Off Peak Return

[RochdalePioneers]

Yet another example of the railway treating its customers as criminals. Buy a ticket. Which is valid. From them. Following the contracted national ticket conditions. And get told by multiple people on multiple teams that the ticket isn’t valid and neither are the contracted conditions.

Someone has told staff that “off peak isn’t valid before 10am”. Issued a guide to tickets. Done training. This isn’t “whoops we got it wrong”. This is deliberate.

 

[Coolzac]

Well I escalated as suggested and the response was almost immediate:

Thank you for the recent email and letter you sent to our contact centre.

My name is xxx xxx and I work within the Senior Customer Contacts Team here in Norwich. The contact centre have shared your correspondence with me and I wanted to make direct contact as quickly as possible.

Please allow me to begin by offering my most sincere apologies for the inconvenience you were caused owing to our staff providing the incorrect information. This is not acceptable and is far from the level of customer service we would expect. All of our staff are highly trained in both ticketing and customer service and therefore it is with deep regret we have not met your expectations, or our own.

The ticket you were using to Manchester was valid as you are aware, and staff should have been able to check this without delay. As you will appreciate, there are thousands of ticket combinations in the national rail booking system, all of which have differing restrictions. Our Revenue and station staff all receive ticket training and therefore this is quite an isolated incident as it is very rare they would misinform a customer. We have acted quickly in regards to the incident and one of our Revenue Protection Managers is dealing with this matter directly internally.

Whilst I cannot disclose the action taken or training that is offered due to data protection, I can assure you that this is being addressed. The Inspector will be spoken to and made aware of the error, and a brief will also be provided to customer service staff so that we can prevent this from happening again.

I do understand that this has caused you great inconvenience and I am genuinely sorry about that. Whilst it cannot make up for the experience you had, I would like to refund your ticket in full by way of a bacs payment. In addition, I would also like to offer you a future complimentary return journey on the Greater Anglia network (a return to London for example).

So that I can make the bacs payment, please can you confirm your account holder name, number and sort code? I will then set the payment up so it is in your account within the next 20 days, although it is usually faster. In addition, the complimentary journey is open and you are welcome to use this whenever you wish. Please just give me one weeks notice and let me know the journey information/dates so that I can then post this out to you.

I can only apologise once again for this awful experience and I hope that it does not deter you from using our services again in the future.

Thank you for taking the time to make us aware of the incidents.

Regards,

So they have acknowledged their mistakes. Still alarming that THREE members of staff can be so wrong ~ a ticket inspector, guy on information desk, and the first responder from customer services. And whilst it is true there are lots of tickets, off peak returns for travel outside the NSE area must be quite common on the gate line at Liverpool Street?

Anyway, I may respond further, but thanks for your help everyone!

That's great you finally got an adequate response. However it is as you say alarming that three members of staff can be totally wrong, especially for something that can be looked up!!!

 

[Hadders]

That's a decent response from the senior manager at Greater Anglia.

 

[ianBR]

Nothing will change. I dread to think how many customers are ripped off on a daily basis and forced to buy new tickets when their ticket is perfectly valid

We only see a tiny fraction of cases on this forum.

If only we had American style class action lawsuits to force the TOC’s to improve

 

[Haywain]

Nothing will change. I dread to think how many customers are ripped off on a daily basis and forced to buy new tickets when their ticket is perfectly valid

We only see a tiny fraction of cases on this forum.

And we see none of the people who have no problems at all using their tickets.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Nothing will change. I dread to think how many customers are ripped off on a daily basis and forced to buy new tickets when their ticket is perfectly valid

We only see a tiny fraction of cases on this forum.

If only we had American style class action lawsuits to force the TOC’s to improve

Actually this is a very useful thread for those within the industry trying to make the case for overhauling the way restrictions and ticket validities are communicated. It's tough to make the case in the abstract and real life examples are very handy.

 

[Kite159]

Actually this is a very useful thread for those within the industry trying to make the case for overhauling the way restrictions and ticket validities are communicated. It's tough to make the case in the abstract and real life examples are very handy.

Don't give some people within the industry any ideas on how to overhaul restrictions to make things 'simpler' as you can bet 10p that such changes will be against the customer (and be more blanket 'not before X:YY' style rules.

