it went to court, and the court found in the passengers favour then the restriction is legally unenforceable, and this would affect other stop short rules. If however the TOC removed it, it doesn't mean they won't try to enforce it on others. Just because they removed it does not mean they consider it unenforceable - just that perhaps the passenger was too vocal, or the TOC was in a good mood.
All Line Rover
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 5,222
Sorry, I think you misinterpreted my post.
I meant that SWT/Megatrain removed the term prohibiting a BoJ and starting/finishing short because they didn't consider it to be enforceable. I wasn't referring to the UPFN.Not quite comparable, as Virgin staff could not have charged the passengers any money, and they were on the look-out for this, because if passengers did alight there then that was contrary to the agreement (that was since ruled illegal) that Virgin would have exclusive rights on the London-Wolverhampton flow.
There is no evidence that I have seen that someone purchasing a Megatrain ticket reduces the quota of AP tickets. All evidence points to the contrary. Can you back up this claim with evidence to support your case?
The revenue issue is a red herring. I could give many examples where a combination of tickets and/or starting/finishing short is cheaper, do you believe that in all instances this is "denying revenue"? If so, then denying revenue in itself is not wrong, because in most cases you are permitted to start/finish short! By your logic, I am "denying revenue" to XC by using a York-Shireoaks ticket to only travel as far as Sheffield, but I am perfectly entitled to do that. So what relevance does the "denying revenue" claim have in this context?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
There is nothing to enlighten that I have not already said.Well whichever way it went, SWT/Megatrain clearly didn't see the restriction as being enforceable, which - in my opinion - is the reason why they removed it.
Perhaps Yorkie would be able to enlighten us on the matter?
SWT reportedly issued a Penalty Fare to a couple, who presented Megatrain tickets at a manual barrier check at Eastleigh station, they were using only the Megatrain tickets, not a combination of tickets, and SWT believed they had the right to issue a PF. It was reported to me by SWT staff that the couple successfully appealed. It was widely reported (on forums at least, if not the mainstream media) that the correct action for break of journey when not entitled to do so, is an excess to the appropriate fare, not a new fare (whether that be Penalty Fare or a normal fare).
I don't think snail was claiming this - only that both types of ticket are quota controlled (two quite separate quotas).
In that case where on earth does the claim that people are being deprived of cheap tickets by the OP?!
Other than in the sense that, by definition, cheap tickets are quota controlled and any time you buy one it could be argued (by that logic) you are "depriving" someone else!
This extreme hypothetical hyperbole does not help the OP, nor does it assist us in determining what is/isn't valid, nor the consequences if it is not valid.
My view does not change that the 'correct' charge to be made is an excess if it is deemed that the T&Cs are enforceable, but that there are strong arguments to be heard that the terms could fall foul of legislation, and I also know that EC would not make such a charge in these circumstances because we have seen what happened when people started/finished short, and it is logical and likely that Virgin would act in a similar way, again based on previous knowledge of Virgin being faced with controversy.
I also support John @ Home's excellent analysis, which is strong evidence indeed to suggest the T&Cs are not breached.
Also let's not forget that the FAQs do not form any part of the contract.
Some of the claims made in this topic are bizarre to say the least.
Well, if you buy a Megatrain ticket you're stopping someone else from buying it.
Of course you're still doing that if you don't use it at all.
Exactly so. I've had instances in the past - before the requirements on starting short were tightened up - where AP tickets to London had sold out from Wigan and Preston but were still available from Lancaster, so I bought the Lancaster one and got on at Wigan. That must come out of the Lancaster quota, thus denying a genuine Lancaster traveller the opportunity to buy that ticket. It is (or was) bending not breaking the rules, but has since been prohibited though questions remain about its common logic or enforceability.
