St Pancras to Stratford validity: can you remain on board and travel via the Kent coast?

[Silverdale]

I suppose the aim would be to have a confrontation with an on-train ticket inspection?

But if you follow The Trainline itinerary all the way and the ticket isn't checked (I don't know how likely this is) what will have been proved, one way or another?

Even if it is checked, that travel is allowed with the itinerary provided by The Trainline would not mean that the itinerary was definitively valid. SouthEastern could be exercising their discretion, or the on train inspector could simply be wrong in believing the itinerary was valid.

The trouble with the 'money where your mouth is' approach is that it adds nothing meaningful to the debate unless and until SouthEastern refuse to allow travel and take a prosecution all the way to trial. Would SouthEastern want to do that, as opposed to indulge the occasional oddball (no offence, FTLO) who wants to go the long way round to Stratford?

I would imagine SouthEastern would become energised to prosecute if the £6.40 fare was used to break journey at any point round the loop and undercut their normal fares from St Pancras. But that break would mean you would no longer be travelling to Stratford on a direct service.

Has anyone considered, in the first instance, writing to SouthEastern to ask whether they consider that the £6.40 ticket is valid for travel on their "direct" service via Ramsgate, as it is being offered with that itinerary on The Trainline site.

Interestingly, a search for a ticket on the SouthEastern site returns "no results", if 'Ramsgate' is included as a via point. If 'via Ramsgate' is ommitted, the £6.40 fare is returned with the 'non-stop' itinerary from St Pancras to Stratford. But, the listed calling points for that service include all stops from Stratford, round the coast and back to Stratford again. So they do implicitly accept the service as "direct" in that sense.

 

[Dai Corner]

It could be argued that someone with an extensive knowledge of the NRCoT, routeing guide, direct train rule etc and knowing full well that £6.40 is a ridiculously cheap fare for a three hour train ride is exploiting a situation (I won't say loophole).

On the other hand, a tourist on his first visit to the U.K. wishing to travel from Central London to his hotel in Stratford but also visit the Kent coast town where his great grandparents were born could be considered an 'innocent benificiary' after plugging his intended journey into a journey planner and accepting the fare and itinerary offered.

 

[Silverdale]

The difficulty for the tourist is that he cannot really visit his great grandparents birthplace. He can only try to view it as best he can, from the train window.

 

[Dai Corner]

The difficulty for the tourist is that he cannot really visit his great grandparents birthplace. He can only try to view it as best he can, from the train window.

He might be happy just doing that, or he might be able to get off, find his ancestors' house and get back on a later train without encountering a ticket check (I've no idea whether the relevant stations are manned/barriered)

 

[Silverdale]

"Exploiting" has two meanings.

It can mean; gaining full benefit from, or

it can mean; making use of in an underhand or unfair way.

 

[BluePenguin]

Why is Rochester to London OK via Margate and Dover Priory?

Because you can travel on a direct service

 

[Dai Corner]

"Exploiting" has two meanings.

It can mean; gaining full benefit from, or

it can mean; making use of in an underhand or unfair way.

It could be said that the first meaning applies to the tourist, but the second to the expert.

Morally, I'd agree. Legally, I'm still undecided.

 

[Silverdale]

He might be happy just doing that, or he might be able to get off, find his ancestors' house and get back on a later train without encountering a ticket check (I've no idea whether the relevant stations are manned/barriered)

He would also have to avoid any on-train checks which would detect that he had changed trains.

 

[yorkie]

Split-ticketing, some may say, is "exploiting a loophole", isn't it?

Please don't discuss that in this thread. I have created a thread to discuss that: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...is-mean-and-what-are-the-implications.170529/

If anyone wishes to go off on a tangent, please use an appropriate thread if there is one (and if th subject has not already been done to death) or create a new one if there isn't.

 

[Skymonster]

This ticket is, IMO, most likely to be used by rail enthusiasts who want a morning / afternoon out (to cover track / accumulate mileage / for spotting etc). Or maybe occasionally by a family wanting to take their kids for a ride out. I am a supporter of using rules to one's advantage, and this currently appears to be a potential opportunity for the few that are so motivated - as long as they can put up with the risk of being accused of overtravelling. However it arose - by programming error or oversight in setting the rules - I think by most measures it would be deemed unreasonable (although not unlawful) in terms of the fare paid, and thus if used / abused is likely to be closed off.

