The "morality" of not sharing loophole tickets publicly

_toommm_

Established Member
Joined
8 Jul 2017
Messages
5,117
Location
Yorkshire
Please can someone explain what a loophole is without giving any locations away? Is it like a fare that’s been accidentally priced for say £5 when it should be more like £30? Or are they less extreme than that?

One example that is now fixed is Denby Dale to Sheffield. An Anytime Day Single is £5.80, Anytime Day Return £8.50. Ticket machines and online journey planners used to allow you to use it via Manchester or Leeds on the last journey of the day on Sunday (without setting a via point), or all the time when you set a via point. I commuted on those tickets from Manchester to Sheffield for months, and only got questioned by a very overzealous TPE guard once (who I’ve had run-ins with since). He took my details but nothing came of it! It eventually got patched, but with a railcard being able to commute from Manchester to Sheffield for £5.60 isn’t to be sniffed at!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
An example that applies to airlines is Inverness to USA can be cheaper than London to USA, especially in Business Class; I was told you can even save money by factoring in the cost of the Highland Chieftain and a hotel. I don't know if this is still the case.

The anomalies available on air travel are far, far greater in scope than exist on the National Rail system in Great Britain.

I have been reliably informed that some loopholes get posted to websites such as Flyer Talk but then get removed once the airlines find out about them, but other loopholes cannot be withdrawn as they are inherently part of the fares structure.

Some people seem to have a moral outrage at anomalous train fares but don't blink an eyelid at even greater anomalies with air travel. However I've not yet seen any proposals to harmonise the fares, nor to remove those anomalies. I wonder why...

Anyway I welcome any proposals for a new fares structure but if anyone wishes to make a proposal it would need to be properly thought out otherwise it's merely an aspiration without a plan; a mere idea that hasn't been fleshed out. And that's fine, of course people can have such ideas! But they can't expect a mere idea to be taken as a serious proposal if there's no flesh and bones on it.
 

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
As I've said before, there is no closed group and anyone can join a fares workshop or other event.

Also, if it was such a closed group, why do we run events like fares workshop where anyone can sign up and be given the information to find these fares?

You really are defensive about this, aren't you?

I'm not criticising the group, or it's members or your activities. I'm just pointing out that at the end of the day, the pressure on you not to disclose anything you find leads to two sets of fares.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
You really are defensive about this, aren't you?

I'm not criticising the group, or it's members or your activities. I'm just pointing out that at the end of the day, the pressure on you not to disclose anything you find leads to two sets of fares.
There are not two sets of fares.

All the fares are publicly visible at www.brfares.com.

Further information, such as routeing information, is all in the relevant sources, which are all publicly available.

Are you interested in learning more about fares?
 

miklcct

On Moderation
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
2,170
Location
Cricklewood
An example that applies to airlines is Inverness to USA can be cheaper than London to USA, especially in Business Class; I was told you can even save money by factoring in the cost of the Highland Chieftain and a hotel. I don't know if this is still the case.

The anomalies available on air travel are far, far greater in scope than exist on the National Rail system in Great Britain. I've not yet seen any proposals to harmonise the fares, nor to remove those anomalies. I wonder why...
Low cost carriers don't have such anomalies though as they only price air travel as singles per segment. They have the simplest fare structure in the airline industry basically by pricing every component separately.
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
6,814
Location
UK
But it does mean there's one set of fares for those party to the agreement not to disclose them, another set of fares for those outside the circle.
And? Is that such a problem? It's frequently the case that you can get goods or services cheaper by investing time in looking into it. I don't think it is in any way problematic that this is the case.
 

Hadders

Established Member
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
9,839
You really are defensive about this, aren't you?

I'm not criticising the group, or it's members or your activities. I'm just pointing out that at the end of the day, the pressure on you not to disclose anything you find leads to two sets of fares.
You're really over thinking this.

There is no inner circle, or secret group. Forum events are open to all, and we are happy to discuss hints and tips with anyone attending an event.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
Low cost carriers don't have such anomalies though as they only price air travel as singles per segment. They have the simplest fare structure in the airline industry basically by pricing every component separately.

True, if you define an anomaly in that way, it is limited to the 'full' fare carriers.

But air fares are much more secret than rail fares are, and even with low cost carriers, it can be much cheaper to go much further; far more so than is the case for any comparison of rail fares. I'd argue that the term anomaly is subjective.

