Split tickets and railcard

[HST274]

So yesterday I bought a ticket to Severn Beach using the site on here, though this applies to train split as well. I used a 16-17 saver, and there was one split and I noticed later in the day they'd only applied the Railcard to the first leg. The difference was only £1.50 so I don't really mind but I just wondered why that might be the case, especially when Trainline were applying the cheapest option. As well as this they said the saving was around £14 and took a fair cut, but in reality this was the saving from the cheapest adult return. If the Railcard was applied overall I saved a grand total of £0.43! I don't really mind but just wondered why this happened. Also on an off note are the Severn beach trains stopping at portway parkway now just in the run up to the opening, because my train stopped there for seemingly no reason even though we were running 23 late. Thanks for any help,
R

 

[Mcr Warrior]

What ticket(s) did you have exactly, including their price, and what times were you travelling, yesterday (Friday)?

 

[HST274]

What ticket(s) did you have exactly, including their price, and what times were you travelling, yesterday (Friday)?

Today. Worcester to Lawrence Hill, £8.35 and Lawrence hill to Severn Beach £3.00. Both off peak return, only the former with 16-17 saver. Supposedly I was saved £14.83 when in reality it was more like 43p.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Any reason the Lawrence Hill -> Severn Beach Anytime Day Return (with 16-17 Saver railcard discount) wasn't available at £1.50 (rather than £3.00 before discount) , unless, of course, the railcard discount wasnt actually selected separately when booking this particular leg?

 

[plymothian]

This is easily replicable, I get the same issue when doing a dummy booking for tomorrow. In fact 16-17 Saver discount is not being offered in the Severn Beach line at all, even when searching fares just between stations on that line.

 

[HST274]

This is easily replicable, I get the same issue when doing a dummy booking for tomorrow. In fact 16-17 Saver discount is not being offered in the Severn Beach line at all, even when searching fares just between stations on that line.

That's odd, considering Trainline did offer it, although we know how they are often innacurate. I suppose the point is they then assumed the saving was much more than it actually was and the cut was 86% of the saving rather than the 15% it would have been. To be honest the loss was negligible I was just curious.

Well now it seems the share of the saving has been refunded. It seems my plan has come together

 

[flythetube]

So yesterday I bought a ticket to Severn Beach using the site on here, though this applies to train split as well. I used a 16-17 saver, and there was one split and I noticed later in the day they'd only applied the Railcard to the first leg. The difference was only £1.50 so I don't really mind but I just wondered why that might be the case, especially when Trainline were applying the cheapest option. As well as this they said the saving was around £14 and took a fair cut, but in reality this was the saving from the cheapest adult return. If the Railcard was applied overall I saved a grand total of £0.43! I don't really mind but just wondered why this happened. Also on an off note are the Severn beach trains stopping at portway parkway now just in the run up to the opening, because my train stopped there for seemingly no reason even though we were running 23 late. Thanks for any help,
R

Speaking to a driver for the Severn Beach Route last night, she said that trains aren’t stopping there yet, that there is a Station Starter and some drivers may stop short of the station if this is displaying a Red Aspect and others may pull into the platform and stop there. You may have been following a freight train.

 

[yorkie]

It's likely the issue is due to Portway Parkway not being in the location data for the Railcard type; no doubt this will be fixed shortly and the problem will be resolved.

 

[SickyNicky]

So, just to clarify what's happening here.

• The 16-17 railcard (railcard code TSU) is a geographically restricted railcard. There must be a "RR" entry for railcard "TSU" in the fares data "locations" table for every location a journey passes through for the railcard to be valid.
• Portway Parkway (CRS code PRI) is a new station, but it is already in the list of stops for trains on that line. It's actually an "unadvertised" stop, but it's still there. See https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L50778/2023-05-28/detailed for an example.
• Portway Parkway doesn't have the requisite "RR" record for railcard "TSU", so it's not a valid location for the railcard.
• Therefore the journey can't be validated because it's partially outside of the railcard validity area.

