Selling tickets - an offence?

[Wallsendmag]

You'd have to ask the operators of those machines that print them.

Please don’t as I haven’t a clue

 

[paddington]

The tickets were advance singles, specifying which trains they were for I sold them to a fellow supporter for the price I'd paid, so I made no profit, the TOC get their money and the ticket was used. As per the opening posts, technically illegal I guess, but in reality no harm done.

If there was a chance you would be unable to attend, you should have bought flexible tickets or been prepared to discard your advance tickets. At least that's what the TOCs would like you to have done, and they would claim that they lost the difference between the price of your advance and the prices that were available to your fellow supporter.

 

[Haywain]

It would be simpler for everyone for it to be replaced with an official means of buying online for collection without a card at all at a small extra fee.

Use PayPal, problem solved.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Use PayPal, problem solved.

Yes, that does work (though you need *a* card). But to replace SILK it's need to require no card and would need to be publicised officially. The only reason PayPal is any card is that the TOC can't have card details.

 

[Clip]

Actually, I think most TOCs would love to get rid of the SILK process. Certainly most ticket office staff would because it's a pain to deal with.

Oh its a pain but it serves a very useful if infrequent service and i wouldnt want o see it got rid of

 

[6Gman]

Wasn’t there a case sometime ago where someone was possibly prosecuted for using an unused return portion of a ticker acquired by his employee for someone else and then left in a mess room for anyone to use?

There was. If I recall correctly* it was a car hire business (or similar) with branches in Bristol and Swindon. Staff sometimes needed to go one way to pick up a car; sometimes the other way. Rather than buy singles they would buy returns and leave the return halves pinned to a noticeboard.

Somehow the TOCs seem to have noticed and were taking action.

Don't think we ever heard the outcome.

* Some, many or all of the details may be wrong but this was the case in principle. And clearly something the TOCs want to avoid.

 

[londonbridge]

If there was a chance you would be unable to attend, you should have bought flexible tickets or been prepared to discard your advance tickets. At least that's what the TOCs would like you to have done, and they would claim that they lost the difference between the price of your advance and the prices that were available to your fellow supporter.

It was fully my intention to attend when I bought the tickets, as I mentioned the change in circumstances which caused me not to attend occurred after I'd bought them.

 

[kristiang85]

There was. If I recall correctly* it was a car hire business (or similar) with branches in Bristol and Swindon. Staff sometimes needed to go one way to pick up a car; sometimes the other way. Rather than buy singles they would buy returns and leave the return halves pinned to a noticeboard.

Somehow the TOCs seem to have noticed and were taking action.

Don't think we ever heard the outcome.

* Some, many or all of the details may be wrong but this was the case in principle. And clearly something the TOCs want to avoid.

lnteresting. I can't help but think if they didn't sell single tickets at near the price of returns then this wouldn't be an issue...

 

[Clip]

lnteresting. I can't help but think if they didn't sell single tickets at near the price of returns then this wouldn't be an issue...

What would your solution be then - single leg pricing or pricing people off their day trips or weekends away?

 

[MikeWh]

What would your solution be then - single leg pricing or pricing people off their day trips or weekends away?

Single leg pricing. It works fine in the London area using Oyster/contactless.

 

[Clip]

Single leg pricing. It works fine in the London area using Oyster/contactless.

Sinlgle leg pricing works in metropolitan cities due to the amount of journeys being made can cover the cost of frequent services.

However if you are going to double the price of me travelling from KX to Edinburgh then the railway has just lost a customer to either road or the dreaded coach. The railway cant afford that

 

[MikeWh]

Sinlgle leg pricing works in metropolitan cities due to the amount of journeys being made can cover the cost of frequent services.

However if you are going to double the price of me travelling from KX to Edinburgh then the railway has just lost a customer to either road or the dreaded coach. The railway cant afford that

I'm not suggesting charging the current single each way. When Oyster was introduced in 2010 the single fares were set at half the existing return fares, or slightly less.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sinlgle leg pricing works in metropolitan cities due to the amount of journeys being made can cover the cost of frequent services.

