Mirfield to Leeds via Sowerby Bridge

Discussion in 'Fares Advice & Policy' started by TUC, 26 Apr 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Starmill

    Starmill Events Co-ordinator

    Messages:
    13,482
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    A semicolon was probably more correct... It was traditionally for lists. I think it was just in the wrong place.
     
  2. yorkie

    yorkie Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    44,565
    Joined:
    6 Jun 2005
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    The word "journey" is wrong, and "negative easement" is an oxymoron (and the concept may even be illegal; did we ever get confirmation DfT approved their introduction?). Some knowledge and interpretation is required. It is not easy for the average passenger to understand.

    Yes, we can work it out, but it's not satisfactory.

    I'd like to see the DfT stipulate that all terms comply with the 'crystal mark' standards and any terms that do not are not binding. Of course I am realistic and I know there is no chance of that happening whatsoever. :roll:
     
  3. Starmill

    Starmill Events Co-ordinator

    Messages:
    13,482
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    Unless you have personally spoken to the author of the sentence, I don't agree you can be definitive that's it.
     
  4. TUC

    TUC Established Member

    Messages:
    2,115
    Joined:
    11 Nov 2010
    But surely the whole purpose of the Routing Guide is to be definitive. Otherwise what is the point?
     
  5. sheff1

    sheff1 Established Member

    Messages:
    4,286
    Joined:
    24 Dec 2009
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Of course, and the source to be used if there is a dispute over a routing.

    That is why, as I said earlier, it is somewhat frightening that ATOC believe it is acceptable to publish barely literate easements .... and do so on a regular basis.
     
    Last edited: 1 Nov 2015
  6. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    44,009
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Has the Guide ever been used for Court evidence in a prosecution?
     
  7. Tetchytyke

    Tetchytyke Established Member

    Messages:
    10,107
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2013
    Location:
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    For those who are struggling to read the easement:

    You and Starmill can now sleep soundly in your beds knowing that ATOC are reading this website and have changed the semicolon to a comma. I trust that this means you are suddenly now able to fully understand what is written.

    Travel from Huddersfield, Deighton or Mirfield to Leeds is not permitted via Sowerby Bridge because of this easement.

    Travel from Huddersfield, Deighton or Mirfield to stations beyond Leeds (e.g. Horsforth, Cross Gates) is not permitted via Sowerby Bridge because of this easement.

    For stations beyond Huddersfield, I would agree that it is a grey area. I would say that the easement wouldn't prohibit journeys where one travels through Sowerby Bridge first (e.g. Manchester Victoria to Leeds via Brighouse), and that the easement is written in such a cack-handed way because of the existence of the direct trains and the VIA HEBDEN BRIDGE tickets.

    I would interpret] the easement as also preventing passengers from places such as Slaithwaite or Berry Brow travelling to Leeds via Sowerby Bridge, as their routeing point is Huddersfield. However I would agree that this is just my interpretation and others could well make an argument that a Berry Brow-Leeds ticket is valid via Sowerby Bridge. Unlike the Mirfield ticket, the fare from Berry Brow is higher than from Sowerby Bridge so Northern/ATOC probably don't care either way.

    Starmill is being disingenuous when he claims that he cannot understand the basic meaning of the easement.

    Tickets from Deighton and Mirfield to Leeds are cheaper than from Sowerby Bridge, and the purpose of the easement is to prevent people buying those tickets and using them from Sowerby Bridge.
     
  8. sheff1

    sheff1 Established Member

    Messages:
    4,286
    Joined:
    24 Dec 2009
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Congratulations that you can now read and correctly quote the easement.

    I notice that you now also agree that there is a grey area regarding ticket validity, contrary to your previous assertions that the meaning was abundantly clear.
     
  9. Tetchytyke

    Tetchytyke Established Member

    Messages:
    10,107
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2013
    Location:
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    I was before, unless you're still labouring the point that a semicolon completely changes the meaning of the words. And I directly referred to the quote from HH, who had also directly quoted it.