Ticket restrictions are a complete minefield, sadly some staff go into a silo mode of thinking that 'off peak not valid' without considering the entire journey being undertaken. Look at GWR & Chiltern for example.

 

[VicH]

I recently bought a Chelmsford-Nuneaton off peak return for a Friday arriving at Liv St at 07.15

Ticket didn't open barriers at Liv St, so I showed it to staff, who said it wasn't valid, as it was off peak!

I said it was valid, as it was a through ticket to Nuneaton. He then let me through!

It was still quite nervy as you automatically think your wrong.

 

[cvs]

Yet another example of the railway treating its customers as criminals. Buy a ticket. Which is valid. From them. Following the contracted national ticket conditions. And get told by multiple people on multiple teams that the ticket isn’t valid and neither are the contracted conditions.

Someone has told staff that “off peak isn’t valid before 10am”. Issued a guide to tickets. Done training. This isn’t “whoops we got it wrong”. This is deliberate.

Nothing will change. I dread to think how many customers are ripped off on a daily basis and forced to buy new tickets when their ticket is perfectly valid

We only see a tiny fraction of cases on this forum.

If only we had American style class action lawsuits to force the TOC’s to improve

Spot on. Very sad state of affairs. the first levels of customer service are as ignorant. Only those who persevere and escalate have their complaints seen by a person knowing the rules. They also know by then that these are potential litigants

Both staff members were wrong, the restriction is on arriving into London Liverpool Street before 1000 on the return portion, not the outward. In addition, there are restrictions only on departure time on the outward.
In any case, for purposes of contract law if an itinerary is provided with the booking, it must be honoured irrespective of normal validity. This applies even where the restriction code is contradicted by the itinerary for that itinerary only Note this second situation doesn't apply if incorrectly offered by a journey planner booking engine and purchased elsewhere (eg. from a ticket office or a booking engine that obeys the rules properly) - either way this is a moot point as the ticket was sold in accordance with its restrictions.
Furthermore, a penalty fare would not be an appropriate remedy for this situation, an excess should have been charged were the ticket genuinely invalid owing to a time restriction (it was actually valid anyway in this case).

All of this assumes you were using the outward portion of your ticket. I'd be inclined to ask that the members of staff concerned are re-trained with respect to restriction codes and request that a suitable brief is issued to all relevant staff on this matter. I'd also mention that they need reminding that if a National Rail accredited booking engine provides an itinerary in conjunction with a booking, this must be honoured for contractual purposes.

Sadly, they depend on machines which are not accurate and are trained to assume customers are crooks unless proved otherwise.
I had a similar experience. Stafford to Shotton off peak return ticket on week day at 0630 in on 2/1/24. Thankfully ended amicably. One way tickets are anytime while returns are off peak for this route. This was my regular travel route then. Usually take the Avanti 0648 to Crewe and then on Transport for wales. I took the Western Midlands 0611 from Stafford to Crewe. I was the only passenger in the coach. Train manager(looked like a rookie) was checking with one Ticket inspector dressed in black with camera. Machine beeped. . was told the ticket was not valid. Requested then to sit down, I pointed out the reservation in Avanti and that it is not a advance ticket, but off peak. Also told his that this is regular travel route and politely told that I will take legal action if I am fined. I also requested then to show me the error - "ticket not valid-check destination ticket is STA-SHT" which I took a screen shot. They seemed to understand when I told this try finding a ticket for same route for the next day. We parted amicably. e-tickets should clearly mention the restrictions. Even this code is not mentioned in many train company tickets.

 

[sheff1]

That's a decent response from the senior manager at Greater Anglia.

Better than some certainly, but this sentence

Our Revenue and station staff all receive ticket training and therefore this is quite an isolated incident as it is very rare they would misinform a customer.

shows an unjustified level of complacency.

Also the doubling down from Customer Relations, who should have no difficulty in checking the actual validity rules before replying, seems to be have been rather glossed over.

A good outcome, eventually, for the OP but will things really change from now on ......

 

[Cesarcollie]

Better than some certainly, but this sentence

shows an unjustified level of complacency.

