Ticket acceptance during disruption

[trainophile]

Is "safety" an arbitrary thing? Back in the fairly recent days of 2-coach TfW 150s Cardiff to Holyhead, when almost every day people posted photos on social media of trains rammed to the gunnels, standing all down the aisles nose to armpit, querying whether it was safe, TfW always replied that they wouldn't operate a service that wasn't safe. This was always met with some disdain as to their interpretation of 'safe' in the case of a sudden stop or emergency.

Secondly, how do guards feel about having this responsibility? Not to put too fine a point on it, might they deliberately make themselves scarce until the last minute as they don't want to be bombarded with requests from anxious disrupted travellers who are seeking permission to board their train. I've noticed at places like Birmingham New Street where there's a staff changeover the guard sometimes doesn't appear on the platform until very close to departure time, rendering it almost impossible to find and ask them. I know they need their breaks but it doesn't make it easy to make a request when they leave it to the last minute. Also I'm sure they have other tasks they need to deal with before the train departs, so questions from passengers must be a time consuming distraction. Interested to hear from any guards as to their views on this.

 

[Starmill]

I don’t see it that way at all;

TPE 1st class ticket holders can sit in standard premium on Avanti - a class below what they’ve paid for but acceptable to get them to their destination.

Avanti standard plus ticket holders can’t use 1st class on TPE - it’s a class above what they’ve paid for so why would they be able to.

Unless I’m missing something?

It's obvious surely? If Avanti say standard premium on their trains is equivalent to first on TPE's when they're accepting tickets, when it's the other way around first should be equivalent to standard premium?

The way I see it, standard premium is a first class seat, so that is what Avanti customers should be offered on TPE.

First class tickets are seat + the full complimentary offer, so that is what Avanti and TPE first class customers should get on both operators.

Anything less is unacceptable (except in the case of overcrowding in which case the usual compensation for the booked standard of accommodation being unavailable should apply).

Indeed. Classic cakeism.

 

[Sheridan]

It's obvious surely? If Avanti say standard premium on their trains is equivalent to first on TPE's when they're accepting tickets, when it's the other way around first should be equivalent to standard premium?


Indeed. Classic cakeism.

I do accept that but I don’t think it’s the only way of looking at it. Avanti and TPE run quite different trains and they’ve clearly come to an arrangement which works for both of them. It may not be the best outcome for the passengers affected - if I’d paid for SP on Avanti I’d certainly prefer to sit in First on TPE - but if ticket acceptance is needed then something has gone wrong and the priority is getting people where they need to go.

 

[AF91]

I have asked at stations about a “permit to travel” stamped with a date - there does not seem to be any such thing to help the passenger!


Are you allowed to ask if you could record the gate-line staff telling you to travel on an alternative train?

In my time as a station manager we had an official stamp to show we'd authorised something and notes can be written on the back of the tickets to give details.

Recording them is probably a bit OTT but I was always happy to let them take a picture of my id pass or make a note of my name so that something could be referred back to me if there was an issue later on.

 

[Jimini]

In my time as a station manager we had an official stamp to show we'd authorised something and notes can be written on the back of the tickets to give details.

I've had this relatively recently a couple of times when there's been issues between Reading and Coventry, and the ticket office at Reading have stamped my ticket on the back validating it to travel via. Paddington and Euston on GWR / Avanti.

 

[Starmill]

I do accept that but I don’t think it’s the only way of looking at it. Avanti and TPE run quite different trains and they’ve clearly come to an arrangement which works for both of them. It may not be the best outcome for the passengers affected - if I’d paid for SP on Avanti I’d certainly prefer to sit in First on TPE - but if ticket acceptance is needed then something has gone wrong and the priority is getting people where they need to go.

Sure but that doesn't change that it's obvious cakeism.

Is "safety" an arbitrary thing? Back in the fairly recent days of 2-coach TfW 150s Cardiff to Holyhead, when almost every day people posted photos on social media of trains rammed to the gunnels, standing all down the aisles nose to armpit, querying whether it was safe, TfW always replied that they wouldn't operate a service that wasn't safe. This was always met with some disdain as to their interpretation of 'safe' in the case of a sudden stop or emergency.

Secondly, how do guards feel about having this responsibility? Not to put too fine a point on it, might they deliberately make themselves scarce until the last minute as they don't want to be bombarded with requests from anxious disrupted travellers who are seeking permission to board their train. I've noticed at places like Birmingham New Street where there's a staff changeover the guard sometimes doesn't appear on the platform until very close to departure time, rendering it almost impossible to find and ask them. I know they need their breaks but it doesn't make it easy to make a request when they leave it to the last minute. Also I'm sure they have other tasks they need to deal with before the train departs, so questions from passengers must be a time consuming distraction. Interested to hear from any guards as to their views on this.