The people that provide the data have been notified, so you can expect it to be fixed. As to why other systems might validate it, I don't know. They shouldn't, because it's clearly passing (and indeed stopping at) a restricted location for the railcard. However, National Rail correctly calculates the journey as not valid for the railcard, and offers the public fare.

 

[Adam Williams]

This does seem like a giant bodge that exists in the fares data solely because TSU isn't valid in Scotland. A blacklist approach for the Railcard geography records would've been a much more sensible provision to have specced up for cases like these.

I wonder how many other locations have been forgotten in the past leading to pax being overcharged.

 

[HST274]

Thanks all for the explanation. As to why the train stopped before Portway I think it was to do with the signal being a red aspect. There was no train ahead of us so I do not know why but I did wonder if it had something to do with the level crossing beyond the station.

 

[Haywain]

I wonder how many other locations have been forgotten in the past leading to pax being overcharged.

Given how few new stations open, I would suspect the number would be very low. It looks like it is probably just an oversight.

 

[Wallsendmag]

This does seem like a giant bodge that exists in the fares data solely because TSU isn't valid in Scotland. A blacklist approach for the Railcard geography records would've been a much more sensible provision to have specced up for cases like these.

I wonder how many other locations have been forgotten in the past leading to pax being overcharged.

TSU is valid in Scotland just not on ScotRail.

 

[yorkie]

TSU is valid in Scotland just not on ScotRail.

It's geographically restricted in the data; that's what the root cause of this issue is.

If it was just implemented as a TOC restriction, this issue would not have arisen.

 

[Wallsendmag]

It's geographically restricted in the data.

That’ll need to be fixed then

 

[penguin8967]

I had an issue very similar to this yesterday involving the new Reading Green Park station - 16-17 saver not available for the ticket (as shown below). Ticket office staff eventually managed to issue it after trying for 10 minutes.

 

[XAM2175]

This does seem like a giant bodge that exists in the fares data solely because TSU isn't valid in Scotland. A blacklist approach for the Railcard geography records would've been a much more sensible provision to have specced up for cases like these.

I wonder how many other locations have been forgotten in the past leading to pax being overcharged.

Yeah that's a particularly impressive bodge in a system that already boasts some real stunners.

 

[Adam Williams]

TSU is valid in Scotland just not on ScotRail.

Then it does beg the question as to why these records were inserted in the fares data in the first place. As @yorkie mentions, restriction code R5 which is associated with railcard TSU already has a NOT SCOTRAIL OR SERCO CALEDONIAN SLEEPER rule.

I'd guess it's used for one of these additional "Not Valid On" restrictions:

• On ScotRail services
• On Caledonian Sleeper services
• On Eurostar
• On First Class fares
• On Rail-Air Coach Link services
• On paper tickets valid for journeys wholly on London Underground and/or DLR services
• On day or Season London Travelcards for wholly within Zones 1-9
• On Oyster Pay as you go in London
• Tickets for special excursion or Charter trains
• Some Train Company specific promotional offers

 

[Wallsendmag]

Then it does beg the question as to why these records were inserted in the fares data in the first place. As @yorkie mentions, restriction code R5 which is associated with railcard TSU already has a NOT SCOTRAIL OR SERCO CALEDONIAN SLEEPER rule.

I'd guess it's used for one of these additional "Not Valid On" restrictions:

• On ScotRail services
• On Caledonian Sleeper services
• On Eurostar
• On First Class fares
• On Rail-Air Coach Link services
• On paper tickets valid for journeys wholly on London Underground and/or DLR services
• On day or Season London Travelcards for wholly within Zones 1-9
• On Oyster Pay as you go in London
• Tickets for special excursion or Charter trains
• Some Train Company specific promotional offers

We had all sorts of problems getting it to work on LNER services in Scotland when it was first introduced

 

[Alex365Dash]

Then it does beg the question as to why these records were inserted in the fares data in the first place.

Considering the RailAir restriction, TSU would technically (in addition to the CS/SR TOC restriction) be a geographically restricted card as it can’t go to Heathrow Bus!