The point is, some people want truly "fair" , predictable and transparent pricing. Some people only want that for rail, and not other modes. But no-one has yet put together a truly workable solution that ticks all boxes.
And? Is that such a problem? It's frequently the case that you can get goods or services cheaper by investing time in looking into it. I don't think it is in any way problematic that this is the case.
Indeed.

An example of an anomaly that exists in York by bus is that a P&R ticket costs less than the cost from the next stop on the line. But, unlike railways, you can't get away with starting short. But the unfairness, and the anomaly, exists. The fares exist in this way to subsidise car drivers and yet there isn't a campaign to standardise bus fares to make them fairer and no endless steam of proposals to harmonise/modernise/restructure bus fares.

I don't get why some people are so concerned about anomalous rail fares but not when it comes to other modes of transport!
 

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
And? Is that such a problem? It's frequently the case that you can get goods or services cheaper by investing time in looking into it. I don't think it is in any way problematic that this is the case.

I see you are giving the "shopping around" argument another run round the track. No. Of course there is nothing wrong with diligently doing your research, finding the best deal, and a better deal than others have found, when you have access to all the information.

But in relation to loophole fares, you don't necessarily have all the information others have, because they aren't allowed to make it public (under threat of the loophole being removed)

There is no inner circle, or secret group. Forum events are open to all, and we are happy to discuss hints and tips with anyone attending an event.
But you have to attend the event. You won't post such hints and tips on a public forum, so that anyone and everyone can see the same thing you can see.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
15,943
Location
No longer here
But you have to attend the event. You won't post such hints and tips on a public forum, so that anyone and everyone can see the same thing you can see.
Well yeah, that’s how keeping secrets works. I don’t see the issue.

I regularly save thousands on air fares by seeking out cheap city pairs, so?
 

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
Also, if it was such a closed group, why do we run events like fares workshop where anyone can sign up and be given the information to find these fares?

If it's not a closed group, why will you not post the same information discussed in the group, here, on a public forum?

[Don't worry, I understand why you can't/won't do that - But the fact you can't/won't defacto makes the group secretive and closed to the general public, however welcoming you may be to any individuals]
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,060
Location
Crayford
But in relation to loophole fares, you don't necessarily have all the information others have, because they aren't allowed to make it public (under threat of the loophole being removed)
No, you do have all the information, you just need to find it yourself.
But you have to attend the event. You won't post such hints and tips on a public forum, so that anyone and everyone can see the same thing you can see.
This is getting silly now.

Scenario A: A good value loophole is published so everyone can see it and make use of it. Two days later it is removed so no-one can make use of it.
Scenario B: The loophole is made available to people who put in a bit of effort, either themself or by attending an event. It stays and people make repeated use of it over a lengthy time.

Which do you think is the better scenario?
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
15,943
Location
No longer here
I believe a pricing manager can write a computer program which automatically list out anomalies and close them accordingly, just like we writing a computer program to list out anomalies and take advantage of them.
Pricing managers generally aren’t computer programmers. In fact very few people have proficiency in computer programming.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
If it's not a closed group, why will you not post the same information discussed in the group, here, on a public forum?
The information is available:


[Don't worry, I understand why you can't/won't do that - But the fact you can't/won't defacto makes the group secretive and closed to the general public, however welcoming you may be to any individuals]
I've just done it; all the information you need to find good value fares is literally there.

Now, you can't deny the information is available; if you want help understanding it, that's where a fares workshop (or fares data workshop) comes in handy.

Of course, while the information is all open and transparent, the average person does not need to know any of that, and can simply type in their origin, destination, travel times, via points and buy the tickets online.

But if anyone wants to know, it's all there.
 

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
Which do you think is the better scenario?
In the case of an individual fare, it would depend.

Should the cheaper fare exist? I can see that there may be historical precedents etc, which suggest Liverpool to London SHOULD be valid via Manchester.

On the other hand I could see that an oddity in the routing guide which allowed Scarborough to Hull to be valid via Bristol and Southampton, really had NO justification and it would be best to patch the routeing guide to DISALLOW that routeing. (while trying not to create further anomalies via the patch)
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
I see you are giving the "shopping around" argument another run round the track. No. Of course there is nothing wrong with diligently doing your research, finding the best deal, and a better deal than others have found, when you have access to all the information.

But in relation to loophole fares, you don't necessarily have all the information others have, because they aren't allowed to make it public (under threat of the loophole being removed)
The information regarding the validity of tickets is all publicly available.

What you seem to be talking about is that you do not have the knowledge to fully understand the system; this is much like I have no knowledge of how air fares work (other than that I know how to book from A to B and that prices can go up and down and be almost any value) compared to @AlterEgo, who does.