Too many people being on a train isn't a safety issue by itself though. It would only become a safety issue if, say, the train was too hot. Or if it were stopped not at a platform for too long.

 

[Bow Fell]

I think ticket acceptance is something the industry needs to get better at.

For example as soon as CSL2 is declared, ticket acceptance should be automatic / assumed.

If TPE have CSL2 between Manchester and Leeds for example then ticket acceptance should be automatic with Northern on their services between Manchester and Leeds. Sometimes Control are absolutely swamped and it can get overlooked.

I know myself from managing incidents that you first have to get all the information out there, advise Bronze/Silver/Gold on Call before you can start dealing with the incident.

In the past I’ve contacted another TOC control myself and asked them if they wanted Ticket Acceptance as they were up the wall as I’d saw they’d gone into CSL2 but hadn’t had chance to phone ourselves.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

As it happens I am aware of at least two people who have had success with a letter before claim from Avanti, under slightly different circumstances during disruptive incidents. In one of these cases, it cost Avanti a four figure sum.

However, I suspect Avanti work on the basis that most passengers won't know their rights, or won't be prepared to fight for them.

What were the particular circumstances in this case?

 

[Mugby]

Something which is happening right now and for the last couple of weekends annoys me greatly. The line between Crewe and Derby is closed for engineering work and replacement buses are operating.

However, the replacement buses can take twice as long as the train whilst an alternative route exists by changing at Tamworth with hardly any time difference.
A ticket from Crewe to Derby is normally marked 'via Uttoxeter only'. A ticket via Tamworth is available but at a much higher fare.

But why should you have to pay more to travel by a perfectly viable alternative route because your normal route is closed?

 

[CyrusWuff]

I think ticket acceptance is something the industry needs to get better at.

For example as soon as CSL2 is declared, ticket acceptance should be automatic / assumed.

Officially it is on my patch, other than with CrossCountry, unless one of the other TOCs is also having issues.

In practice, our Control give the other TOCs a courtesy call anyway, so it's on a recorded line.

 

[MKB]

Lots of passengers are not agile and cannot run up and down platforms looking for a guard who may or may not make an appearance on the platform during a short stop. Most are unfamiliar with esoteric legal and contractual obligations during disruption. Many do not have the wherewithal to advocate for themselves.

With all that mind, it's utterly crazy that we expect passengers to be able to make journeys during disruption and not fall foul of the "rules" as enforced by specific members of staff. Travelling during disruption does not need to be any more stressful than it already is.

The industry needs to agree a simple rule that can be printed on tickets. Something like, if your booked train is disrupted with a delay of more than 30 minutes expected, you are authorised to take any subsequent alternative service that will reduce the delay. You are also permitted to take the prior service if possible.

For simplicity, and recognising that most passengers do not have the knowledge and or psychic powers to predict arrival times, a 30-minute delay at departure or any stopping or connecting point should be considered as sufficient grounds to activate this clause. Passengers cannot be expected to know/understand what mitigating measures may have been enacted (such as skipping stops) that may cause the delay on arrival to be less than 30 minutes.

Why 30 minutes? Because frankly, that's plenty long enough a delay, and passengers should not be expected to wait an hour or more if there's an alternative service that can reduce that.

Of course, if we had a joined-up railway under a single Train Operating Company, much of the problem of cross-ticket-acceptance (but not all granted) goes away.

 

[trainophile]

On a journey involving multiple connections, even half an hour can have a knock on effect causing the missing of subsequent connections, and ultimately (as was nearly the case for me on Friday, avoided by paying out £25 for a new ticket), getting stranded when not yet at final destination, having found you've missed the last train. I believe that immediately the first connection is missed it should become no holds barred, and provided you can show valid tickets for the services you would have got then you're within your rights to take whatever action is needed to avoid getting stranded. Let the operators sort it out among themselves afterwards.

Nobody wants to be taxied maybe 50 miles, and I'm sure no operator wants to be forking out for hotels. They need to apply some logic rather than just "them's the rules" mentality.

 

[800Travel]

If acceptance is put in place, say for example due to disruption, and you use an LNER First advance ticket on another operator with a far inferior offering, is any refund/compensation due please?

 

[janb]

As per yesterday's issues across a lot of the network, is it fairly safe to assume that there will be blanket ticket acceptance on those trains that ARE running?

In any disruption, but certainly major disruption always a good idea to check the relevant journeycheck.com page. This gives the public facing version of internal messages. Looking at /northern on Friday would have told you Northern had ticket acceptance with TPE, Avanti, EMR, CrossCountry, and LNER via any reasonable route.

 

[trainophile]

How’s this - I’ve an Advance Hereford to Liverpool today, timed departure from Brum 12:34. However I discovered on checking first thing that both the 09:39 and 10:40 from Hereford are cancelled.

