Seating

[callum112233]

Do you think CHILD ticket holders should give up a seat for a full paying adult?

No. A child ticket doesn't mean the child ticket holder is any less significant to an adult ticket holder. Unless it's an elderly person, but that's got nothing to do with ticket prices, that's just manners and courtesy.

Do you think PRIV ticket holders or free staff travel should give up a seat for a full paying adult?

Maybe. I know it has been previously mentioned that it's in T&C's that a free travelling member of staff should give up their seat for a paying customer, but what about 'perk of the job' and all that?

Should a pushchair vacate the train if a wheelchair needs it?

This one depends. If the pushchair is in the 'designated disabled space' then I would say the pushchair would have to find another space on the train and if that wasn't possible then I would say it was only fair to leave the train. I suppose it depends on the type of train aswell. For example I think that a class 142 has a decent sized space for pushchairs and prams at each end of the train and a class 175 doesn't seem to have the same amount of 'bulk space' if you know what I mean.

 

[krisk]

And therefore break the Terms and Conditions on which you were granted it?

Rules get broken on the railway whatever next eh?

If I travel free then ill give up a seat. If I buy a ticket ill occupy one.

Free pensioners travel take seats when I pay for a ticket. How does that work.

Kids on seats. Bags on seats. People not letting others sit down. You then expect me to stand?

 

[RichmondCommu]

I certainly believe that PRIV ticket holders or free staff travel should give up their seat if I'm forced to stand. Having said that, if they were retired members of staff (got to think of my dad and his partner here!) I would decline their offer.

 

[Urban Gateline]

I certainly believe that PRIV ticket holders or free staff travel should give up their seat if I'm forced to stand. Having said that, if they were retired members of staff (got to think of my dad and his partner here!) I would decline their offer.

But how about a situation where an Advance ticket is Cheaper than a PRIV ticket being held. Why should the PRIV ticket holder then stand, when they've paid more than the Advance ticket holder?

 

[AlterEgo]

Having said that, if they were retired members of staff (got to think of my dad and his partner here!) I would decline their offer.

How would you know? Would you ask to see their ticket?

 

[RichmondCommu]

How would you know? Would you ask to see their ticket?

If an elderly gentleman or lady stood up and offered me their seat I would immediately refuse and tell them not to be so ridiculous! Irrespective of whether or not they had paid for their ticket!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But how about a situation where an Advance ticket is Cheaper than a PRIV ticket being held. Why should the PRIV ticket holder then stand, when they've paid more than the Advance ticket holder?

To clarify I'm referring to my daily commute into Waterloo which in all fairness I should have made clear in my original post. For leisure travel as a family we always pre book (in which case I agree our tickets would be cheaper than PRIV) and for work my employer pays for me to travel 1st class which is very rarely standing room only!

 

[lincolnshire]

Free and Piv Travel tickets and seats on trains.
If my passes are free, Why have I been paying tax on them for the last few years then? Answer me that one please.
I do belive pensioners are not required to give up there seats when travelling if the train is full.
Another gripe that gets me is people with free reservations with there ticket,s should be told that they must occupy the seat allocated to them or be fined if not sitting in the correct seat, as many a time you see them get on train and just sit anywhere leaving there reserved seat empty and the other passengers not risking sitting in that seat, yet another emprty seat.
There is also the passengers who sit next to the isle and leave the window seat empty and sit there with the vacant expression when you ask if the seat is free, but don,t want to move over or let you sit down in a rush.
Oh for the days when there is enough seats for passengers, maybe one day.

 

[Squaddie]

Not enough seats for all the passengers?
Passengers with second class tickets sitting in first class accommodation?
Passengers attempting to avoid payment?

How quaintly British.

 

[lookingforit35]

If my passes are free, Why have I been paying tax on them for the last few years then? Answer me that one please.

No expert on PRIV but I'd hazard a guess that they are indeed provided to you free of charge. However HMRC will still require you to pay tax as a "benefit in kind", ie what the passes are worth if they were paid for.

It's the same for cheap loans etc.

But yes, they are free in that your employer makes no charge to you for them.