If I wanted to learn how air fares work and there was a free workshop available to understand more, I'd consider attending that. But that doesn't change the fact the information is available to anyone.
In the case of an individual fare, it would depend.

Should the cheaper fare exist?
Why not?
I can see that there may be historical precedents etc, which suggest Liverpool to London SHOULD be valid via Manchester.
Indeed.
On the other hand I could see that an oddity in the routing guide which allowed Scarborough to Hull to be valid via Bristol and Southampton, really had NO justification and it would be best to patch the routeing guide to DISALLOW that routeing. (while trying not to create further anomalies via the patch)
Indeed. If such a fare was valid that way anyone could find that out. Anyone could announce it on this forum. If they did, it would be picked up by RDG and/or TOC staff and amended almost immediately.

A good example was Newcastle to Carlisle was valid via Manchester for many years. Anyone could see this! But it didn't get publicly announced. When someone got 'caught', it changed. But it was only changed in one direction, so the anomaly persisted for a while. Then Marton to Wigton remained valid, even though Newcastle to Carlisle wasn't. It was obscure enough to avoid being deleted for several more years before it was eventually found out by pricing managers.

As The Cat from Red Dwarf once said; "I know this game. It's called cat and mouse. And there's only one way to win: don't the the mouse..."

There was nothing secret about those anomalies and there was nothing stopping you looking at the routeing guide at the time. Anyone could have done it!
 
Last edited:

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
6,814
Location
UK
I see you are giving the "shopping around" argument another run round the track. No. Of course there is nothing wrong with diligently doing your research, finding the best deal, and a better deal than others have found, when you have access to all the information.

But in relation to loophole fares, you don't necessarily have all the information others have, because they aren't allowed to make it public (under threat of the loophole being removed)
All of the information needed to find the anomalies is in the public domain. Some of it is in fact very easy to find (e.g. using BR Fares).

People can't expect to have anomalies handed to them on a silver platter though. They simply wouldn't survive if they that happened.

A degree of effort has to be required to keep the anomalies from being fixed. Clearly Pricing Managers read these forums and fix any loopholes that are posted, but don't go to the effort of actively looking for them. So that, relatively low, barrier to entry is a necessary evil.

Whilst some of the anomalies are clearly ludicrous (e.g. the Trainline 'via point' bug), others are simply the result of e.g. being reasonably priced CDRs that haven't been abolished. Or tickets which have long been valid on one particular route, but because they're priced by a different operator, have fewer time restrictions or haven't been increased as much over time. Clearly there would be efforts made to add restrictions or abolish fares where this was the case but 'legitimate' passengers could well be inconvenienced in the process. Is that really what you want?
 

FenMan

Member
Joined
13 Oct 2011
Messages
1,162
If it's not a closed group, why will you not post the same information discussed in the group, here, on a public forum?

[Don't worry, I understand why you can't/won't do that - But the fact you can't/won't defacto makes the group secretive and closed to the general public, however welcoming you may be to any individuals]

Because that would be, as you've already said, a daft thing to do.

To give a small example, I support a beer festival at a venue that's 20 miles away as the crow flies. Due to various stations being placed in fares "baskets" and the way the railway works, the ticket from my home station to the venue is nearly £4 more expensive than buying another ticket and starting "short".

Likewise, a friend of mine commuted (pre-COVID, he works from home now) to a major local centre. He was moaning about the season ticket cost. I pointed him to a valid ticket that saved him nearly £300 a year. I got some beers as a reward! :D

No Fares Workshops were involved with either of the above (although I have been to one and enjoyed it), just me doing a little research.
 

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
But if anyone wants to know, it's all there.

Yes. Anyone can access the base data and analyse it. Or they can short circuit that process by attending one of your workshops. But in either case, they're not free to disclose any "bargain fares" they have found or learned about. They must be kept secret.
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
6,814
Location
UK
Yes. Anyone can access the base data and analyse it. Or they can short circuit that process by attending one of your workshops. But in either case, they're not free to disclose any "bargain fares" they have found or learned about. They must be kept secret.
Nobody is forcing them to keep the fares "secret". But if they choose to attract attention to them, particularly here where Pricing Managers read, then they are shooting themselves and anyone else who relies on them in the foot.

