But those who are disagreeing with me might actually be accepting that retailers have not got these itineraries correct, but once they have offered the itineraries to the customer, the customer is then entitled to remain on board after calling at their destination on the basis that their itinerary says so?
My assumption has been that there is no explicit "first arrival" rule which invalidates these itineraries. So, a relevant question is one that I asked earlier: Is it the case that the "first arrival" rule
already applies and that the retailers have
not got these itineraries correct?
yorkie, I am not disagreeing with you that the retailers' itineraries are perverse. If the St Pancras-Stratford single is valid via Ramsgate and with short start/BoJ allowed, it clearly undercuts both the St Pancras-Ramsgate single and the Stratford-Ramsgate return, which makes a mockery of the fares structure on the Kent Coast. What I would query is whether a "first arrival" rule is the right patch to put over the hole. Rather, I would question the assumptions built into the algorithm which otherwise makes St Pancras to Stratford valid via Ramsgate, in the first place. It would appear to be a clear case of "rubbish in, rubbish out".
I see problems with the "first arrival" rule which makes me think it's not a good patch.
Firstly, it doesn't completely fix the fares structure problem, as it would only apply where A to B was valid via C,
and the train stopped at B. Travel by trains which did not stop at B would still undercut the A-C single fare.
Secondly, it could quite unintentionally remove some of the routing flexibility that "any permitted" currently and quite legitimately enjoys.
I reject the bald statement that by purchasing a ticket, all you do is enter into a contract to be taken from A to B and that by arriving at B by whatever means, the contract is fulfilled. In some cases it may be, but you have to consider
all the terms and conditions associated with the purchase. Often the validity offered with the ticket includes being able to have a choice of itinerary to travel via C or D and to break your journey at any point. My point being that the choice of travelling via C or D is not merely incidental, but integral to the value of the ticket.
For instance, Chesterfield to Long Eaton "any permitted" has historically, and currently still is, valid via either Derby or Nottingham. My ability to use the "any permitted" ticket to travel from Chesterfield, first to Nottingham, then to Long Eaton, in that order, which is the journey I want to make, is a crucial part of the contract.
So what happens if the "first arrival" rule is introduced (or, if it self-evidently already exists, is enforced)? I turn up one day at Chesterfield station, with the return portion of my Long Eaton-Chesterfield, "any permitted" ticket, to find that a freight train has derailed on the Erewash and direct trains to Nottingham are not running. The advice is that passengers for Nottingham should change at Derby. That is all fine until the Derby-Nottingham train stops at Long Eaton and the validity of my "any permitted" ticket evaporates. The TOC of the train on which I'm travelling can now require me to pay for a Long Eaton-Nottingham return to complete the itinerary for which the ticket was originally and legitimately purchased.