I was using AP and Megatrain as different examples of quota controls. If you say Megatrain isn't controlled then that argument doesn't apply but there is still the issue of a substantial difference in fares between EDB-BHM on Megatrain and any other combination. If you can find one that does allow finishing short, that's fine, but here the cheapest way of getting to Wolverhampton without doing that is to travel to New St then back again.
chris89
Established Member
As some others have said i wouldn't risk it especially if you are caught but then if not leaving the station an incredibly low chance as no matter how many times i've seen someone off and meet them i've never been asked to show tickets on the Platform.
If you where leaving the platform overaly i wouldn't risk it as they do have inspectors on sometimes at the exit, but seem to only be when Wolves are playing though (I've been stopped once and the person wouldn't believe i was seeing someone off
)
I would honestly just go to New street then double back on yourself as at max will only add 10+ mins of traveling time as trains from new street - wolvo stopping are quiet frequent.
Also would save you a potentionaly costly error as walk up fairs are not cheap at all on that route from Edinburgh to Wolvohampton.
Chris
If you where leaving the platform overaly i wouldn't risk it as they do have inspectors on sometimes at the exit, but seem to only be when Wolves are playing though (I've been stopped once and the person wouldn't believe i was seeing someone off
)I would honestly just go to New street then double back on yourself as at max will only add 10+ mins of traveling time as trains from new street - wolvo stopping are quiet frequent.
Also would save you a potentionaly costly error as walk up fairs are not cheap at all on that route from Edinburgh to Wolvohampton.
Chris
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
The purpose of Megatrain is to offer dirt cheap fares between two points. This is done essentially on a promotional basis, to encourage people off buses and out of cars, onto the train. The EDB-BHM tickets are intended to be used only between those two stations. Of course someone wanting to get off at Lockerbie or Carlisle will save money on this ticket! The point is, using Megatrain tickets outside their terms is depriving TOCs of revenue. There are many places along the routes of Megatrain tickets that have flows priced by, or revenue attached to, other TOCs who do not offer Megatrain.
In this particular instance revenue is being lost as the customer intends to travel to Wolverhampton. Megatrain does not allow this at all, and so the customer should buy the appropriate ticket for his journey, which is more expensive as it happens.
However, I cannot help but feel swayed by John@home's thorough analysis. It is hard to disagree with the NRCoC as it stands in black and white, and it forms the contractual arrangement between TOC and customer. In my view, however, there exists a law and then there exists the spirit and application of the law. Rules are nothing without common sense and logic. While I agree that in the cold light of the NRCoC the combination is most likely valid, I do not think that is the intent of the Megatrain scheme. In summary:
1. The ticket as designed is not intended to be used to start or finish short.
2. Passengers deciding to go ahead and break their journey on these tickets deprive the industry of revenue (legitimately, it can be argued).
3. TOCs do not like being deprived of revenue, whether by fraud, or legitimately by knowledgeable people exploiting loopholes in the NRCoC.
4. Exploitation of this scenario, or a challenge in court may end up with the scheme being withdrawn altogether.
5. Rail travel becomes more expensive and less inclusive as a result.
In this particular instance revenue is being lost as the customer intends to travel to Wolverhampton. Megatrain does not allow this at all, and so the customer should buy the appropriate ticket for his journey, which is more expensive as it happens.
However, I cannot help but feel swayed by John@home's thorough analysis. It is hard to disagree with the NRCoC as it stands in black and white, and it forms the contractual arrangement between TOC and customer. In my view, however, there exists a law and then there exists the spirit and application of the law. Rules are nothing without common sense and logic. While I agree that in the cold light of the NRCoC the combination is most likely valid, I do not think that is the intent of the Megatrain scheme. In summary:
1. The ticket as designed is not intended to be used to start or finish short.
2. Passengers deciding to go ahead and break their journey on these tickets deprive the industry of revenue (legitimately, it can be argued).
3. TOCs do not like being deprived of revenue, whether by fraud, or legitimately by knowledgeable people exploiting loopholes in the NRCoC.
