Seasons

[34D]

"Season tickets are available for all short distance and some longer journeys. There is no season ticket option available between the stations you have chosen."

Does anyone know if there is a mileage limit, for the definition of "all short distance" journeys?

Was looking for a season from Ulleskelf to Pannal (31.5 miles via Headingley, or 32.5 miles via Knaresborough) but it doesn't seem to exist (either weekly or monthly).

 

[Brucey]

Under BR, there was a formula that a ticket office could use to create a season ticket for a flow where one doesn't exist. I think this is still in use nowadays.

 

[calc7]

Not wishing to hijack the thread, but does anybody know why no season exists between Ipswich and Norwich?

 

[wibble]

Not wishing to hijack the thread, but does anybody know why no season exists between Ipswich and Norwich?

They're based on the Anglia Plus Pass. The Suffolk & Norfolk Zone (which covers Ipswich - Norwich) season ticket prices are below and includes travel on some bus services:

Weekly: £76.50
Monthly: £293.80
Annual: £3060

More info's on the National Rail website

 

[barrykas]

Under BR, there was a formula that a ticket office could use to create a season ticket for a flow where one doesn't exist. I think this is still in use nowadays.

Nowadays that only applies to cross-London tickets, where you add together the relevant Travelcard prices then subtract the cost of a Zone 1-6 Travelcard. Gets a little more complicated when the "out-boundary" Metropolitan Line stations are involved.

For any other journey where no through fare is shown, you need to contact your Pricing Manager, who should then contact his opposite number at the relevant TOC(s) to work out a price between them.

Cheers,

Barry

 

[island]

Some routes appear to have monthly but not weekly seasons. For example Manchester Stns to London Terminals (which costs just over four times the price of an SOR!)

[Aside: in this case you can use a Manchester Stns to Reading Stations weekly, but it's the principle I'm thinking of.]

[Aside to the aside: the said Manchester Stns to Reading Stations weekly ticket is cheaper than one SOR from Manchester Stns to London Terminals.]

 

[barrykas]

Some routes appear to have monthly but not weekly seasons. For example Manchester Stns to London Terminals (which costs just over four times the price of an SOR!)

That primarily applies to longer distance tickets on former InterCity® routes, though there's usually an "actual" 7 Day rate listed along with a "base rate" to calculate monthly and longer prices. Details are given in The Manual.

Cheers,

Barry

 

[cjohnson]

Some routes appear to have monthly but not weekly seasons. For example Manchester Stns to London Terminals (which costs just over four times the price of an SOR!)

[Aside: in this case you can use a Manchester Stns to Reading Stations weekly, but it's the principle I'm thinking of.]

[Aside to the aside: the said Manchester Stns to Reading Stations weekly ticket is cheaper than one SOR from Manchester Stns to London Terminals.]

This may be going off the thread topic somewhat but is a Reading-Manchester any permitted ticket valid via London? In Avantix there's also more expensive "+via london" fares, but that wouldn't make 'any permitted' invalid via London, would it? (as London is a mapped route)

 

[LexyBoy]

This may be going off the thread topic somewhat but is a Reading-Manchester any permitted ticket valid via London? In Avantix there's also more expensive "+via london" fares, but that wouldn't make 'any permitted' invalid via London, would it? (as London is a mapped route)

Any Permitted is valid via London (discussed before here). Apparently whoever set the Via London fares was unaware of this (though a lot of flows priced by Virgin don't have an Any Permitted fare, only a Via London and a Via [othertown]).

No doubt nothing to do with the fact that certain journey planners will show only the more expensive routed ticket as valid even when a cheaper Any Permitted or other route is valid

 

[cjohnson]

Any Permitted is valid via London (discussed before here). Apparently whoever set the Via London fares was unaware of this (though a lot of flows priced by Virgin don't have an Any Permitted fare, only a Via London and a Via [othertown]).

No doubt nothing to do with the fact that certain journey planners will show only the more expensive routed ticket as valid even when a cheaper Any Permitted or other route is valid

(was this the other thread where it was discussed?)

So next time I need to take a last-minute peak evening train out of Euston to Manchester, I should of course be travelling from Reading and across London. (does the lack of Maltese cross on this fare mean no tube included in the ticket?)

