Not to stop orders and split tickets

[Lockwood]

I'm not sure if this should live here or elsewhere.

The thread on stop orders made me wonder about a few scenarios, and I didn't want to clog up that thread on a massive detour.

I'm curious about these, and wonder if my understanding of the situations are close to accurate

We have 4 stations, A, B, C, and D, in that order. It is cheaper for a journey from A to D to split at C.

Bob, our passenger, has split tickets for all of these:

Scenario 1: Bob boards at A. "Ladies and gentlemen, we will not be stopping at C today. Passengers for C, please change at B."
Would Bob have to change at B since his service no longer calls at C, despite that being the original plan?

Scenario 2: After leaving B, the drivers gets a radio message to skip C (temporary incident on that platform or something) so passengers will need to change at D to get back to C.
Bob can continue to D and just leave rather than having to mess around with C?

Scenario 3: Same as 2, but an additional stop is ordered at an intermediate station between C and D
Would Bob have to change there, go back to C and then change again to get to D?

Scenario 4: Trains will not stop at C until further notice. Passengers advised to seek alternative travel until replacement services can be arranged. (C's Station buildings are on fire, trains being cautioned through, or something)
Bob would just go to D, as it is impossible to use a service stopping at C?

Scenario 5: Bob gets the super fast A-D. This train often has a special stop order added for C that is advertised after the train departs A.
Bob is a naughty boy? Sometimes this journey is invalid on his ticket when the stop order is not put on. What about days where this order is put on? (Bonus one here... It is well known there is a 50/50 chance of C getting added. Bob has heard this and wants to give it a try, so this journey is his first time doing it rather than being a habitual user)

 

[Snow1964]

I might be mistaken, but I am under the impression that the relevant timetable is the one in force at the time of purchasing the tickets, because of basic consumer law. (That is effectively when contract to travel is made, in exchange for railway taking your money)

1) if train doesn’t then call at a split point, when you are already on it, not much you can do, it’s same as emergency diversion etc.

2) If you have an open (not restricted to specific train) and a stop is added then nothing to stop you using it.

In practical terms, having sold you the tickets the railway has an obligation to do its best to get you there, and although some alternative trains are restricted (maybe another operator), it is often easier to get ticket acceptance than lay on a special train, find a taxi, or arrange a bus.

The last scenario is a no, because shouldn’t join a train that is not going where you have a ticket for, you can of course alight or change before getting to C, but shouldn’t chance C being added just before you get there. But there is a caveat here, a few places permit short backtracking usually due to sparse service that means need to change at a bigger station bit further along.

 

[driverd]

Back in my days as a guard, all of the above scenarios would get a smile and "No problem mate". Simply put, someone trying to save a few quid, but being quite prepared to buy a ticket for the journey their making and in all but option 5 attempting to stick to the rules, is fine by me. The intent is good and clearly Bob has clearly gone out of his way to knows his rules and make a valid journey. There's much bigger fish to fry, such as the guy sat right behind the drivers cab, doing all he can to avoid buying a ticket at all.

As far as scenario 5 goes, the only issue would be if the Chap was a regular offender and I came across him on multiple occasions, at which point and after repeated friendly words of guidance about split ticketing, if I was in a bad mood, he might have to buy a new ticket.

But, frankly, ticketing rules are very complex and it's important that staff recognise the challenges customers may have in understanding them. I don't know what staff are taught during training in 2022, but back in 2011, we were clearly told to use discretion and generally give the customer the benefit of the doubt (at both the two First group TOCs where I worked across that period).

If you want a technically correct answer, you'll have to hope a revenue protection officer is on these forums!

 

[Fokx]

Bob, our passenger, has split tickets for all of these:

Scenario 1: Bob boards at A. "Ladies and gentlemen, we will not be stopping at C today. Passengers for C, please change at B."
Would Bob have to change at B since his service no longer calls at C, despite that being the original plan?

Scenario 2: After leaving B, the drivers gets a radio message to skip C (temporary incident on that platform or something) so passengers will need to change at D to get back to C.
Bob can continue to D and just leave rather than having to mess around with C?

Tickets should/would still be accepted based on the original calling pattern and neither incident is the fault of the passenger travelling my to D from C.

Scenario 3: Same as 2, but an additional stop is ordered at an intermediate station between C and D
Would Bob have to change there, go back to C and then change again to get to D?

Bob would have to change at B for C as he ticket would not be valid past that point as the service was not advertised to call at C, or board a service that calls at C.

Scenario 4: Trains will not stop at C until further notice. Passengers advised to seek alternative travel until replacement services can be arranged. (C's Station buildings are on fire, trains being cautioned through, or something)
Bob would just go to D, as it is impossible to use a service stopping at C?

