The 'More Expensive Routes' Rule & TOC ONLY Restrictions

[Starmill]

In the absence of anything better to call it, can anyone link to the rule that states that you can travel by the route printed on your ticket and cheaper routes, without the need to pay an excess?

For example, Manchester Stations to Doncaster has route options 'Via Leeds' and 'Via Sheffield', with Via Leeds always costing more. It is legitimate, as I understand it, to purchase the 'Via Leeds' ticket and travel via Sheffield and not Via Leeds, because it costs more. Some might say this is in lieu of either a negative excess or a zero excess, but I think we can be fairly clear it is permitted, right?

So does this function in exactly the same way with a TOC Restricted ticket or not? For example take a case study in Stockport to Chester. Fares come in 3 routes, in descending price order they are Any Permitted, Via Altrincham and Virgin Trains Only.

Is it therefore legitimate to purchase the 'Via Altrincham' and travel only on Virgin Trains, which do not ever take the route via Altrincham, on the basis that the Virgin Trains Only route exists and is cheaper?

If that is allowed that has some very interesting implications for those who claim that it is not possible to excess a ticket for the purpose of removing the TOC restriction. If it is not allowed, we know that an excess to a TOC Only Fare is permitted, so could one be undertaken in this case?

The levels of complexity at work here are potentially mind-boggling.

 

[thebigcheese]

In the absence of anything better to call it, can anyone link to the rule that states that you can travel by the route printed on your ticket and cheaper routes, without the need to pay an excess?

Well to answer that question page 2 of the Routing Guide Instructions states
"Where there are other permitted routes, these may also be used for the same journey provided the same or a lower fare applies. "

As for the following questions...I think I'll leave that to more suitably qualified people to answer!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....Is it therefore legitimate to purchase the 'Via Altrincham' and travel only on Virgin Trains, which do not ever take the route via Altrincham, on the basis that the Virgin Trains Only route exists and is cheaper?....

I see no reason why not.

....If that is allowed that has some very interesting implications for those who claim that it is not possible to excess a ticket for the purpose of removing the TOC restriction. If it is not allowed, we know that an excess to a TOC Only Fare is permitted, so could one be undertaken in this case?....

What you have to realise is that 'Via Altrincham' is NOT a TOC restriction, it is a geographic restriction. There is no restriction on changing a geographic restriction, there is for a TOC restriction.

 

[Merseysider]

Well logically:

'You aren't travelling via Altrincham, you are in fact travelling via Crewe, so I'm going to charge you an excess to the cheapest available ticket appropriate for the journey.' *fiddles about with machine for 5 minutes* 'That would appear to be an excess to the 'Virgin Trains Only' fare.' *fiddles for another 5 minutes* 'I see that the VT fare is cheaper. Therefore there is nothing to pay. Crap, I was supposed to unlock the doors...'

 

[RailAleFan]

Well to answer that question page 2 of the Routing Guide Instructions states
"Where there are other permitted routes, these may also be used for the same journey provided the same or a lower fare applies. "

The same paragraph also states;

"Where the fare specifies a particular route, you may choose only those routes listed in the Guide which pass through the station shown in the route description."

Surely via and TOC specific fares are fundamental to revenue distribution...

 

[Starmill]

What you have to realise is that 'Via Altrincham' is NOT a TOC restriction, it is a geographic restriction. There is no restriction on changing a geographic restriction, there is for a TOC restriction.

Of course I realise that. But the point is you could use it as a Virign Trains Only ticket in one direction, and a Via Altrincham ticket in the other - something which wouldn't be allowed the other way around. And all this without any sort of revenue redistribution of any kind, which is often brought out as an argument as to why this kind of excess cannot happen.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Surely via and TOC specific fares are fundamental to revenue distribution...

It's completely valid to use a ticket on a TOC's train even if they get 0% of the revenue from your buying it - as Virgin would if you used a Via Altrincham ticket on their train.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Of course I realise that. But the point is you could use it as a Virign Trains Only ticket in one direction, and a Via Altrincham ticket in the other - something which wouldn't be allowed the other way around. And all this without any sort of revenue redistribution of any kind, which is often brought out as an argument as to why this kind of excess cannot happen....

I'd imagine no-one on this forum truly knows how much money Virgin would get on a 'Via Altrincham' fare (though we could probably make a fairly accurate guess), but, in any case, they are contracted by the NRCoC because it is valid on some of their services (Manchester to Stockport as a minimum), so even if we bring ORCATs into it the argument is not the same.

 

[maniacmartin]

I agree that it would be valid.

