National Rail Enquiries not validating a fare properly?

[miklcct]

I'm looking for some fares on my local line to destinations beyond Bedford.

However, National Rail Enquiries show that the journey from Cricklewood / Hendon to Wellingborough requires multiple tickets on the fastest itineraries, by changing at St Albans and Luton.

Thameslink app only shows the itineraries the long way (via London) with a note saying that they are overtaken, but the overtaking itineraries (mentioned above) aren't shown at all, EMR app the same as well but without an overtaken message.

Both app refuse to produce

Both app refuses to produce an itinerary departing in the evening peak when trains run direct to Luton.

The reason is that the only fare available is defined as via London, but it is obvious that the ticket is valid to go direct because it forms part of the route via London.

So in this case, are the retailers defective but not showing the direct routes at all, and NRE defective saying that multiple tickets are required (although it is cheaper to split anyway)?

 

[SickyNicky]

If the ticket is routed "via London" the journey planner is required to produce an itinerary via London. Anything else will fail. It's very annoying as it happens quite a bit, even when the ticket would be OK to use in practice.

 

[Watershed]

I'm looking for some fares on my local line to destinations beyond Bedford.

However, National Rail Enquiries show that the journey from Cricklewood / Hendon to Wellingborough requires multiple tickets on the fastest itineraries, by changing at St Albans and Luton.

Thameslink app only shows the itineraries the long way (via London) with a note saying that they are overtaken, but the overtaking itineraries (mentioned above) aren't shown at all, EMR app the same as well but without an overtaken message.

Both app refuse to produce

Both app refuses to produce an itinerary departing in the evening peak when trains run direct to Luton.

The reason is that the only fare available is defined as via London, but it is obvious that the ticket is valid to go direct because it forms part of the route via London.

So in this case, are the retailers defective but not showing the direct routes at all, and NRE defective saying that multiple tickets are required (although it is cheaper to split anyway)?

The retailers are merely simply complying with industry accreditation rules which mean they aren't allowed to offer a 'via London' ticket on an itinerary that avoids London.

NRE is definitely wrong for suggesting you must split at a higher cost though.

Really what's needed is for the via London ticket to be re-routed to +Any Permitted, or for a cheaper not via London fare to be introduced.

 

[miklcct]

The retailers are merely simply complying with industry accreditation rules which mean they aren't allowed to offer a 'via London' ticket on an itinerary that avoids London.

NRE is definitely wrong for suggesting you must split at a higher cost though.

Really what's needed is for the via London ticket to be re-routed to +Any Permitted, or for a cheaper not via London fare to be introduced.

So aren't they misleading by not showing any peak journeys from Hendon to Wellingborough at all, despite no tickets are available?

By showing these journeys, people will aware of their existence and will be able to make enquiry with the ticket office, which will be able to sell the ticket with instruction to start short.

 

[miklcct]

Also, London is not permitted on a any permitted ticket because it's a local journey, so the proper fix needs to be via London and not via London.

 

[kieron]

The retailers are merely simply complying with industry accreditation rules which mean they aren't allowed to offer a 'via London' ticket on an itinerary that avoids London.

NRE is definitely wrong for suggesting you must split at a higher cost though.

I'm not sure what distinction you are drawing here. In order to identify that a "via London" ticket was valid for a route which doesn't go through London, it would have to find a valid route which includes the specific invalid one, and check that the valid ticket permits a break of journey.

If it can't do that, its choice is between offering a combination of tickets, saying "No fares available" or acting as if the itinerary doesn't exist. None of these options is perfect.

Also, London is not permitted on a any permitted ticket because it's a local journey, so the proper fix needs to be via London and not via London.

That would be annoying if you just wanted to buy tickets for specific times on-line, as the next fastest journey is sometimes via London, and sometimes direct. While that isn't a problem for the traveller, NRE and the retailers will all act as if you have to use the same route in both direction.

