Reducing fares legitimately - akin to tax avoidance?

[Flamingo]

Split tickets and Advance tickets are starting to turn up more and more with business users, who seem to think that "my firm / travel company bought this" or "my meeting finished early / late" is a legitimate excuse for ignoring the T&C attached to these tickets.

My usual response when charging up if an argument is being pursued is "Why should my firm subsidise yours?".

 

[NSEFAN]

Split tickets and Advance tickets are starting to turn up more and more with business users, who seem to think that "my firm / travel company bought this" or "my meeting finished early / late" is a legitimate excuse for ignoring the T&C attached to these tickets.

My usual response when charging up if an argument is being pursued is "Why should my firm subsidise yours?".

To continue the fiscal theme, would flouting the T&Cs of the tickets turn fare avoidance into fare evasion?

 

[Flamingo]

To continue the fiscal theme, would flouting the T&Cs of the tickets turn fare avoidance into fare evasion?

I'd say yes, doubtless somebody will be along soon to disagree...

 

[soil]

To continue the fiscal theme, would flouting the T&Cs of the tickets turn fare avoidance into fare evasion?

T&Cs aren't law. However many of them are backed by law.

If you break the law in breaching the T&Cs, then we could call that fare evasion.

But if you don't break the law it's just a contractual (civil) issue.

However if you engage in tax evasion that's a criminal matter.

 

[NSEFAN]

T&Cs aren't law. However many of them are backed by law.

If you break the law in breaching the T&Cs, then we could call that fare avoidance.

But if you don't break the law it's just a contractual (civil) issue.

However if you engage in tax evasion that's a criminal matter.

Are the railways not special however, in that there are the byelaws which make fare evasion a criminal offence?

 

[soil]

Are the railways not special however, in that there are the byelaws which make fare evasion a criminal offence?

Yes there are. But not in all cases.

If there is no applicable law making it an offence, it's just a contractual dispute.

 

[RJ]

T&Cs aren't law. However many of them are backed by law.

If you break the law in breaching the T&Cs, then we could call that fare evasion.

But if you don't break the law it's just a contractual (civil) issue.

However if you engage in tax evasion that's a criminal matter.

To expect any entity to be anything less than maximally tax-efficient is to live in cloud cuckooland. Similarly to expect anyone to be less than maximally fare-efficient on the railways.

Did I miss anything in the thread?

Agreed.

 

[yorkie]

Quite honestly I don't see that minimising the fare you have to pay by legal means such as split ticketing etc. is any different to walking past Curry's Digital where the printer you want is £75 to shop in Asda where the exact same machine is only £55.

I agree, except I'd say the analogy* would be a bit more accurate if Curry's had decided to sell a printer, let's say with an extra paper tray and scanner add-on for £75, but Asda had decided that the cost of the bare printer would only be £40, Sainsbury had decided that the cost of the paper tray would be £10, and Tesco had set the cost of the scanner add-on at £10, and all those items could be purchased at Curry's for a sum of £60, but only if you asked for each item separately. Not only that, but you would be able to choose any permitted manufacturer (unless a cheaper manufacturer-specific price was available and chosen) within the range available, as stated in the restriction text associated with the relevant printer. In some cases, the £75 printer may have a longer warranty period than the combination of items.

(* Note: analogies to railway ticketing can never be applied seriously, and can only be used for hypothetical and/or amusement purposes)

 

[soil]

Sometimes of course, you might to choose to buy the printer, scanner and paper tray for £40, then throw away the extras, rather than pay for a printer on its own for £60.
(Note it's surprisingly common that it is cheaper to buy a new printer and throw away the printer, rather than to buy new ink for your existing printer.)

 

[34D]

Sometimes of course, you might to choose to buy the printer, scanner and paper tray for £40, then throw away the extras, rather than pay for a printer on its own for £60.
(Note it's surprisingly common that it is cheaper to buy a new printer and throw away the printer, rather than to buy new ink for your existing printer.)

Though 90% of printers get sold with cartridges that are half full

 

[Darandio]

Though 90% of printers get sold with cartridges that are half full

Only 90& and only half full?

The recent Canon we bought managed to print one solitary A4 photo using the colour cartridge provided.

 

[Deerfold]

Only 90& and only half full?

The recent Canon we bought managed to print one solitary A4 photo using the colour cartridge provided.

But the quality of that photo was unbelieveable?

 

[Goatboy]

The only way I afford rail travel is by reducing the price though split ticketing etc. If it's legitimate why not? It's not like the companies profiting from your tickets won't avoid tax anyway.

Similar - the only way I can justify using the train rather than simply driving my already taxed, insured and ready to go car on some of my longer journeys is by using split ticketing. If I purchased just the one ticket from A to B it'd be more expensive than using the car by enough of a margin to make it very difficult to make a rational case for using the train.

Sadly not everyone uses routes like Virgin's 'We give away advance singles for 20p' London to Birmingham route and the regular tickets really are very expensive, especially with XC.

 

[neilmc]

Split tickets and Advance tickets are starting to turn up more and more with business users, who seem to think that "my firm / travel company bought this" or "my meeting finished early / late" is a legitimate excuse for ignoring the T&C attached to these tickets.

My usual response when charging up if an argument is being pursued is "Why should my firm subsidise yours?".

They certainly are, since companies which incur a lot of travel expenses now initiate policies which stipulate that employees should use any means possible to reduce the exorbitent fares, particularly for peak travel to London.

Split ticketing, a combination of advances and open tickets, timing meetings to allow off-peak travel, staying overnight rather than travelling peak and, my favourite, encouraging younger employees to use young persons' railcards and thus travel cheaply at peak are all effective, but I make sure I don't incur any "charging up" by sticking to the restrictions - after all, Flamingo, why should my firm subsidise yours either?

 

[Flamingo]

They certainly are, since companies which incur a lot of travel expenses now initiate policies which stipulate that employees should use any means possible to reduce the exorbitent fares, particularly for peak travel to London.

Split ticketing, a combination of advances and open tickets, timing meetings to allow off-peak travel, staying overnight rather than travelling peak and, my favourite, encouraging younger employees to use young persons' railcards and thus travel cheaply at peak are all effective, but I make sure I don't incur any "charging up" by sticking to the restrictions - after all, Flamingo, why should my firm subsidise yours either?

No reason at all. Megabus do a frequent service to London as well.

 

[yorksrob]

It seems that peak time fares on some routes are beginning to strangle the golden goose of business travel.