    There are no grey areas regarding validity of tickets from Huddersfield, Deighton or Mirfield to Leeds.

    There is certainly not the level of ambiguity that Starmill was trying to claim when he said:

    I'm not saying I agree with the easement. I'm saying that anyone who tries to claim they don't understand it is being disingenous.
     
  10. Starmill

    Starmill Events Co-ordinator

    Messages:
    13,482
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    We were doing so well. You actually managed to quote what it says, rather than what you want it to say. Now though, we have this quandry! Where does it refer to tickets? Nowhere. It refers to journeys. This really isn't complicated unless you make it mate...
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    Right. Let's have an example. It's clear to me that just one of the "journeys" which do this "travelling" is Huddersfield to Mirfield. You agree?
     
    Last edited: 2 Nov 2015
  11. Tetchytyke

    Tetchytyke Established Member

    Messages:
    10,107
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2013
    Location:
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Needless pedantry, given that one is not permitted to make any journey on the railways without being in possession of a ticket for that journey.

    Not sure how you reach that conclusion when the words specifically state from Huddersfield, Deighton and Mirfield to Leeds and beyond.

    Unless you're trying to argue Mirfield is beyond Leeds?

    Stop being disingenuous. You know fine well what it means.
     
  12. Starmill

    Starmill Events Co-ordinator

    Messages:
    13,482
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    I'm so disappointed that I've got to explain this. I thought I was dealing with a seasoned member and didn't need to point this out but obviously that was my own naivety. Easements typically refer to one of two main groups of people who can do something that they might not otherwise have been able to. Either those making journeys 'to or via' a place, irrespective of their tickets, or those with particular tickets. The distinction is very important when it refers to specific things, e.g. if it refers only to tickets routed 'Any Permitted' from X to Y, or (as in this case) it refers to journeys being made from a particular place or through particular places. The easement doesn't seek to loosen the way in which a ticket can be used, it just tells a certain group of travellers which nobody has been able to thus far satisfactorily define. Before you bring still another flagrant charge of pedantry, you can argue if the the net effects of this are actually any different until the cows come home, I don't care; it is a 'clear' distinction that ATOC have chosen to make in the writing of the easements.

    Oh dear, making things up again, are we?

    I have no idea, because the easement does not say! If you can go from Huddersfield to Mirfield via Halifax, it's unclear if this should be via Leeds or not. You're very good at telling me that you categorically know what it means though so maybe we should just go with that? :roll:

    Based on your conduct in this thread, I am forced to conclude that you most certainly do not. You accuse me of all sorts of things when I am merely going off what is actually written, and say that your own version of what your brain fills in the gaps left by the illiterate writer of this sentence are somehow definitive and because my brain has filled the gaps differently (or more accurately gives me several options for how they might be filled) none of my views are valid while only your singular one is? "I am right and you are wrong." Why?" "Because." Why would anyone accept that?

    Hate to repeat myself but the semicolon could have assisted with disambiguation had it just been put in the right place. Anyway, there is no way someone would be brain-dead enough spend their time trawling through this thread, see that the easement is garbage and has all sorts of problems with just the wrong words, syntax and ambiguities, but still decide to go and change it just on the basis of that semicolon becoming a comma. ATOC won't have people that stupid working for them.

    This is not likely. There are much more effective ways than the use of an easement to do that. There are abundant solutions, the best of which is to use a more sensible fares structure, like oh I don't know - zones?
     
    Last edited: 2 Nov 2015
  13. sheff1

    sheff1 Established Member

    Messages:
    4,286
    Joined:
    24 Dec 2009
    Location:
    Sheffield
    You seem to be confusing me with someone else. I have never mentioned a semicolon, use (or not) of which is neither here nor there in my view.


    Yet again you are quoting things which are not there and, just for good measure, even underlining a word which does not appear in the easement.
     
    Last edited: 2 Nov 2015
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page