However if you are going to double the price of me travelling from KX to Edinburgh then the railway has just lost a customer to either road or the dreaded coach. The railway cant afford that

Given that most journeys are made using return tickets, single-leg pricing would not double the price of your journey in order to be revenue-neutral. I reckon if we switched to a system of singles only (with any two the same being purchasable as a return at no discount, for those who like stuff like the month-long validity and multiple overnight breaks of journey on the return half). Most likely a single would be about 55-60% of a current return, I reckon.

I strongly support single-leg pricing - it removes all sorts of issues, anomalies and the need for excesses and the likes entirely (an excess would simply be a refund and reissue in the same transaction with no £10 fee).

 

[Clip]

I'm not suggesting charging the current single each way. When Oyster was introduced in 2010 the single fares were set at half the existing return fares, or slightly less.

Fair enough but my point still stands about longer distance journeys

Given that most journeys are made using return tickets, single-leg pricing would not double the price of your journey in order to be revenue-neutral. I reckon if we switched to a system of singles only (with any two the same being purchasable as a return at no discount, for those who like stuff like the month-long validity and multiple overnight breaks of journey on the return half). Most likely a single would be about 55-60% of a current return, I reckon.

You really think the railway would just lie down and accept that? You must be still dreaming Neil. The return fare was set as it was to encourage travel and people are now used to it and anything else will see prices go up and people move to other modes.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Technically illegal; but in reality they aren't going to send a team of plain clothes revenue inspectors in a van with blacked out windows armed with a long lens camera to catch you doing the handover.

It's more for people who start selling tickets on eBay etc.

Like this one, which actually expired last July anyway. Collection in person, from a seller with no feedback.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Express-...London-Terminals-until-12th-July/292622916894

 

[Baxenden Bank]

India Railways has a serious problem with companies buying up the whole ticket allocation of trains, as soon as it becomes available, and then selling them on with a large price increase. The UK rule prevents that happening.

 

[Bensonby]

Legally, it is “simple” theft. The relevant case is R v Marshall, Coombes & Eren [1998] 2 Cr App R 282

 

[34D]

There was. If I recall correctly* it was a car hire business (or similar) with branches in Bristol and Swindon. Staff sometimes needed to go one way to pick up a car; sometimes the other way. Rather than buy singles they would buy returns and leave the return halves pinned to a noticeboard.

Somehow the TOCs seem to have noticed and were taking action.

Don't think we ever heard the outcome.

* Some, many or all of the details may be wrong but this was the case in principle. And clearly something the TOCs want to avoid.

But NRCOT 5.2 states

When a Ticket is purchased on behalf of an organisation, business or similar entity, it
may be used by any person employed by that organisation, business or similar entity
unless otherwise shown on the Ticket by means of a person’s name, photocard number
or other identifying means. In such cases it may only be used by the person identified
on the Ticket.

So surely the car hire business can in fact do as proposed?

 

[MikeWh]

But NRCOT 5.2 states

So surely the car hire business can in fact do as proposed?

The problem is that the railway considers a return ticket on two coupons to be one ticket.

 

[MikeWh]

Given that most journeys are made using return tickets, single-leg pricing would not double the price of your journey in order to be revenue-neutral. I reckon if we switched to a system of singles only (with any two the same being purchasable as a return at no discount, for those who like stuff like the month-long validity and multiple overnight breaks of journey on the return half). Most likely a single would be about 55-60% of a current return, I reckon.

I strongly support single-leg pricing.

I certainly would not support a 10-20% increase in fares for the majority of journeys. You must be living in cloud cuckoo land!

 

[34D]

The problem is that the railway considers a return ticket on two coupons to be one ticket.

I'm sure that is the crux of the matter, but it would be interesting to argue the point.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm sure that is the crux of the matter, but it would be interesting to argue the point.