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Some routes appear to have monthly but not weekly seasons. For example Manchester Stns to London Terminals (which costs just over four times the price of an SOR!)....

Long distance monthly (or longer) tickets are usually 'market price' and may not have a weekly fare, however where they do they are different to the 'base price' for the monthly or longer seasons

....(does the lack of Maltese cross on this fare mean no tube included in the ticket?)

The Routeing Guide states that if a journey has 'LONDON' as a map option it includes the cost of cross London travel (in section A I think).

 

[Brucey]

The Routeing Guide states that if a journey has 'LONDON' as a map option it includes the cost of cross London travel (in section A I think).

Just for clarity, here is the exact wording:

In some instances (particularly long distance cross country journeys) the
Manual will show an "any permitted" fare but without the via London, Maltese
cross symbol. Reference to Section C (the “yellow pages”) may show via
London to be a permitted route for this journey and in such instances travel
via London to include cross-London transfer would be permitted.

 

[yorkie]

Yes, cross-London travel is included.

In 2006, Grantham-Stroud was valid via London, and a booking clerk happily issued us with reservations via London, all guards accepted it. At Paddington there was no need to go through the barriers while interchanging between LU & NR, but you can guess where the only problem occurred... King;s Cross LU gateline. However I was well prepared, and despite one member of staff insisting I was wrong, his colleague instructed him to give up and that I was right. However sometimes the staff will not give in - so be prepared for this. It may be easier to use Oyster PAYG or unbarriered interchanges, to avoid potential conflict with LU staff, all of whom have not been given sufficient ticket training, and most of whom will be unaware that the tickets are valid.

 

[John @ home]

Was looking for a season from Ulleskelf to Pannal (31.5 miles via Headingley, or 32.5 miles via Knaresborough) but it doesn't seem to exist (either weekly or monthly).

I think a Leeds - York season would meet your needs. A 7-day Standard ticket route Any Permitted costs £49.30 and is valid via Ulleskelf or Pannal.

I don't recommend asking for a specific fare to be created. This is likely to be based on the adjacent Knaresborough - Garforth season, where the via York and via Leeds routes are also within 3 miles. That is poor value at £55.70 for a 7-day Standard ticket, with no additional journey opportunities.

 

[transmanche]

It may be easier to use Oyster PAYG or unbarriered interchanges, to avoid potential conflict with LU staff, all of whom have not been given sufficient ticket training, and most of whom will be unaware that the tickets are valid.

I wouldn't expect LUL staff to have to understand the intricacies of the NR Routeing Guide. Their training would probably be '+ = OK', 'no + = not OK'. And that's all they should need to know.

It's up to ATOC to make sure that the + appears on all tickets where LUL cross-London transfer is included.

 

[Terrafire]

I wouldn't expect LUL staff to have to understand the intricacies of the NR Routeing Guide. Their training would probably be '+ = OK', 'no + = not OK'. And that's all they should need to know.

It's up to ATOC to make sure that the + appears on all tickets where LUL cross-London transfer is included.

I agree that no one can reasonably expect staff to be better than their training, and I further agree that the system should be changed so + appears on all tickets for all LONDON-routed flows. Given the current fact that things aren't as simple as this, it is a failing of the people devising the training programme not to explain that tickets for LONDON-routed flows are valid irrespective of the presence of a +.

 

[transmanche]

I agree that no one can reasonably expect staff to be better than their training, and I further agree that the system should be changed so + appears on all tickets for all LONDON-routed flows. Given the current fact that things aren't as simple as this, it is a failing of the people devising the training programme not to explain that tickets for LONDON-routed flows are valid irrespective of the presence of a +.

However, when there is no indication on the ticket that it is valid via London (i.e. where it says Any Permitted, rather than Via London), then you cannot expect LUL staff to have Routeing Guide knowledge to know that the ticket is valid via London.

 

[island]

However, when there is no indication on the ticket that it is valid via London (i.e. where it says Any Permitted, rather than Via London), then you cannot expect LUL staff to have Routeing Guide knowledge to know that the ticket is valid via London.

Indeed. And I expect that making too much of a fuss about this will result in the ANY PERMITTED ticket magically changing to NOT VIA LONDON in the May fares update.

