Starting Short - Advanced (Northern)

[Starmill]

I think it would be clearer to explain that your view is that at no time have you contravened any "Railway Regulations", as it has been put there. However, you have followed more recent advice to use tickets from Anytime Day Return Micklefield to York rather than Advance tickets from Leeds to York.

You could state that you deny any allegation that you have committed an offence, if you feel comfortable with that.

is not applicable to travelling on the wrong train, which is simple travel without a valid ticket.

I disagree. If you're travelling at the wrong time of day, but not on the wrong route or date, 9.5 applies, meaning that only the difference is to be charged.

The drafting of these paragraphs is exceptionally poor I accept, but that is what I take from it:

9.5 Where you:
9.5.1 are using a time-restricted Ticket (such as an “off-peak” or “super-off-peak”
Ticket) that is correctly dated but invalid for the service on which you are
travelling; or
9.5.2 are using a route for which your Ticket is not valid; or
9.5.3 break your journey when you are not permitted to do so;
you will be charged the difference between the fare that you have paid and
the lowest price Ticket that is valid for the train you are using.

 

[jamiearmley]

I think it would be clearer to explain that your view is that at no time have you contravened any "Railway Regulations", as it has been put there. However, you have followed more recent advice to use tickets from Anytime Day Return Micklefield to York rather than Advance tickets from Leeds to York.

You could state that you deny any allegation that you have committed an offence, if you feel comfortable with that.


I disagree. If you're travelling at the wrong time of day, but not on the wrong route or date, 9.5 applies, meaning that only the difference is to be charged.

The drafting of these paragraphs is exceptionally poor I accept, but that is what I take from it:

Whilst i completely agree with your interpretation, there are other references to "service specific tickets " - as distinct from "time restricted " .. and also references to the "special conditions for advance tickets" in the NrCOT. I think that they have tried to make a distinction, and i think that they are trying to show that different conditions apply to advances , however, the whole thing smacks of something written by someone in a rush to finish their work day and go home. Its not clear, and the many contradictory statements which should be clearer as to their meaning and intent should really be resulting in outcomes in favour of the consumer due to their incomprehensible nature, IMHO.

 

[Starmill]

Whilst i completely agree with your interpretation, there are other references to "service specific tickets " - as distinct from "time restricted " .. and also references to the "special conditions for advance tickets" in the NrCOT. I think that they have tried to make a distinction, and i think that they are trying to show that different conditions apply to advances , however, the whole thing smacks of something written by someone in a rush to finish their work day and go home. Its not clear, and the many contradictory statements which should be clearer as to their meaning and intent should really be resulting in outcomes in favour of the consumer due to their incomprehensible nature, IMHO.

I agree.

If the industry would like to change the rules in a way which is detrimental to the consumer, they may do so, providing they comprehensively reword the whole thing to very clearly codify it, and communicate the meaning of the changes. That's only fair, because then everyone knows what the situation is.

 

[spag23]

It would not be appropriate to use that sort of terminology. Better to simply say something about being confused by contradictory advice from different staff.

If the TOC is reticent about the TOC being offended by the facts, perhaps phrase it as a question: "Can the TOC confirm that its first inspector gave me incorrect advice?" This neatly puts the ball back into their court.

 

[Haywain]

If the TOC is reticent about the TOC being offended by the facts,

It's not about anyone being offended, it's about using language that is polite and constructive. Something tending towards abuse is likely to be ignored, at best.

 

[Wolfie]

Yes, Advance single


I’ve attached the ticket, a single from Micklefield is 10.60. From Leeds it was £6.

I’m not too fussed about the fine, a had the wrong ticket, I get this outcome, but the fact a guard told me to do this - not that I can prove this.


I’d just pay and get it done with to be honest.

I would remove that ticket as it identifies you and TOCs do read this site.

 

[Metal_gee_man]

Did I miss you on my first check?
Yeah I was in the toilet, would have been my first answer!

 

[skyhigh]

Did I miss you on my first check?
Yeah I was in the toilet, would have been my first answer!

Which I'm sure would have gone down well if the inspector had observed the single toilet on the unit was unoccupied on the way down...