As there was a prosecution on this very matter, I'd be surprised if they didn't but were unsuccessful.

 

[mallard]

I strongly support single-leg pricing - it removes all sorts of issues, anomalies and the need for excesses and the likes entirely (an excess would simply be a refund and reissue in the same transaction with no £10 fee).

It also means that "day returns" (which are almost always the cheapest returns on any particular route) would be abolished and day-trippers would have to pay a fare much closer to that of a period return, likely decimating local day-trip traffic (which is already price sensitive due to competition from bus operators).

 

[kristiang85]

It also means that "day returns" (which are almost always the cheapest returns on any particular route) would be abolished and day-trippers would have to pay a fare much closer to that of a period return, likely decimating local day-trip traffic (which is already price sensitive due to competition from bus operators).

I personally find it ridiculous that a day return is much cheaper than returning within 30 days - it is the same journey, same product, why should it cost more just because you're only going away for a day? Bring the price to the middle of both - day trippers pay a little more but all benefit from the flexibility. It will also help the local economies of smaller towns as people are more likely to stay the night.

I fear this is drifting off topic though.

 

[Scotty]

I personally find it ridiculous that a day return is much cheaper than returning within 30 days - it is the same journey, same product

It's not the same product. With a period return, you can choose which day to return, out of the 30 available.

 

[kristiang85]

It's not the same product. With a period return, you can choose which day to return, out of the 30 available.

Well its an unnecessary extra product. What difference does it make to the railway to make one-day returns cheaper? Its not like they can suddenly add a load of extra trains in the evening if they've sold loads in the morning. Why not make 2-day returns and 7-day returns?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Well its an unnecessary extra product. What difference does it make to the railway to make one-day returns cheaper? Its not like they can suddenly add a load of extra trains in the evening if they've sold loads in the morning. Why not make 2-day returns and 7-day returns?

That is then coming onto the difference between selling tickets on a cost-plus strategy (where everything would be on single leg pricing, with returns twice a single and no such concept as a Day Return), versus selling them on the basis of what the market will bear. The former strategy worked for the railways where it was the only feasible means of transport. Now that there is very often competition from other modes, market-based pricing is universal.

 

[Ianno87]

That is then coming onto the difference between selling tickets on a cost-plus strategy (where everything would be on single leg pricing, with returns twice a single and no such concept as a Day Return), versus selling them on the basis of what the market will bear. The former strategy worked for the railways where it was the only feasible means of transport. Now that there is very often competition from other modes, market-based pricing is universal.

To use a simple example, the costs that Day and Period returns are competing against are different. Imagine you have a choice of train or car to the nearest town. Then parking for a day costs less than parking for multiple days. So a Day Return is priced less partly for this reason - the price of the competition in this case is also less.

 

[Scotty]

Well its an unnecessary extra product. What difference does it make to the railway to make one-day returns cheaper? Its not like they can suddenly add a load of extra trains in the evening if they've sold loads in the morning. Why not make 2-day returns and 7-day returns?

2-day and 7-day returns are both covered by the period return...

 

[kristiang85]

2-day and 7-day returns are both covered by the period return...

Yes but if a 1-day return is cheaper than 30 days, why not put other X-day in the middle? Obviously, the answer is because that is ridiculous. Personally I believe you buy a return from A to B, it is the same price whenever you decide to use it (but fine to keep the within 30 days rule), unless you get a discount for having an advance on a specified train.

To use a simple example, the costs that Day and Period returns are competing against are different. Imagine you have a choice of train or car to the nearest town. Then parking for a day costs less than parking for multiple days. So a Day Return is priced less partly for this reason - the price of the competition in this case is also less.

It is not really the same though, as a return ticket is still only one product you are paying for - 1x return journey. It is the same single item you are paying for if you return today, or in 5 days time. In a car park, you are paying for 5x of that product (i.e. 1x day of parking).

This is seriously off topic now, though (my fault I know )