 

[John @ home]

I expect that making too much of a fuss about this will result in the ANY PERMITTED ticket magically changing to NOT VIA LONDON in the May fares update.

It is the route Not Via London fares which generally cause the greatest problem, especially when the validity changes overnight. For example:

Southampton Central - Birmingham Stations

1 January 2011
Route: + London: SVR £68.00
Route: Not London: SVR £66.00
As a result, the Route: + London ticket is also valid by routes which avoid London.

2 January 2011
Route: + London: SVR £71.00
Route: Not London: SVR £71.80
As a result, the Route Not London ticket is also valid via London.

 

[yorkie]

I wouldn't expect LUL staff to have to understand the intricacies of the NR Routeing Guide. Their training would probably be '+ = OK', 'no + = not OK'. And that's all they should need to know.

It's up to ATOC to make sure that the + appears on all tickets where LUL cross-London transfer is included.

An LU Customer Service Assistant (CSA) who mans the barriers gets a salary of approx £27,000 per year, if they were expected to able to understand the Routeing Guide I think Bob Crow would be demanding their salary be at least an extra £10k!

 

[Terrafire]

However, when there is no indication on the ticket that it is valid via London (i.e. where it says Any Permitted, rather than Via London), then you cannot expect LUL staff to have Routeing Guide knowledge to know that the ticket is valid via London.

In reality that would be impossible, yes. However, issuing staff with a smartphone or some other device able to check a journey planner wouldn't be too outlandish. That way they could wave through all + tickets and LONDON tickets, and check on a journey planner any others.

On a slightly unrelated note, I'm surprised at the £27,000 figure for a CSA, not being in the industry myself or having followed the pay disputes. Is that a starting salary? That's a lot of money for that kind of work, which isn't safety-critical (or is it?).

 

[34D]

An LU Customer Service Assistant (CSA) who mans the barriers gets a salary of approx £27,000 per year, if they were expected to able to understand the Routeing Guide I think Bob Crow would be demanding their salary be at least an extra £10k!

A simpler rule for LU staff could be to let any network rail ticket with a face value of at least £75, that isn't from/to London Terminals through. Obviously in addition to Maltese crosses.

Would £75 cover the majority of situations?

 

[transmanche]

However, when there is no indication on the ticket that it is valid via London (i.e. where it says Any Permitted, rather than Via London), then you cannot expect LUL staff to have Routeing Guide knowledge to know that the ticket is valid via London.

In reality that would be impossible, yes. However, issuing staff with a smartphone or some other device able to check a journey planner wouldn't be too outlandish. That way they could wave through all + tickets and LONDON tickets, and check on a journey planner any others.

Unfortunately a smartphone would be of little use at many stations.

Anyway, this FOI request reveals the extent of NR ticket training for LU ticket staff.

Some NR tickets are valid for travel on the underground. These tickets will have an R, U, or + on them.

R is found on National Rail Travelcards and is followed by the zones where the ticket is valid e.g. R1 valid only in zone 1 or R2-6 valid for travel in zones 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6.

U is for underground and is on single or return tickets.

+ is for cross London transfers and are valid for one unbroken journey on the underground for a single ticket. Return tickets will allow two unbroken journeys.​

If these symbols are not on the National Rail ticket then the customer must be sent to the ticket office to pay for the underground part of their journey​

This (along with some illustrations and examples of PERTIS tickets and NR excess tickets is the extent of their training. Which seems reasonable to me - as I said earlier, it's up to ATOC to ensure that tickets carry the correct markings.

 

[Terrafire]

Unfortunately a smartphone would be of little use at many stations.

Anyway, this FOI request reveals the extent of NR ticket training for LU ticket staff.

Some NR tickets are valid for travel on the underground. These tickets will have an R, U, or + on them.

R is found on National Rail Travelcards and is followed by the zones where the ticket is valid e.g. R1 valid only in zone 1 or R2-6 valid for travel in zones 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6.

U is for underground and is on single or return tickets.

+ is for cross London transfers and are valid for one unbroken journey on the underground for a single ticket. Return tickets will allow two unbroken journeys.​

If these symbols are not on the National Rail ticket then the customer must be sent to the ticket office to pay for the underground part of their journey​

This (along with some illustrations and examples of PERTIS tickets and NR excess tickets is the extent of their training. Which seems reasonable to me - as I said earlier, it's up to ATOC to ensure that tickets carry the correct markings.

