I would argue that the easement is not applicable. The routeing of this ticket is +Taunton, not Taunton. It is probably intended to apply, but with a literal interpretation of the rules this is not so.
That is not correct.
✠ never forms part of a route.
The route is 'VIA TAUNTON'
✠ is the cross-London marker, which indicates that the ticket is valid to make a cross-London transfer by DLR, Tube or FCC:
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46587.aspx#travelling_connect
If there is no ✠ marker, then the ticket almost certainly will not work the tube barriers, but that doesn't determine its validity, merely the practicalities of the matter.
The ✠ marker can be very confusing.
For example, a Brighton - Portsmouth Stations SVR, is priced £24, and routed 'ANY PERMITTED'. This ticket has no ✠ marker. A Brighton - Southampton Central SVR priced at £58 is also routed 'ANY PERMITTED' but it does have a ✠ marker.
The price difference reflects the fact that a permitted route for BTN - SOU is LONDON, but that BTN - Portsmouth Stations lacks that route.
It is however the 'Any Permitted' route, and the routeing guide, that determines this, and not the ✠ marker.
✠ does not change the routeing. There are some tickets routed '✠Any Permitted' where there are no permitted routes via London. This is not altered by the ✠, although in practice it is almost certain to be accepted as valid via London, particularly if priced accordingly. The correct routeing for such a ticket (where London is not a permitted route, but the TOC wants to offer a (possibly high-priced) via London fare), is '✠VIA LONDON', noting that if there is an 'Any Permitted' ticket on sale at a lower price, the Via London ticket would be valid by those routes also.
When performing a fares check, for example, '✠Any Pemitted' is the same as 'Any Permitted' - the routes are the same, so the fares are comparable.