4. Exploitation of this scenario, or a challenge in court may end up with the scheme being withdrawn altogether.
5. Rail travel becomes more expensive and less inclusive as a result.
If one is really paranoid about the risk of being asked to show one's ticket when changing platforms at Wolves, presumably one way to get round this (by having a ticket which in unquestionably acceptable to change from the first to the second train there) would be, in addition to the Megatrain ticket, to have a valid single ticket from the station last called at before Wolverhampton to Sandwell & Dudley. This still, arguably, bends the Megatrain ticket conditions (at any rate as described in the FAQs), but gives you a legitimate document for the crucial "leave train at Wolves - cross platform at Wolves - get on local train at Wolves" moments.
Mutant Lemming
Established Member
It wasn't my intention to incite pepole to commit fraud in an earlier post but more to highlight that anyone contemplating something which may be a little suspect would be ill advised to promote their intentions on a public web forum which is viewed by people who police the slightly illicit activity they intend to partake in.
As for being 'what is wrong with society' then maybe we should start with rail fares and just charge a standard fare based on distance travelled to everyone regardless of age, creed etc etc.
Until that happens then people will look for loopholes (like in tax avoidance - it's legal but is it right ?)
Here is a possible loophole for your consdieration.
Buy a ticket from Crewe or Stafford to Sandwell & Dudley - you will have two tickets valid for your journey to Wolverhampton one of which will be valid for break of journey at Wolverhampton.
Also out of interest how would a ticket examiner deal with someone they believe is feigning illness in order to circumvent any ticketing rules ? I very much doubt most ticket examiners are medically qualified to determine if someone is genuine or trying to pull a fast one.
As for being 'what is wrong with society' then maybe we should start with rail fares and just charge a standard fare based on distance travelled to everyone regardless of age, creed etc etc.
Until that happens then people will look for loopholes (like in tax avoidance - it's legal but is it right ?)
Here is a possible loophole for your consdieration.
Buy a ticket from Crewe or Stafford to Sandwell & Dudley - you will have two tickets valid for your journey to Wolverhampton one of which will be valid for break of journey at Wolverhampton.
Also out of interest how would a ticket examiner deal with someone they believe is feigning illness in order to circumvent any ticketing rules ? I very much doubt most ticket examiners are medically qualified to determine if someone is genuine or trying to pull a fast one.
I don't see the benefit of going on about revenue. If I get a York to Shireoaks, and only use it York to Sheffield, I could be seen as depriving XC of revenue, and giving EC and Northern extra revenue. My answer to that would be "and...? so what...?"
Revenue does not determine validity. T&Cs do. Some T&Cs are enforceable, some - arguably - may not be. Some may be deemed unfair. FAQs do not form the terms of the contract.
The revenue argument is used to justify a moral argument that the OP is doing something wrong. People can make up their own minds, but if the OP is doing something wrong, it is because the T&Cs possibly do not permit it, not because of revenue reasons.
If revenue - alone - determined right or wrong, then many legitimate perfectly valid ticket combinations would be considered 'wrong', and that is a suggestion I will strongly oppose.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
).
Revenue does not determine validity. T&Cs do. Some T&Cs are enforceable, some - arguably - may not be. Some may be deemed unfair. FAQs do not form the terms of the contract.
The revenue argument is used to justify a moral argument that the OP is doing something wrong. People can make up their own minds, but if the OP is doing something wrong, it is because the T&Cs possibly do not permit it, not because of revenue reasons.
If revenue - alone - determined right or wrong, then many legitimate perfectly valid ticket combinations would be considered 'wrong', and that is a suggestion I will strongly oppose.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That is a whole new topic, so if anyone wants to discuss that, please feel free to start a new topic (though I am likely to copy & paste what I said in the last topic on the subject, and the topic before that...
).
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
I think you misunderstood my post. I agree that the ticket and combination may well be valid. However, as well all know, using tickets and "bending the rules" may be perfectly legal and effective way to save money. But we've all seen examples of TnCs being changed, splits and permitted routes removed, and rovers increase in price because of little tricks that people have used them for in the past.
In all cases the railway industry amends things to maximise revenue, and to remove opportunities from the frugally-minded.