If you had a "via Bedford/London" route code (similar to the "via Stratford/London" one used for journeys such as Basildon-Chelmsford), or an easement which said that "via London" tickets between these stations can be used via Bedford, someone could buy a "via London" ticket with any itinerary.

 

[Watershed]

So aren't they misleading by not showing any peak journeys from Hendon to Wellingborough at all, despite no tickets are available?

I don't think you can describe that as misleading in any way. It's certainly not very helpful, but at least it's not overcharging.

By showing these journeys, people will aware of their existence and will be able to make enquiry with the ticket office, which will be able to sell the ticket with instruction to start short.

I think you vastly overestimate the average person! The vast majority of people would either assume there are no trains running, or that tickets aren't on sale. Most people wouldn't even think to ask the ticket office for a second opinion, they'd either take the car or just not travel at all.

Also, London is not permitted on a any permitted ticket because it's a local journey, so the proper fix needs to be via London and not via London.

That would be unduly inflexible and would require people to commit to either going, or not going, via London.

I'm not sure what distinction you are drawing here. In order to identify that a "via London" ticket was valid for a route which doesn't go through London, it would have to find a valid route which includes the specific invalid one, and check that the valid ticket permits a break of journey.

The former doesn't strike me as particularly problematic. It'd certainly require a bit of work, but it's well within the realms of the feasible.

The latter is impossible to do given the lack of data about break of journey restrictions, but frankly I cannot see any scenario where a TOC would have a problem with passengers omitting a double back. So I would have said it should be permitted on a blanket basis for any walk-up ticket.

Of course this all requires changes to be made to industry accreditation rules. But with retailing moving ever more digital and itinerary-based, these kinds of scenarios should be addressed.

If it can't do that, its choice is between offering a combination of tickets, saying "No fares available" or acting as if the itinerary doesn't exist. None of these options is perfect.

None are perfect but at the moment the retailers' hands are tied. I think suggesting a combination of tickets at a higher price is probably the worst option of all, as it means actively overcharging.

If you had a "via Bedford/London" route code (similar to the "via Stratford/London" one used for journeys such as Basildon-Chelmsford), or an easement which said that "via London" tickets between these stations can be used via Bedford, someone could buy a "via London" ticket with any itinerary.

Alternatively you could add an easement to ensure that journey planners offered the Any Permitted fares via London. That would probably be the clearest option of all.

 

[miklcct]

That would be unduly inflexible and would require people to commit to either going, or not going, via London.

As we are discussing flexible tickets here, you can just buy the ticket right before travel, when you already know which way you want to go.

 

[Watershed]

As we are discussing flexible tickets here, you can just buy the ticket right before travel, when you already know which way you want to go.

You can, but many people prefer to book even flexible tickets in advance, e.g. to ensure they get a seat reservation.

Again, you have to consider what the average person will do, not what someone in the know will do.

 

[miklcct]

That would be unduly inflexible and would require people to commit to either going, or not going, via London.

I'm looking for some more fares, and fares between Nottingham and Mill Hill Broadway are either via London or not via London, while to Hendon or beyond, the only fare is via London.

It's so annoying that the intercity trains don't call anywhere south of Kettering that it is usually faster to double back as far as Elstree & Borehamwood, or sometimes even Radlett.

However, if the EMR travel is on EMR Connect services, as they call at Luton Airport Parkway, going direct is always faster as far as West Hampstead Thameslink, and is sometimes faster even if the destination is Kentish Town, the final stop before London.

However, the fare is always a clear cut that anywhere south of Hendon is always via London, while between Mill Hill Broadway and St Albans City, choices of via London and not via London (binary choice) are available for longer distance journeys, and north of Harpenden it is always not via London.

The availability for Advance tickets are similar as well, which are called AP London or EMR & Connections, however, there are some journeys where the only flexible ticket is not via London, but Advance tickets are compulsory via London, such as St Albans City to Wellingborough where the only flexible ticket is any permitted (i.e. direct) but the only Advance tickets are AP London.