However, lets consider another flow that is more interesting.
Here is London Terminals to Barnetby, in descending order of price:
ANY PERMITTED > HULLTRNS & TPE > NOT VIA DONCASTER

If you hold the ANY PERMITTED, you can travel on any route valid for that ticket or cheaper tickets.

However, it is my view that if you held the HULLTRNS & TPE, you could not travel via Lincoln, which is the natural route for the NOT VIA DONCASTER ticket. This is because TOC-specific restrictions are mentioned in the NRCOC paragraph 10, but geographic route restrictions are covered by the completely seperate paragraph 13, so a TOC restriction is not a route restriction. They are only in the Route field on the ticket as it was the easiest way to implement it in the IT system of the day when privatisation happened.

 

[Starmill]

This is because TOC-specific restrictions are mentioned in the NRCOC paragraph 10, but geographic route restrictions are covered by the completely seperate paragraph 13, so a TOC restriction is not a route restriction. They are only in the Route field on the ticket as it was the easiest way to implement it in the IT system of the day when privatisation happened.

I'm confused. If this is the case, why does it matter if the TOC ONLY ticket is the cheaper or the more expensive ticket than the VIA LOCATION ticket?

If this is not why you say my Stockport to Sheffield example is valid buy the London to Barnetby one isn't - then why is that?

 

[Merseysider]

I agree that it would be valid.

However, lets consider another flow that is more interesting.
Here is London Terminals to Barnetby, in descending order of price:
ANY PERMITTED > HULLTRNS & TPE > NOT VIA DONCASTER

If you hold the ANY PERMITTED, you can travel on any route valid for that ticket or cheaper tickets.

However, it is my view that if you held the HULLTRNS & TPE, you could not travel via Lincoln, which is the natural route for the NOT VIA DONCASTER ticket. This is because TOC-specific restrictions are mentioned in the NRCOC paragraph 10, but geographic route restrictions are covered by the completely seperate paragraph 13, so a TOC restriction is not a route restriction. They are only in the Route field on the ticket as it was the easiest way to implement it in the IT system of the day when privatisation happened.

I agree.

With a geographically routed ticket, one must not obey its route restriction for the ticket to be converted to a valid one (ie excessed).

However, with a TOC Only ticket, if one travels on another TOC, it is 'as if no ticket is held' even if there is a lower priced appropriate geographical route.

Crazy

 

[LexyBoy]

On consideration I think it is valid, on the basis that the VT Only ticket is unrouted and cheaper than the Via Altrincham ticket. I feel a bit uneasy, although I can't really justify why. In any case a zero-fare excess would certainly validate it (and should be obtainable onboard without penalty).

This is because TOC-specific restrictions are mentioned in the NRCOC paragraph 10, but geographic route restrictions are covered by the completely seperate paragraph 13, so a TOC restriction is not a route restriction. They are only in the Route field on the ticket as it was the easiest way to implement it in the IT system of the day when privatisation happened.

Agreed. It would have been far preferable if TOC and geographic restrictions were treated identically, as one would expect them to be from occupying the same field.

I'm confused. If this is the case, why does it matter if the TOC ONLY ticket is the cheaper or the more expensive ticket than the VIA LOCATION ticket?

If this is not why you say my Stockport to Sheffield example is valid buy the London to Barnetby one isn't - then why is that?

You need to think of the restrictions as two seperate things. In your example you are comparing:

[B]SPT-CTR CDR £10.30		SPT-CTR CDR £12.00[/B]
[B]Route:[/B] (no restriction)		[B]Route:[/B] Via Altrincham
[B]TOC:[/B] VT Only			[B]TOC:[/B] (no restriction)

The ticket on the left can be used on any permitted route, but only on Virgin Trains, and this restriction cannot be altered. The ticket on the right is valid on any TOC, but only on routes which pass through Altrincham. However, the route can be altered and additionally the NRG automatically allows travel on other permitted routes where the ticket price is lower.

[B]KGX-BTB FOS £126.50		KGX-BTB FOS £142.00[/B]
[B]Route:[/B] Not Via Doncaster	[B]Route:[/B] (no restriction)
[B]TOC:[/B] (no restriction)		[B]TOC:[/B] Hull Trains & TPE

In manicmartin's example, you could use the left hand ticket to travel via Doncaster using HT and TPE only subject to a £15.50 excess (analogous to your example). You couldn't use the right hand ticket via Lincoln, since although it's unrouted and therefore the route is permitted, you cannot change the TOC restriction, and neither go to Lincoln. Unless there were diversions due to engineering of course (in which case you'd buy the cheaper ticket anyway).

 

[maniacmartin]

Sorry for not showing my working. LexyBoy's post explains my reasoning.