If people "abuse" (can't think of a better word, sorry!) the Megatrain scheme, it will probably become dearer, or the TnCs tightened, or it will be removed altogether.
WillPS
Established Member
Except that "abuse" has lead to exactly the opposite of that.
It's not a matter of "abuse" at all anyway. The OP has purchased a "seat" (megatrain's term) which he could legitimately occupy until Birmingham.
Only on the railways would this kind of bollocks happen.
When Saver restrictions were imposed between Exeter and Didcot/Newbury in 2003, meaning that you had to get an SOR between Exeter and Didcot/Newbury, someone on uk.railway blamed the fare rise on people splitting tickets:
Then it was suggested that you could split at Pewsey and Newbury, leading to this response:
It was argued that legitimate exploitation of the system has led to hardship for 'genuine' passengers.
Then it was suggested that you could split at Pewsey and Newbury, leading to this response:
It was argued that legitimate exploitation of the system has led to hardship for 'genuine' passengers.
All Line Rover
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 5,222
Although Megatrain is a promotional scheme, I can't imagine Virgin withdrawing it because they would get no benefit out of doing so.
I appreciate that Megatrain don't want their tickets to be used by commuters for short distance journeys - and I accept this - but I do find it slightly baffling that customers can buy a ticket from Edinburgh to Birmingham, but not Edinburgh to Wolverhampton (or even Crewe/Wigan). In my experience, services with Megatrain tickets between Scotland and Preston/Birmingham are always very, very quiet (much less than 20% full).
Offering a few extra Megatrain tickets on these services would do no harm, surely? Even if customers are only pay a couple of quid, Virgin are filling up their trains and will hopefully get high customer satisfaction levels, encouraging customers to travel on other - more expensive - services.
I'd also point out that no one has shown me a term in the Megatrain T&C's that obviously prohibits finishing short, so I'm not sure why people are trying to come up with all these creative ways of getting round a restriction that doesn't appear to exist! (For the time being...)
I appreciate that Megatrain don't want their tickets to be used by commuters for short distance journeys - and I accept this - but I do find it slightly baffling that customers can buy a ticket from Edinburgh to Birmingham, but not Edinburgh to Wolverhampton (or even Crewe/Wigan). In my experience, services with Megatrain tickets between Scotland and Preston/Birmingham are always very, very quiet (much less than 20% full).
Offering a few extra Megatrain tickets on these services would do no harm, surely? Even if customers are only pay a couple of quid, Virgin are filling up their trains and will hopefully get high customer satisfaction levels, encouraging customers to travel on other - more expensive - services.
I'd also point out that no one has shown me a term in the Megatrain T&C's that obviously prohibits finishing short, so I'm not sure why people are trying to come up with all these creative ways of getting round a restriction that doesn't appear to exist! (For the time being...)
Although Megatrain is a promotional scheme, I can't imagine Virgin withdrawing it because they would get no benefit out of doing so.
I appreciate that Megatrain don't want their tickets to be used by commuters for short distance journeys - and I accept this - but I do find it slightly baffling that customers can buy a ticket from Edinburgh to Birmingham, but not Edinburgh to Wolverhampton (or even Crewe/Wigan). In my experience, services with Megatrain tickets between Scotland and Preston/Birmingham are always very, very quiet (much less than 20% full).
Offering a few extra Megatrain tickets on these services would do no harm, surely? Even if customers are only pay a couple of quid, Virgin are filling up their trains and will hopefully get high customer satisfaction levels, encouraging customers to travel on other - more expensive - services.
I'd also point out that no one has shown me a term in the Megatrain T&C's that obviously prohibits finishing short, so I'm not sure why people are trying to come up with all these creative ways of getting round a restriction that doesn't appear to exist! (For the time being...)
The problem with that is they have to have someone at any allowed station who can determine the valdity of a code. Megabus do (or did) allow you to board at more than one location in some towns - this wasn't hard for them to offer as the same person was checking the validity with the driver handily accompanying the bus.
- Status