 

[Bungle73]

Do wheelchair users actually like the space that is allocated to them? On 375s it's next to the toilet and stinks. Well meant I'm sure but pretty grotty.

Isn't the disabled space next to the toilet on all trains? There'd be no sense in putting it somewhere else.

 

[deltic1989]

Of course an Under-5 should sit on the parent's lap, if a paying passenger is standing.

This (whilst pheaseable for most would be difficult for some. In my case even at my comparitively young age I have 3 children that are under 5 a son of 4 and two daughters of 3 years, and 7 weeks.We as a family take frequent trips by rail mostly at quiet periods its difficult for 3 children to occupy 2 laps. also i have taken my two eldest children on a crowded train before but the dame issue existed more children than laps. its not my way to make elderly or disabled people stand and where possable i will give up my seat but as anyone with children will know they make funny noises when asked to stand for long periods of time and become uncomfortable on ones lap. so whereas i do my best to be courtious to other passengers sometimes this is impossable.

 

[Squaddie]

We as a family take frequent trips by rail mostly at quiet periods its difficult for 3 children to occupy 2 laps... whereas i do my best to be courtious to other passengers sometimes this is impossable.

The National Rail conditions of carriage are quite clear with regard to children under 5.

Children under five years of age who are travelling free may only occupy a seat which is not required by a fare-paying passenger.

If you wish to reserve a seat for your child under five - or to ensure that they do not need give up their seat during their journey - a child discounted ticket may be purchased.

If there are more children than laps and the train is likely to be full then you should be buying a ticket for at least one of the children.

 

[district]

Also, what about off duty police officers travelling on merit of their warrant cards?
You may say it doesn't happen but time after time when the guard is doing a ticket check I see officers with wives/girlfriends/boyfriends/husbands and children using their warrant card in lieu of a ticket.
I understand that depending on constabulary officers can get travel subsidized by the constabulary, but more onto the topic should they give a seat up if travelling free if a fare paying passenger requires it?

 

[pemma]

Isn't the disabled space next to the toilet on all trains? There'd be no sense in putting it somewhere else.

It's not on Pacers and non-refurbished 150s.

 

[ReverendFozz]

Also, what about off duty police officers travelling on merit of their warrant cards?
You may say it doesn't happen but time after time when the guard is doing a ticket check I see officers with wives/girlfriends/boyfriends/husbands and children using their warrant card in lieu of a ticket.
I understand that depending on constabulary officers can get travel subsidized by the constabulary, but more onto the topic should they give a seat up if travelling free if a fare paying passenger requires it?

Personally I dont think Police should get free travel unless they are BTP or seconded to the BTP and only when on Police time.

When it comes to seating and giving it up, I will almost always give a seat up for old people, women with little children and pregnant women. The only time I ever refused to give my seat up for someone was to a drunk old man, who claimed because he fought in North Africa, Italy and France in WW2 he had the right to my seat, as harsh as it sounds, acting like a plonker will not see me give up a seat for anybody.

As for pushchairs and buggies, they should be folded in favour of a wheelchair. As for priority in seating nobody should have priority unless it is reserved.

 

[BestWestern]

I completely disagree with the notion that a paying child should have to vacate their seat for a paying adult. Why? I would argue that, with the exception of the elderly or disabled, some younger children are probably more likely to find standing for a long period to be difficult than most healthy adults. When I was a nipper myself, I can recall travelling on Blackpool buses which displayed a notice proclaiming that children MUST stand if the bus was full, and frankly finding it really quite insulting! A good point has been made previously about the elderly on buses; many services now carry so many 'twirlies' on their freebie passes that there are precious few seats left for people actually buying a ticket. Bear in mind that it is all taxpayers, not just the elderly, who help fund said passes, and who also have to bear the brunt of the cost through other local authority cutbacks to pay for it all as the passes cannot be scrapped (though they should be, or at the very least means tested and attached to income support or suclike). Yet, we wouldn't dream of asking an elderly bus passenger to stand, would we? This is by no means an anti-elderly rant, I'm simply drawing a curious comparison. On that basis though, should I feel morally obliged stand on a train if I have paid PRIV rate?