 

[Kite159]

This ticket is, IMO, most likely to be used by rail enthusiasts who want a morning / afternoon out (to cover track / accumulate mileage / for spotting etc). Or maybe occasionally by a family wanting to take their kids for a ride out. I am a supporter of using rules to one's advantage, and this currently appears to be a potential opportunity for the few that are so motivated - as long as they can put up with the risk of being accused of overtravelling. However it arose - by programming error or oversight in setting the rules - I think by most measures it would be deemed unreasonable (although not unlawful) in terms of the fare paid, and thus if used / abused is likely to be closed off.

There is a much safer ticket for rail enthusiasts wanting to do the Kent coast round trip, one which I believe the forum has done a few times, with doesn't have the issue of the guard saying you have overtravelled.

 

[yorkie]

But if you follow The Trainline itinerary all the way and the ticket isn't checked (I don't know how likely this is) what will have been proved, one way or another?

It is likely the ticket will be checked. As well as a driver, these trains also have an OBM (On Board Manager) whose role consists of patrolling the train providing passenger assistance including the checking of tickets. But I agree it does not prove anything either way.

Even if it is checked, that travel is allowed with the itinerary provided by The Trainline would not mean that the itinerary was definitively valid. SouthEastern could be exercising their discretion, or the on train inspector could simply be wrong in believing the itinerary was valid.

The trouble with the 'money where your mouth is' approach is that it adds nothing meaningful to the debate unless and until SouthEastern refuse to allow travel and take a prosecution all the way to trial. Would SouthEastern want to do that, as opposed to indulge the occasional oddball (no offence, FTLO) who wants to go the long way round to Stratford?

I doubt they would take action against the customer if someone had an itinerary and was following it.

I would imagine SouthEastern would become energised to prosecute if the £6.40 fare was used to break journey at any point round the loop and undercut their normal fares from St Pancras. But that break would mean you would no longer be travelling to Stratford on a direct service.

I agree this is likely

Has anyone considered, in the first instance, writing to SouthEastern to ask whether they consider that the £6.40 ticket is valid for travel on their "direct" service via Ramsgate, as it is being offered with that itinerary on The Trainline site.

They will say no they do not believe it to be valid.

Interestingly, a search for a ticket on the SouthEastern site returns "no results", if 'Ramsgate' is included as a via point. If 'via Ramsgate' is ommitted, the £6.40 fare is returned with the 'non-stop' itinerary from St Pancras to Stratford. But, the listed calling points for that service include all stops from Stratford, round the coast and back to Stratford again. So they do implicitly accept the service as "direct" in that sense.

On Track Retail is 50% owned by Govia, which itself is the company owning Southeastern (and one other train company, namely GTR) and 50% by Assertis, and given that Assertis people have been contributing to this thread, and are 'on the ball' with this sort of thing, I am not surprised their website isn't offering it.

 

[infobleep]

I am confident @Haywain wasn't suggesting otherwise!.

I'm not sure what that is meant to mean, but let's move on...

What I was trying to say was that if something is legal then surely it is legal even if it seems morally questionable.

As for season ticket, I hadn't realised at that point this was purely about the direct train rule and nothing else. I realised later in the thread.

If one held a season ticket between St Pancreas and Stratford and would that change anything with the direct train rule or would it still boil down to the same arguments as a point to point ticket?

 

[Silverdale]

They will say no they do not believe it to be valid.

I was not thinking of a letter which simply asked the bald question of validity of your OP example, but one which asked whether, e.g the 12:27 train from St Pancras to Stratford via Ramsgate, was a direct service. Asked whether Stratford to St Pancras via Ramsgate (which does not stop twice at the destination) is valid, and whether Ebbsfleet to Gravesend via Ramsgate (which also wins an itinerary on The Trainline - £4.00) is valid (it doesn't stop anywhere twice).

Of course they can say they believe that none of the itineraries are valid for the quoted fare and that the train is not a direct one because <insert BS reason>. But having the response from the TOC inches us forwards in answering your original question, which was not about nailing a TOC to the wall, but about whether the routing rules are fit for purpose.