I managed to get to Hereford for the 08:37, and headed for the Liverpool 10:34 platform at New Street. Asked three different people in LNR uniform if they were the guard, all said no but he’d be along before the train departed. The third chap asked what I needed the guard for, and when I explained he said he didn’t think there’d be any problem and watched me get on.

Just had a ticket check and explained about the cancellations, to be told he didn’t have a problem but I should always ask the guard first. He also said the rules are that if there’s a cancellation you can take the train after but not the one before, whereupon we had an animated discussion about missing appointments etc.

I accept that I should have waited for the guard to appear but thought I had a sound case, especially as it’s all the same company.

Is he correct in saying I’m only ‘entitled’ to take the train after a cancelled one, not the one before? I know that used to be the case but thought we’d moved on to a more sensible and customer focused approach.

Guards should have a distinctive head wear, bright red feather or something, so they are easy to find!

 

[Belperpete]

How’s this - I’ve an Advance Hereford to Liverpool today, timed departure from Brum 12:34. However I discovered on checking first thing that both the 09:39 and 10:40 from Hereford are cancelled.

I managed to get to Hereford for the 08:37, and headed for the Liverpool 10:34 platform at New Street. Asked three different people in LNR uniform if they were the guard, all said no but he’d be along before the train departed. The third chap asked what I needed the guard for, and when I explained he said he didn’t think there’d be any problem and watched me get on.

Just had a ticket check and explained about the cancellations, to be told he didn’t have a problem but I should always ask the guard first. He also said the rules are that if there’s a cancellation you can take the train after but not the one before, whereupon we had an animated discussion about missing appointments etc.

I accept that I should have waited for the guard to appear but thought I had a sound case, especially as it’s all the same company.

Is he correct in saying I’m only ‘entitled’ to take the train after a cancelled one, not the one before? I know that used to be the case but thought we’d moved on to a more sensible and customer focused approach.

Guards should have a distinctive head wear, bright red feather or something, so they are easy to find!

I think you may have jumped the gun a bit as regards the new policy. And whereas you may have had a good argument for catching the earlier train from Hereford, if your booked train from Brum was running I am not sure that you had a particularly good argument for catching a significantly earlier train from there.

Someone saying that they think there shouldn't be a problem is very different to categorically saying there won't be a problem. And not sure what your point is about he watched you get on the train? He gave his advice, and you obviously decided to take the risk. Are you saying he should have intervened and prevented you from boarding?

 

[trainophile]

Well no, but in his capacity as a LNR staff member I felt it was safe to take his comments reliably.

I don’t see any point in expecting already disrupted passengers to kill two hours at Birmingham, or alternatively to stick with the train after their cancelled first leg and arrive at destination an hour late.

Oh well, once again inconvenience the passenger when there’s a simple means of avoiding doing so.

 

[sannox]

In my time as a station manager we had an official stamp to show we'd authorised something and notes can be written on the back of the tickets to give details.

That's what I've had. LNER disrupted out of Glasgow Central with issue at Carstairs, went to Queen Street who stamped the ticket. Had no issues on alternative Scotrail or LNER trains. Most just looked at the stamp and went fair enough.

 

[800001]

That's what I've had. LNER disrupted out of Glasgow Central with issue at Carstairs, went to Queen Street who stamped the ticket. Had no issues on alternative Scotrail or LNER trains. Most just looked at the stamp and went fair enough.

All staff should have some small
Credit card sized tickets that they can write on authorisation to travel on Xx:xx train, sign it and out employee id number on.

Do what’s right for the customer, not what is ‘right’ for the train company.

 

[Par]

And whereas you may have had a good argument for catching the earlier train from Hereford, if your booked train from Brum was running I am not sure that you had a particularly good argument for catching a significantly earlier train from there.

Isn’t it reasonable to advance the argument that the passenger having gone out of their way to do their research and discover their booked train was cancelled and then arrived at Hereford for an earlier train (quite possibly at some inconvenience), should, as a Quid pro quo, having saved the TOC a Delay Repay payment, be allowed to board an earlier service from New St?

 

[voyagerdude220]

All staff should have some small
Credit card sized tickets that they can write on authorisation to travel on Xx:xx train, sign it and out employee id number on.

Do what’s right for the customer, not what is ‘right’ for the train company.

I'd be very grateful to have some sort of system similar to what you describe in my Ticket Office.

Previously I've resorted to stamping a piece of paper and writing on it (of course I can't stamp a ticket on someone's phone) only to have the Conductor come to me in the Ticket Office before departure and question whether it was genuine. (despite it having the Station stamp on it, I can appreciate why they wanted to check- having something like a TOC branded far more official system would be better).