As for seating reservations, it is universally accepted that allocating a safeguarded seat to those who have paid 27 pence for their advance ticket to travel 750 miles, is completely stupid. The sooner the TOCs engage their collective brain and simply allocate a specific train rather than a seat, the better.

 

[Bungle73]

It's not on Pacers and non-refurbished 150s.

How does a disabled person gain access to the toilet then?

As for seating reservations, it is universally accepted that allocating a safeguarded seat to those who have paid 27 pence for their advance ticket to travel 750 miles, is completely stupid. The sooner the TOCs engage their collective brain and simply allocate a specific train rather than a seat, the better.

"Universally accepted" by whom? If I've booked months in advance why shouldn't I be able reserve a seat? The fact that I've paid less isn't a good enough reason; I may have paid less, but I am limited to one train, and there are far more restrictions on Advance tickets.

 

[SS4]

As for seating reservations, it is universally accepted that allocating a safeguarded seat to those who have paid 27 pence for their advance ticket to travel 750 miles, is completely stupid. The sooner the TOCs engage their collective brain and simply allocate a specific train rather than a seat, the better.

By whom?

• Anytime Passengers? I wonder how many of these have paid out their own pocket? Not many I'd guess and those that would are likely to be...
• Season Ticket Holders. They get a heavily discounted fare. Should they have to stand for Anytime holders?
• Off-Peak Passengers? How many decided to travel less than 2 hours before departure when it's not possible to reserve a seat

Advance tickets are quota controlled and there are typically less of them available on busier services so there is little overlap between Advance and Anytime (ie: when off peak is not valid due to a time restriction)

Furthermore, the quota control on advance tickets naturally limits the reservation they can make and I cannot see every reservable seat being in the advance quota.

An advance ticket holder has a valid ticket to travel. To be honest it sounds like snobbery and elitism because you personally cannot take advantage of advance tickets.

 

[BestWestern]

How does a disabled person gain access to the toilet then?


"Universally accepted" by whom? If I've booked months in advance why shouldn't I be able reserve a seat? The fact that I've paid less isn't a good enough reason; I may have paid less, but I am limited to one train, and there are far more restrictions on Advance tickets.

It is considered a daft system by most who know how it works, in my experience, railway people and passengers. You make some good points, but ultimately it remains completely nonsensical that somebody who has paid three, four or five times as much for their ticket should have to stand because, in some cases, two cars of a three coach train are wedged solid with reserved 'cheap seats'. At the very least, there is a excessive Advance ticketing quota on many trains. I would argue that the fact you have paid less is a very valid reason.

 

[Bungle73]

It is considered a daft system by most who know how it works, in my experience, railway people and passengers. You make some good points, but ultimately it remains completely nonsensical that somebody who has paid three, four or five times as much for their ticket should have to stand because, in some cases, two cars of a three coach train are wedged solid with reserved 'cheap seats'. At the very least, there is a excessive Advance ticketing quota on many trains. I would argue that the fact you have paid less is a very valid reason.

No its not. I've paid less but I am under far more restrictions, and have booked far earlier, than those that have turn-up-and-go tickets. And if I am looking at train journey lasting several hours why should I have to take a chance on where I sit, or of I get a seat all? Anyway if those people wanted (and could be bothered) they could book a seat themselves.

 

[BestWestern]

No its not. I've paid less but I am under far more restrictions, and have booked far earlier, than those that have turn-up-and-go tickets. And if I am looking at train journey lasting several hours why should I have to take a chance on where I sit, or of I get a seat all? Anyway if those people wanted (and could be bothered) they could book a seat themselves.

We shall have to agree to disagree, such is life!

I would argue that an Advance is a promotional ticket, used to fill up what is sold as empty capacity on trains, the intention was never for it to become the ticket of priority. TOC's are guilty here for deliberately over-selling this 'empty' capacity, flogging a trainload of cheap seats when they know the service will be full anyway with other travellers. Essentially, they are filling the train twice. I have no issues with a sensible proportion of a train being reserved for Advance ticket holders, but all too often the reality is that much of the available seating is sold before the train even starts it's journey, with those who are contributing the most to the farebox getting the shoddiest treatment. The provision of a guaranteed seat is not pushed as a selling point of Advance fares, and it should be. A higher base price should apply if a seat is provided. If people want rock-bottom prices, they must accept that they do not get preferential treatment, as would be expected in most other situations.