Also the doubling down from Customer Relations, who should have no difficulty in checking the actual validity rules before replying, seems to be have been rather glossed over.

A good outcome, eventually, for the OP but will things really change from now on ......

i have written back - politely - raising these points amongst others.

 

[yorkie]

Finally, a correct response! Thanks for updating us.

Unfortunately it's not uncommon for TOCs to only have a very select few people who actually know how to look up the rules (or who to ask if they aren't sure how to do so).

Better than some certainly, but this sentence

shows an unjustified level of complacency.

True, but given the prevailing culture at numerous TOCs, and I'd be very surprised if the letter had been completely spot on!

While the response is not quite perfect, based on typical train company standards (which are quite a different set of standards when compared to many other sectors), it's of a very good standard.

 

[Cesarcollie]

Finally, a correct response! Thanks for updating us.

Unfortunately it's not uncommon for TOCs to only have a very select few people who actually know how to look up the rules (or who to ask if they aren't sure how to do so).


True, but given the prevailing culture at numerous TOCs, and I'd be very surprised if the letter had been completely spot on!

While the response is not quite perfect, based on typical train company standards (which are quite a different set of standards when compared to many other sectors), it's of a very good standard.

And a speedy response to my follow-up letter. Can’t fault this particular individual:

Thank you so much for getting back to me and providing three additional points.

With regards to your first point, I fully agree and can confirm staff are equipped to be able to check ticket restrictions. This should be a fairly easy thing to do since they are dealing with tickets as part of their role. It is therefore unacceptable that this was not done and that is why we really are taking this very seriously. Our head of revenue has been dealing with this matter so that we can ensure this kind of thing does not happen again. It is worth noting that the incorrect advice being offered is not common and this is very rare, and we have acted quickly to prevent any further repeats. You have mentioned Penalty Fare's, but when these are issued they are checked by an independent body so that mistakes are not made.

I understand that the offer of a return trip may not be suitable. I have therefore set up a bacs payment of £157.70 as requested which represents the double value of your ticket. This will appear in your account within the next 20 days although it is usually faster.

With regards to your upcoming trip, there should be by no means any repeat of this. However, should you encounter any problems then please show the Inspector this email and they can contact me directly internally. Please feel free to pass my name on.

I hope that this helps and I hope that the upcoming journey goes smoothly.

Regards,


etc

 

[miami]

That's a better response than the first one. Still has a joke in there ("incorrect advice being offered is not common") but it doesn't overwhelm the rest of the message like the first one's zingers

 

[Fermiboson]

I’m sure that of every single enquiry made of a typical frontline staff member in the course of a normal day of operations, most of which will be of the nature “what’s the next train to London/Cambridge/Norwich and what platform is it”, incorrect advice is indeed quite rarely given.

Doesn’t, of course, detract from the fact that staff should absolutely know better, or at least know when they don’t.

 

[SteveM70]

You have mentioned Penalty Fare's, but when these are issued they are checked by an independent body so that mistakes are not made

Anyone have any idea of the detail behind this? It implies to me that an independent body verifies PFs after they've been issued, or is the bloke misrepresenting the appeals process?

 

[Fermiboson]

Definitely referring to the appeals process. We’ve never heard of TOCs proactively withdrawing penalty fares. I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily misleading, only that the independence of the independent body can sometimes be under question.

 

[SteveM70]

Definitely referring to the appeals process. We’ve never heard of TOCs proactively withdrawing penalty fares. I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily misleading, only that the independence of the independent body can sometimes be under question.

If it is a reference to the appeals process, it absolutely is misleading. To say "they are checked" is just not true - they are only checked if a passenger appeals. As its written, it implies issuing a PF then triggers some sort of a check.

 

[sheff1]

You have mentioned Penalty Fare's, but when these are issued they are checked by an independent body so that mistakes are not made.

Whilist they do seem to be trying to do the right thing, they have moved beyond complacency now.
Multiple threads on here show that mistakes have been, and continue to be, made in the issuing of PFs and I very much doubt that everyone who has been issued with a 'mistaken' PF knows about this forum, so the ones we have heard about will not be the only ones.