What possible benefit is there to doing this? I'm afraid I simply don't understand your position. You don't like that things are "secret", but effectively that's the way they have to be if there are to be any anomalies at all.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
Yes. Anyone can access the base data and analyse it.
Exactly.
Or they can short circuit that process by attending one of your workshops.
I just offer people help in understanding the materials, which are all available to anyone.

Would you rather I didn't do this; do you want me to stop offering to help people with the publicly available materials?
But in either case, they're not free to disclose any "bargain fares" they have found or learned about. They must be kept secret.
Who is stopping people doing this?

At the end of the day, if someone wants to publicly divulge a loophole (by the way, I have published a current one in this very thread!) no-one is going to prevent them doing so; if RDG and/or the TOCs can close the loophole (sometimes they can, sometimes they can't), they will do so.

Here is a good example of exactly this happening:

Can someone please advise whether Mirfield to Leeds via Sowerby Bridge is a permitted route? The journey planners say yes, but i am left wondering whether there is a doubling back element in the Sowerby Bridge area so wanted to check.
@TUC was researching season ticket options for his new commute; he found a loophole and enquired about it. However before he could make the purchase, the loophole was rapidly 'fixed' and no longer available, by the publication of a 'negative easement':
700575: Journeys between Huddersfield; Deighton and Mirfield to Leeds and beyond may not travel via Sowerby Bridge. Journeys may however travel via Halifax. This negative easement applies in both directions

However @strowger managed to buy an annual season just before it was fixed.

I remember meeting both members since then (they may have both been to the The Stubbing Wharf pub in Hebden Bridge at the same time actually) and I recall @strowger was so happy with his purchase he bought my meal (if @strowger is reading this, if you are able to join us again some time, I'll ensure your next meal is paid for!)

No-one prevented @TUC disclosing the loophole but it was fixed so quickly; to the best of my knowledge only one person was able to take advantage before it was closed. Of course it's possible others may have done so and kept quiet.

RDG even took on board the suggestion, posted on the forum, to change the semicolon to a comma.
:lol:


I am also reminded of the time when a young @All Line Rover was new to the forum and disclosed a loophole and said something along the lines that the route was convoluted and was clearly a mistake; when the route was abolished he put in a request to RDG asking why it was removed, and had his own post quoted back at him. I can't find the thread now; @All Line Rover if you are reading this, could you provide a link or can you recall the details?
 
Last edited:

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
Whilst some of the anomalies are clearly ludicrous (e.g. the Trainline 'via point' bug), others are simply the result of e.g. being reasonably priced CDRs that haven't been abolished. Or tickets which have long been valid on one particular route, but because they're priced by a different operator, have fewer time restrictions or haven't been increased as much over time. Clearly there would be efforts made to add restrictions or abolish fares where this was the case but 'legitimate' passengers could well be inconvenienced in the process. Is that really what you want?
If a 'legitimate' passenger is someone who wants to travel from A to B via the most convenient, frequent or fastest route, I think a lot of 'legitimate' passengers are inconvenienced already.

I have to say though, I have found anomalies in the routeing guide which are of the scale of the 'via point' bug, though each limited to just one or two flows, where it's clearly the case the wrong map combination has been entered into the permitted routes record for a particular pair of routeing points. I struggle with the justification that this should be kept a closely guarded secret, lest the nasty pricing managers take it away (by applying the clearly intended map combo to the data) In my book, it's an error and it ought to be fixed. There are other errors which are just as obvious, but which prevent 'legitimate' routes being used. e.g. Birmingham Group to Warrington Group only contains the map combo BM+NR, which means mapped routes only via Manchester to Warrington Central. Birmingham New Street to Frodsham should be a simple change at Bank Quay from the Avanti service, but because map combo BM has been omitted, journey planners will send you on a trek via Shrewsbury and Chester. But perhaps that anomaly is benefiting someone who really wants to take that longer route, so we can't mention it for the benefit of 'legitimate' passengers wanting to travel from Birmingham to Frodsham, lest it be taken away -oops, seems I already have.

Who is stopping people doing this?
It's the implied threat that publication will lead to the loophole being closed.

And you have admitted this much, yourself, that you will not make loopholes public, lest this happens.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
59,527
Location
Yorkshire
If a 'legitimate' passenger is someone who wants to travel from A to B via the most convenient, frequent or fastest route, I think a lot of 'legitimate' passengers are inconvenienced already.
Anyone who wants to this can simply go to a website that will always show the fastest journeys, and put in their origin & destination and the fastest route will always be offered.