On our crowded network a seat is, sadly, a bonus. It simply isn't fair to automatically dish them out to those who pay the least, whilst full fare ticket holders have to lump it.

 

[Bungle73]

We shall have to agree to disagree, such is life!

I would argue that an Advance is a promotional ticket, used to fill up what is sold as empty capacity on trains, the intention was never for it to become the ticket of priority. TOC's are guilty here for deliberately over-selling this 'empty' capacity, flogging a trainload of cheap seats when they know the service will be full anyway with other travellers. Essentially, they are filling the train twice. I have no issues with a sensible proportion of a train being reserved for Advance ticket holders, but all too often the reality is that much of the available seating is sold before the train even starts it's journey, with those who are contributing the most to the farebox getting the shoddiest treatment. The provision of a guaranteed seat is not pushed as a selling point of Advance fares, and it should be. A higher base price should apply if a seat is provided. If people want rock-bottom prices, they must accept that they do not get preferential treatment, as would be expected in most other situations.

On our crowded network a seat is, sadly, a bonus. It simply isn't fair to automatically dish them out to those who pay the least, whilst full fare ticket holders have to lump it.

You keep going on about how much people have paid, but what about the fact that I've booked weeks (maybe months) in advance?

This argument has been had before on here in a thread where someone complained about reserved seats (which they hadn't done); the consensus was that the poster could have reserved a seat if they had really wanted to. You seem to want to abolish the entire reservation system to benefit people who turn up at the last minute and with the money (if it's even theirs that they're spending) to buy expensive tun-up-and-go tickets.

 

[BestWestern]

You keep going on about how much people have paid, but what about the fact that I've booked weeks (maybe months) in advance?

This argument has been had before on here in a thread where someone complained about reserved seats (which they hadn't done); the consensus was that the poster could have reserved a seat if they had really wanted to. You seem to want to abolish the entire reservation system to benefit people who turn up at the last minute and with the money (if it's even theirs that they're spending) to buy expensive tun-up-and-go tickets.

I don't feel that booking well ahead particularly outweighs the substantial difference in price being paid. It is still a heavily discounted promotional fare and I see no clear reason why it should offer benefits above and beyond what a full fare-paying passenger can expect. If I go buying bargains at huge discount I wouldn't expect to also get preferential treatment, you don't generally get both in the same package.

I have no wish to abolish reservations, I simply feel that they should be used fairly. At the moment the reservations system is almost entirely the exclusive preserve of the Advance ticket purchaser, and is barely promoted at all to those travelling on anything else. The expectation amongst most travellers is that it's pot luck. However, when you go on-line and book your bargain Advance ticket, a seat is provided without you even so much as asking for it.

A much fairer system would be a box appearing on your screen when you book the Advance, asking if you wish for a reserved seat, and adding an additional charge for it. Nothing major, maybe £2.50 or so, hardly a big expense considering the low cost of your ticket. The same privilege should be promoted at stations and so on so that others can also take advantage, again for a small fee, perhaps slightly less as you are not using a heavily discounted Advance ticket. Agreed, you would lose the flexibility offered by a standard ticket, but I still feel that many would take advantage. Many people still chose to buy ordinary 'SVR' tickets and suchlike rather than Advance, even if they know which trains they intend to use. We would also doubtless see a reduction in Advance users opting for a reservation, as many would prefer not to spend the extra couple of quid, and quite a few don't use them now even when they're free.

The issue here is that quite frankly we have too few trains with too few seats available to just go dishing them out willy nilly. Whilst it might not be universally palatable, the fact is that a guaranteed seat is a luxury, and it is therefore reasonable to treat it as such. Bear in mind that even those paying an enormous premium to travel in First Class are given no promise of a seat, and the situation with Advance reservations really does start to look farcical. As I said before, TOC's are also guilty and they need to play their part by not offering so many Advance tickets on trains they know are excessively busy with regular commuters, but that's an issue to be taken up elsewhere.