Well, no, it's not 'reasonable' at all to be making training statements to staff like 'Some NR tickets are valid for travel on the underground. These tickets will have an R, U, or + on them.' when you know this is not true! At the very least, that 'will have an R...' statement should read 'will usually have...'

The tickets already carry the 'correct' markings, as current rules state that a ticket does not need any marking to be valid via London. If LUL needs to accept NR tickets, it must accept them with all their consequent rules, and not merely the simple ones. LUL doesn't set those rules, and can't therefore pick and choose them on the grounds that they don't look logical. If we were suddenly going by logical rules only, the Oyster system would have to change!

 

[transmanche]

If LUL needs to accept NR tickets, it must accept them with all their consequent rules, and not merely the simple ones. LUL doesn't set those rules, and can't therefore pick and choose them on the grounds that they don't look logical.

Sorry, that's just impractical nonsense. It's like expecting a bus driver to accept a PlusBus ticket which doesn't have any marking on it to indicate that it actually is a PlusBus ticket.

As I said before. It's up to ATOC to ensure that a + appears on all tickets which are valid for cross-London transfer on LU.

 

[Terrafire]

Sorry, that's just impractical nonsense. It's like expecting a bus driver to accept a PlusBus ticket which doesn't have any marking on it to indicate that it actually is a PlusBus ticket.

As I said before. It's up to ATOC to ensure that a + appears on all tickets which are valid for cross-London transfer on LU.

It's not impractical nonsense to let staff know that the customer might sometimes be in the right when they present a ticket with no obvious marking. As it currently stands, the training gives staff false confidence in the logic of the system, meaning they are likely to challenge customers on tickets which are in fact perfectly valid. As no indication that this is possible is given during training, at the moment customers are likely to face an unpleasant experience at barriers trying to convince staff that their training was wrong. It shouldn't be like that.

 

[transmanche]

It's not impractical nonsense to let staff know that the customer might sometimes be in the right when they present a ticket with no obvious marking.

I didn't say it was.

I said it was impractical nonsense to expect LU staff to be experts in the intricacies of the NR fares system and routeing guide.

It shouldn't be like that.

I agree, it shouldn't. And the way to resolve it is for ATOC to sort it out, so that all valid tickets carry the appropriate + marking. That solves the problem at source, rather than creating complications at the LU gateline.

 

[barrykas]

I agree, it shouldn't. And the way to resolve it is for ATOC to sort it out, so that all valid tickets carry the appropriate + marking. That solves the problem at source, rather than creating complications at the LU gateline.

All well and good, except that there are plenty of tickets with LU/DLR validity that don't have a Maltese Cross on them because it's not classed as a cross-London transfer, such as:

London Terminals - Zone U12 via LU/DLR (journey to an LU/DLR station in Zone 2)
Zone U123 - White Hart Lane (journey from a London Terminal to White Hart Lane including the tube to Seven Sisters)
Angel Road - Zone U1245 (journey from Angel Road to an Underground station in Zone 5)
Travelcards

Cheers,

Barry

 

[MarkyMarkD]

But they all have "U" in the description, and hence meet the limited LUL training material's criteria.

I have to agree with transmanche's view - how hard is it for ATOC to correctly include "+" on all tickets which are valid via a route which requires a cross-London transfer? The various booking websites are all capable of working out most of the valid routes (if not all) and suggesting legs which are on LUL.

 

[34D]

All well and good, except that there are plenty of tickets with LU/DLR validity that don't have a Maltese Cross on them because it's not classed as a cross-London transfer, such as:

London Terminals - Zone U12 via LU/DLR (journey to an LU/DLR station in Zone 2)
Zone U123 - White Hart Lane (journey from a London Terminal to White Hart Lane including the tube to Seven Sisters)
Angel Road - Zone U1245 (journey from Angel Road to an Underground station in Zone 5)
Travelcards

Cheers,

Barry

Yes, but stretches of the underground (ie seven sisters-kings cross) are parts where national rail tickets can be used, so it isn't a cross london transfer. Local staff will know that such tickets are valid, and the gateline at Kings cross st panc tube is programmed to act as London terminals so there shouldn't be any issues there.