If your complaint is that TOCs do not always show the fastest route, that is a legitimate complaint and is an entirely artificial situation which the TOCs could change in an instant. But that's a whole new topic, surely?
I have to say though, I have found anomalies in the routeing guide which are of the scale of the 'via point' bug, though each limited to just one or two flows, where it's clearly the case the wrong map combination has been entered into the permitted routes record for a particular pair of routeing points. I struggle with the justification that this should be kept a closely guarded secret, lest the nasty pricing managers take it away (by applying the clearly intended map combo to the data) In my book, it's an error and it ought to be fixed.
Ah, I think I understand now; your aim is to remove good value fares from use, and you are frustrated that you are struggling to find some of them, to submit them for amending, and you are dissatisfied that people who don't want routes to be abolished are not helping you to disclose them?

If I've misunderstood, I apologise; please do correct me if so.

There are other errors which are just as obvious, but which prevent 'legitimate' routes being used. e.g. Birmingham Group to Warrington Group only contains the map combo BM+NR, which means mapped routes only via Manchester to Warrington Central. Birmingham New Street to Frodsham should be a simple change at Bank Quay from the Avanti service, but because map combo BM has been omitted, journey planners will send you on a trek via Shrewsbury and Chester.
In this case why not create a thread, with suitable title, describing the issue? It may then get fixed.

I see Trainsplit will offer itineraries via WBQ only with a combination of tickets, but looking at the high price of the through fare, it ought to be valid that way.

But perhaps that anomaly is benefiting someone who really wants to take that longer route, so we can't mention it for the benefit of 'legitimate' passengers wanting to travel from Birmingham to Frodsham, lest it be taken away -oops, seems I already have.
That makes no sense and is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how this works; the fares to Shrewsbury and Chester are lower (than to Frodsham/WBQ) and so there is no 'anomaly' by allowing those routes.

The lack of a route via Warrington Bank Quay does not in any way somehow enable a route via Chester.

The availability of different routes is not mutually exclusive.

Adding validity via WBQ would not in any way invalidate validity via Chester.

I trust this clarifies the situation, now that the misunderstandings have hopefully been cleared up?
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
7,917
Location
Rail replacement bus cab
Those "in the know" who currently get to exploit the anomalies would be "levelled-up" to pay the same as everyone else from A to B. Whether that levelling up would increase revenue enough to allow an overall reduction in fares to create winners is difficult to gauge. I suspect the exploitation of loopholes makes up such a small percentage of potential lost revenue, that you may be right and there'd be no winners.

Passengers who want to save will always find ways to save. Trust me on that one, if a TOC closes one loophole we just move onto the next one.

As for elsewhere on the network there’s always some fare that gives more for less.
 
Last edited:

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
In this case why not create a thread, with suitable title, describing the issue? It may then get fixed.

I see Trainsplit will offer itineraries via WBQ only with a combination of tickets, but looking at the high price of the through fare, it ought to be valid that way.

I agree, it ought to be valid that way, but because map combo BM does not appear in the routing guide for Birmingham Group to Warrington Group, it's not a permitted route, it's not a direct train and it's not the shortest route either (that's via Runcorn)

That makes no sense and is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how this works; the fares to Shrewsbury and Chester are lower (than to Frodsham/WBQ) and so there is no 'anomaly' by allowing those routes.

The lack of a route via Warrington Bank Quay does not in any way somehow enable a route via Chester.

The availability of different routes is not mutually exclusive.

Adding validity via WBQ would not in any way invalidate validity via Chester.

I trust this clarifies the situation, now that the misunderstandings have hopefully been cleared up?
I understand all of that. I was merely pointing out that because of a clear and obvious error in the routeing guide data, journey planners are not offering the most convenient and obvious route. But because we're told to be scared of the pricing managers fixing things, if that route is added to the routeing guide another may be taken away.

In fact I have written to RDG on the subject, pointing out that that as map BM is present in the data for Smethwick to Warrington, Walsall to Warrington and Tyseley to Warrington, it's not being present in Birmingham to Warrington looks like an unintended omission. I also mention how journey planners behave because of that omission. I have not had a response let alone an admission that the error exists or any suggestion of a desire to fix it.
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
6,814
Location
UK
If a 'legitimate' passenger is someone who wants to travel from A to B via the most convenient, frequent or fastest route, I think a lot of 'legitimate' passengers are inconvenienced already.
Unfortunately that's very much the the case. Everything that is wrong with the Routeing Guide is encapsulated by the ludicrous claim it makes, that: "most customers wish to make journeys ... by the shortest route". No they don't - they want to travel via the fastest route! Or, if it isn't significantly slower, the route requiring the fewest changes. But of course if it admitted that, it would always have to permit travel via the fastest route. Which would open up even more anomalies.