Ticket would be accepted on if it is still being sold by the retailer with a valid itinerary. In most situations like this there will be general ticket acceptance in place as it’s not the fault of the passenger

Scenario 5: Bob gets the super fast A-D. This train often has a special stop order added for C that is advertised after the train departs A.
Bob is a naughty boy? Sometimes this journey is invalid on his ticket when the stop order is not put on. What about days where this order is put on? (Bonus one here... It is well known there is a 50/50 chance of C getting added. Bob has heard this and wants to give it a try, so this journey is his first time doing it rather than being a habitual user)

Bobs ticket isn’t valid at all and he could be liable for a penalty fare

 

[yorkie]

If you want a technically correct answer, you'll have to hope a revenue protection officer is on these forums!

I'm not sure revenue protection officers are always correct But if they are on this forum there is a much better chance they will be, of course!

Scenario 1: Bob boards at A. "Ladies and gentlemen, we will not be stopping at C today. Passengers for C, please change at B."
Would Bob have to change at B since his service no longer calls at C, despite that being the original plan?

No; the tickets remain valid. The passenger may use these tickets for the journey; the train was advertised to call. If the passenger bought the tickets using a split ticket provider they could be following their booked itinerary and are perfectly entitled to do so.

Scenario 2: After leaving B, the drivers gets a radio message to skip C (temporary incident on that platform or something) so passengers will need to change at D to get back to C.
Bob can continue to D and just leave rather than having to mess around with C?

Absolutely, as above.

Scenario 3: Same as 2, but an additional stop is ordered at an intermediate station between C and D
Would Bob have to change there, go back to C and then change again to get to D?

Absolutely not; they can simply proceed to D, as above.

Scenario 4: Trains will not stop at C until further notice. Passengers advised to seek alternative travel until replacement services can be arranged. (C's Station buildings are on fire, trains being cautioned through, or something)
Bob would just go to D, as it is impossible to use a service stopping at C?

Again yes, as above.

Scenario 5: Bob gets the super fast A-D. This train often has a special stop order added for C that is advertised after the train departs A.
Bob is a naughty boy? Sometimes this journey is invalid on his ticket when the stop order is not put on. What about days where this order is put on? (Bonus one here... It is well known there is a 50/50 chance of C getting added. Bob has heard this and wants to give it a try, so this journey is his first time doing it rather than being a habitual user)

If the train is not advertised, and never was advertised, as calling at the station where Bob changes from one ticket to the next, they are not complying with the conditions and the tickets can be deemed invalid. In practice many staff would allow this, but the passenger can have no complaints if they are charged.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I think these sorts of threads would be a lot more interesting and educational if everyone gave their exact justification for their answers, e.g. referencing a clause in the NRCoT or consumer protection legislation, or established principles.

 

[Lockwood]

Oh, for the record, I am not Bob and I do not do #5

Bob would have to change at B for C as he ticket would not be valid past that point as the service was not advertised to call at C, or board a service that calls at C.

Maybe I didn't explain that well. The train should have gone to C. For whatever reason, it was decided it would stop at C# instead, so passengers for C were told to change at C#

@yorkie Cool - was hoping that a common sense approach would be used, but given the experiences some posts share you wonder at times!

@Paul Kelly That would be great, but are some of the questions like this far enough outside of the box that there isn't a prescriptive answer?

 

[Fokx]

Maybe I didn't explain that well. The train should have gone to C. For whatever reason, it was decided it would stop at C# instead, so passengers for C were told to change at C#

I see! In which case the ticket would be valid throughout, as again it’s not the fault of the passenger

 

[matt_world2004]

I would argue that If someone got on a train that normally stops at A,B,C with a ticket between A and B only that subsequently runs fast to A and C .has a valid ticket

 

[miklcct]

I would argue that If someone got on a train that normally stops at A,B,C with a ticket between A and B only that subsequently runs fast to A and C .has a valid ticket

Is this even permitted after the train leaves A?

In case of an incident, isn't it required for the train to wait until the line to B is clear, or stop at the next available opportunity to detrain passengers to prevent overcarrying them?

I can imagine mass confusion or even the handle pulled if the train, announced to call at B when leaving A, ends up skipping through B.

 

[matt_world2004]

Is this even permitted after the train leaves A?

In case of an incident, isn't it required for the train to wait until the line to B is clear, or stop at the next available opportunity to detrain passengers to prevent overcarrying them?

I can imagine mass confusion or even the handle pulled if the train, announced to call at B when leaving A, ends up skipping through B.i

I've been on trains before that have been running late with an oyster card whose first station after leaving paddington has been Slough with no announcement made until after leaving paddington about the change of route. This was a few years ago though

 

[Fokx]

In case of an incident, isn't it required for the train to wait until the line to B is clear, or stop at the next available opportunity to detrain passengers to prevent overcarrying them?

There’s no requirement to no.

Passengers can be taken from ‘A’ to ‘C’ for example and ticket acceptance given to travel back to ‘B’.

An example where this might happen could be a failed points on the Up line, but the down line is working normally. The train diverts directly from ‘A’ to ‘C’ and passengers catch the train from ‘C’ to ‘B’ because it’s faster than detraining them and sourcing road replacement transport

 

[Watershed]

Scenario 1: Bob boards at A. "Ladies and gentlemen, we will not be stopping at C today. Passengers for C, please change at B."
Would Bob have to change at B since his service no longer calls at C, despite that being the original plan?

