Not allowed out of gateline on advance ticket

[ForTheLoveOf]

If it is an advance ticket, surely the timings of the train are on it, so a passenger can do what they like in the gap between their trains? As long as they get their correct connection (which will be checked at barriers/on board), I don't see a problem.

The railways do not help themselves.

Well, I suspect the argument is that they might just leave the station and abandon their journey entirely if they were let out. It's a difficult policy to enforce for sure.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well, I suspect the argument is that they might just leave the station and abandon their journey entirely if they were let out. It's a difficult policy to enforce for sure.

It's a stupid policy and one that only serves to make the railway look really silly.

 

[kristiang85]

Well, I suspect the argument is that they might just leave the station and abandon their journey entirely if they were let out. It's a difficult policy to enforce for sure.

Ah OK. But then I still think its stupid in that you are not allowed to stop short if you've paid for a longer journey - OK there's very few examples where someone can take advantage of the advance ticket system, but that's a problem with our pricing system that is quite frankly embarrassing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ah OK. But then I still think its stupid in that you are not allowed to stop short if you've paid for a longer journey - OK there's very few examples where someone can take advantage of the advance ticket system, but that's a problem with our pricing system that is quite frankly embarrassing.

Blaming passengers for taking advantage of something the railway has done to itself is really a sign of contempt in my eyes.

I have never been refused this kind of so-called break of journey as yet, and I really have never heard of anything quite so utterly ridiculous. Would it not also be false imprisonment? An excess to an Anytime or Off Peak Single as applicable may have been appropriate before letting the passenger out (at a push) but the OP doesn't mention any suggestion of this.

 

[LeylandLen]

At Euston, if you are transferring from LM or London Overground to a Virgin train , whatever ticket you have, you usually have to pass through a ticket gate ; you might want to spend a penny (or is it 20p now ?)or visit WH Smiths or fast food outlet.No doubt they make a few ££ from people changing trains.Preston station on WCML does not have any ticket gates or barriers although they sometimes do spot checks .

 

[Bletchleyite]

At Euston, if you are transferring from LM or London Overground to a Virgin train , whatever ticket you have, you usually have to pass through a ticket gate ; you might want to spend a penny (or is it 20p now ?)

OT, but it's been free the last few times I've (not) spent a penny there due to the change machines all being broken.

At CLJ there are toilets inside the barrier, but they are beyond disgusting.

 

[Stigy]

That’s incorrect. The byelaw makes smoking illegal only where signage says so. The majority of stations have such signs, and the smoke-free legislation makes it illegal indoors anyway, but if the signs are missing then smoking outdoors on the railway is legal.

Correct but beat me to it. Although all stations has signage, this is at the entrance/exit points to railway buildings, making it illegal to smoke beyond the signs only. In opinion, there are far too few signs even taking this in to account.

 

[CentralTrainer]

Something like that - or indeed, changing from the 1-5 A end platforms to the 6-12 A end platforms at Birmingham New Street - would certainly not constitute a break of journey. Nevertheless, on the railways, being legally (and theoretically) in the right does not always mean practical success, sadly...

In Birmingham New Street’s case - one would simply use the B end of the platforms where there are no barriers between platforms.

That’s what it’s there for - to interchange.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

In Birmingham New Street’s case - one would simply use the B end of the platforms where there are no barriers between platforms.

That’s what it’s there for - to interchange.

Indeed, but someone who doesn't know New Street well wouldn't know to do that. It's quite a walk, too, from the A end, and if you are connecting from one A end service to another, it doesn't make sense, even when you allow for the time wasted by having to exit and re-enter the barriered area.

 

[shredder1]

In Birmingham New Street’s case - one would simply use the B end of the platforms where there are no barriers between platforms.

That’s what it’s there for - to interchange.

Passengers need to know this though, it took me a while to figure that out after the rebuild, a sign post might be helpful.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Passengers need to know this though, it took me a while to figure that out after the rebuild, a sign post might be helpful.

There are signs and they announce it as well.

Nonetheless, the barrier staff will let you out if you ask.

 

[shredder1]

There are signs and they announce it as well.

Nonetheless, the barrier staff will let you out if you ask.

I didnt see a sign after the rebuild, and it wasnt announced, we arrived at platform 1 and had to get to platform 12 in a short time gap to change trains, very confusing and not just for me.

 

[dcbwhaley]

Well, I suspect the argument is that they might just leave the station and abandon their journey entirely if they were let out. It's a difficult policy to enforce for sure.

And what loss does the ToC suffer if a passenger abandons the journey?

 

[Bletchleyite]

And what loss does the ToC suffer if a passenger abandons the journey?

They might do it to avoid paying the correct, higher fare.

 

[dcbwhaley]

They might do it to avoid paying the correct, higher fare.

How on earth does abandoning a journey for which you have already paid for cause you to avoid paying a correct fare?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How on earth does abandoning a journey for which you have already paid for cause you to avoid paying a correct fare?

Because sometimes shorter journeys cost more than longer ones.

 

[dcbwhaley]

Because sometimes shorter journeys cost more than longer ones.

I see. But even if they don't allow you to leave the station can they force you to complete the journey you have paid for? Do BTP have the authority to physically manhandle you onto a train going to the destination that your ticket indicates?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I see. But even if they don't allow you to leave the station can they force you to complete the journey you have paid for? Do BTP have the authority to physically manhandle you onto a train going to the destination that your ticket indicates?

No, neither. The only authority a member of gateline staff has to physically interact with the passenger is to detain them if they refuse to provide their name and address, or to remove them from the railway using reasonable force under the common law rights of the land's occupier or owner (as the case may be), or under the Railway Byelaws for being reasonably suspected of committing an offence thereunder.

None of the relevant railway offences are indictable offences and hence no 'citizen's arrest' is permissible: only a police office etc. may arrest for a non-indictable offence (*opens can of worms exceptions*).

If a passenger breaks their journey on a ticket which does not permit this, the passenger is liable to pay the excess (difference) between the fare paid and the cost of the cheapest ticket permitting break of journey for their journey. If they refuse to pay, they must give their name and address such that the matter can be followed up later. But if they offer to pay, or to give their name and address, I see no power for them to be detained (at least by a member of railway staff).