That being said, there are some anomlies which would lead to notable fare increases for 'legitimate' passengers if they were publicised. Perhaps the withdrawal of a reasonably priced CDR for instance, or the addition of a route restriction which didn't previously exist. Are you so blinded by your hatred of keeping anything a secret that you want to disadvantage all these people?

I have to say though, I have found anomalies in the routeing guide which are of the scale of the 'via point' bug, though each limited to just one or two flows, where it's clearly the case the wrong map combination has been entered into the permitted routes record for a particular pair of routeing points. I struggle with the justification that this should be kept a closely guarded secret, lest the nasty pricing managers take it away (by applying the clearly intended map combo to the data) In my book, it's an error and it ought to be fixed.
You would rather that those relying on such errors (much of which may well be marginal revenue) are forced to pay more? Who really wins through having such errors (if they even are) resolved?

There are other errors which are just as obvious, but which prevent 'legitimate' routes being used. e.g. Birmingham Group to Warrington Group only contains the map combo BM+NR, which means mapped routes only via Manchester to Warrington Central. Birmingham New Street to Frodsham should be a simple change at Bank Quay from the Avanti service, but because map combo BM has been omitted, journey planners will send you on a trek via Shrewsbury and Chester. But perhaps that anomaly is benefiting someone who really wants to take that longer route, so we can't mention it for the benefit of 'legitimate' passengers wanting to travel from Birmingham to Frodsham, lest it be taken away -oops, seems I already have.
Now you are just playing devil's advocate. You know perfectly well it's not an anomaly. It's simply another example of the system being too inflexible and not permitting fastest (or most convenient) routes. Which is an issue, but really one quite apart from that of anomalies.

Funny how they are red hot on closing down anomalies but not on fixing long-standing issues like this, though...

It's the implied threat that publication will lead to the loophole being closed.

And you have admitted this much, yourself, that you will not make loopholes public, lest this happens.
It sounds to me like your complaint is basically that other people are warning you that talking about loopholes on here may get them closed? In which case - go right ahead. No-one is stopping you. But you cannot force others to talk about loopholes in public.
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
7,917
Location
Rail replacement bus cab
Could it be that the industry has ‘bigger fish to fry’ than, let’s face it a few enthusiasts trying for cheap travel?

Closing down loopholes is an easy win. You’d be surprised at the amount of resource can be taken up by staff dealing with fares they are not familiar with - patching these is akin to making a stitch to save nine.

It isn’t just enthusiasts who do it either - I have passengers buying tickets which my eye can immediately spot don’t look right price wise. I applaud them and advise them not to draw any attention to what they’re doing unless they want to pay a lot more in future!

Also read the case of Andrew Myers - a season ticket loophole that made the national press, generating a lot of refunds and changeover requests. The case prompted the end of the National Routeing Guide as we knew it. It went from being infrequently updated with the odd anomaly patched to being actively amended to remove permitted “circuitous” routes, which is still happening 9 years on!
 

Jason12

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2022
Messages
130
Location
W.Yorks
Funny how they are red hot on closing down anomalies but not on fixing long-standing issues like this, though...

This is the problem with trying to do things openly. Two clear errors in permitted map combos. One allows a ridiculous serpentine routing across many miles of the midlands and north west england, the other prevents a 'legitimate' route being followed by journey planners. I've raised the one to the passenger's disadvantage with RDG and they don't care a fig about it.

I'm clear in my own mind they are both clear "errors" which in an ideal world BOTH need to be fixed. I'd be sorry for those taking advantage of the ridiculous circuitous routeing for a farthing losing that gig, but there we are. Errors are errors.
 

Cdd89

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
1,180
I regularly save thousands on air fares by seeking out cheap city pairs, so?
I suppose one reason is that airline fares are ephemeral, whereas rail fares are permanent (until actively changed). This means there’s less risk to sharing exceptionally low air fares. There’s also less learning and expertise involved with air fares as it’s mostly just a brute force search; there’s not really much “trying to find valid but unintended uses for existing tickets”.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
15,943
Location
No longer here
I suppose one reason is that airline fares are ephemeral, whereas rail fares are permanent (until actively changed). This means there’s less risk to sharing exceptionally low air fares.
Mistake fares can have very serious consequences, including the tickets being cancelled and your entire plans being laid waste.
 

Top