This is the most difficult situation out of your examples.

If the anticipated delay through changing at B would be less an hour or less, then I think Bob is effectively reliant on any 'easement' the TOC is willing to offer. He would be well advised to speak to the guard (if there is one) before B to ask if he can stay the train beyond B.

If this isn't possible (e.g. the train doesn't have a guard or Bob can't find them), and can't speak to any other member of staff (e.g. contacting the TOC on social media) then I think he would have to get off at B or else risk encountering e.g. an RPI between B and D who could try and force Bob to buy a new ticket, pay an excess, or issue Bob with a Penalty Fare or take Bob's details for potential prosecution.

If, on the other hand, the anticipated delay by changing at B would be 61+ minutes, Bob has rights under Article 16 of EU Regulation 1371/2007 on passenger rights and obligations (PRO). These include the right to require the TOC to re-route him to D at the earliest available opportunity - i.e. on the train to D which Bob is currently on.

That re-routing request could be effectuated by speaking to the guard or social media as mentioned above, and if they wrongly claim that Bob must change at B, then Bob would be entitled to recover any additional fare the member of staff claims he must pay to stay on the train.

The interaction of consumer, contract and railway law is very complex in this situation and it's possible that in the first scenario (of a delay of less than an hour) consumer and contract law may require the railway to carry the passenger on the booked train, despite it no longer stopping at C. But I wouldn't want to definitively say that, because it relies on the application of these laws in an untested way. Rights under the PRO are much more clear-cut.

Scenario 2: After leaving B, the drivers gets a radio message to skip C (temporary incident on that platform or something) so passengers will need to change at D to get back to C.
Bob can continue to D and just leave rather than having to mess around with C?

Bob has overtravelled C through no fault of his own. Once reaching D he has no obligation to return to C.

Similarly, if Bob had split at B, and B had been unexpectedly skipped after leaving A, Bob would not be obliged to return to B upon arriving at C.

Scenario 3: Same as 2, but an additional stop is ordered at an intermediate station between C and D
Would Bob have to change there, go back to C and then change again to get to D?

No. His C-D ticket would, after all, presumably be valid to start late at the station between C and D.

Scenario 4: Trains will not stop at C until further notice. Passengers advised to seek alternative travel until replacement services can be arranged. (C's Station buildings are on fire, trains being cautioned through, or something)
Bob would just go to D, as it is impossible to use a service stopping at C?

Article 16 of the PRO would certainly be triggered here, and would entitle Bob to require the TOC to re-route him at the earliest available opportunity - i.e. on the next train to D.

Scenario 5: Bob gets the super fast A-D. This train often has a special stop order added for C that is advertised after the train departs A.
Bob is a naughty boy? Sometimes this journey is invalid on his ticket when the stop order is not put on. What about days where this order is put on? (Bonus one here... It is well known there is a 50/50 chance of C getting added. Bob has heard this and wants to give it a try, so this journey is his first time doing it rather than being a habitual user)

If the train actually stops at C then Bob has done nothing wrong. But he is taking quite a risk, because if it doesn't - he will (depending on the exact permitted routes for his A-C ticket) be travelling on an invalid route, and be liable to pay an excess fare, and potentially be prosecuted under section 5(3)(a) of RoRA if he intended to avoid payment of the correct fare.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Is this even permitted after the train leaves A?

In case of an incident, isn't it required for the train to wait until the line to B is clear, or stop at the next available opportunity to detrain passengers to prevent overcarrying them?

I can imagine mass confusion or even the handle pulled if the train, announced to call at B when leaving A, ends up skipping through B.

I've been on a XC train which announced, after leaving Stafford, it would no longer be calling at Stoke or Macclesfield and instead would call Crewe & Wilmslow. Telling me at or before Stafford would have been more helpful to me, but nevertheless we all had to travel to Crewe instead.

 

[mmh]

I'm with @yorkie on this - algebra threads are very difficult to read! When it's a hypothetical situation, why not just use some station names as examples? For me at least, it would make people's points far more comprehensible!

 

[Lockwood]

I was worried that if I said, for example, London Waterloo, Woking, Guildford, and Haslemere, people would focus on SWR policies, or that splitting at Guildford doesn't save anything, or that Farncombe would be a better split, or "they'd never skip Guildford", and the focus would be pushed onto the exact situation rather than the spirit of the question.

 

[Watershed]

I was worried that if I said, for example, London Waterloo, Woking, Guildford, and Haslemere, people would focus on SWR policies, or that splitting at Guildford doesn't save anything, or that Farncombe would be a better split, or "they'd never skip Guildford", and the focus would be pushed onto the exact situation rather than the spirit of the question.

I concur with your reasoning; also not everyone will be familiar with the geography of the locations in question.

 

[Lockwood]

Yeah, it's one of those ones where you can't win either way - at least ABCD gives an indication of station order.

It did make it harder creating a name for the intermediate station - I chose C#, but it could have been Db if you were looking at it from the other direction.