He also said the rules are that if there’s a cancellation you can take the train after but not the one before, whereupon we had an animated discussion about missing appointments etc.

Is he correct in saying I’m only ‘entitled’ to take the train after a cancelled one, not the one before? I know that used to be the case but thought we’d moved on to a more sensible and customer focused approach.

I was always under the impression that passengers could travel on either the train before or the one after their cancelled booked train (assuming it's an Advance) but recently been told (Northern) it's changed to two trains either side.

Do different TOCs have different policies with dealing with this or is there one set policy for all TOCs to follow?

 

[trainophile]

Isn’t it reasonable to advance the argument that the passenger having gone out of their way to do their research and discover their booked train was cancelled and then arrived at Hereford for an earlier train (quite possibly at some inconvenience), should, as a Quid pro quo, having saved the TOC a Delay Repay payment, be allowed to board an earlier service from New St?

Exactly, thank you. It wasn’t even a split ticket but a through one for the whole journey.

Don’t get me started on WMR delay repay, still trying to sort out my claim from 11 days ago when they offer no means to select “paper ticket“. Chased it up yesterday, still waiting for any progress.

 

[IanXC]

I’m not saying they should be declining ticket acceptance on a half empty train, and they will initially follow the company’s instructions, yes, but that does not mean they are required to accept unlimited numbers of passengers. Once (in their view) safety is compromised they can unilateraly refuse to dispatch until some passengers disembark.

If things get too bad they can simply take the train out of service. Control will be informed and will then need to work around it. There will be no comeback on the guard, just so long as they can justify their actions on the grounds of safety - and it is their view of the situation that matters.

Control are fully aware and on board with this, of course, and it is to prevent precisely these sorts of scenarios from arising that operators sometimes decline ticket acceptance. I’m not sure what any of this has to do with the OP’s query, though.

You're absolutely right on safety grounds of course. But the guard does not have 'absolute authority' as you put it, they cannot unilaterally decline to accept passengers they have been instructed to accept.

The question of a train being over loaded from a safety perspective is a different matter, and declining agreed ticket acceptance isn't something a guard can do unilaterally to resolve the situation.

 

[Belperpete]

Isn’t it reasonable to advance the argument that the passenger having gone out of their way to do their research and discover their booked train was cancelled and then arrived at Hereford for an earlier train (quite possibly at some inconvenience), should, as a Quid pro quo, having saved the TOC a Delay Repay payment, be allowed to board an earlier service from New St?

I would say that it is reasonable to expect that if a train is cancelled and the passenger elects to travel an hour (or in this case two hours) earlier then that passenger should get the same compensation as if they had attempted to catch their booked train and been delayed by an hour or two. However, just because I think that is a reasonable argument, doesn't mean that many (any?) TOCs would accept it as a reasonable argument.

Likewise allowing a passenger to catch a train two hours previous to his booked train, when that train is running, just to save him some time, may seem reasonable to you, but I am not convinced that it would seem reasonable to some TOCs.

 

[trainophile]

Likewise allowing a passenger to catch a train two hours previous to his booked train, when that train is running, just to save him some time, may seem reasonable to you, but I am not convinced that it would seem reasonable to some TOCs.

In the normal way I absolutely agree with you, however in the situation under discussion it was the train company’s own failing that lead to the customer arriving early. They can’t have it both ways.

Or would they rather pay out delay repay, and have a dissatisfied customer telling their friends what a (literal!) waste of time they are?

 

[Par]

Putting myself into the shoes of the LNR/WMR guard for the 10.34 to Liverpool from Birmingham, it’s inconceivable to me how it could possibly be in either the passenger’s or my company’s interest by making them wait two hours for their booked train, especially when my company was the one that caused the disruption.

Let the passenger sit for two hours at New St and fume, whilst opening up my company for a Delay Repay claim, or just use your noggin and let them on board.

 

[All Line Rover]

We at TPE received a retail brief a few weeks ago detailing that when disruption on the WCML occurs:

- Customers with TPE only or AP TPE only 1st class tickets are only allowed to sit in standard premium on Avanti

- Customers with Avanti only or Avanti & connections 1st class tickets are allowed to sit in TPE 1st class but only allowed free tea, coffee, water - nothing else

- Customers holding Standard Premium Avanti tickets must sit in standard on TPE with no catering

And how does that square with Article 18(2) of the recast version of the EU Regulation 1371/2007?

"Passengers shall not be downgraded to transport facilities of a lower class unless such facilities are the only re-routing means available."

The recast regulation does not apply in England as it post-dates Brexit, but the above clarification gives a strong indication of how the equivalent provision in the original 2007 regulation - which still applies in England - is intended to be interpreted.

I do accept that but I don’t think it’s the only way of looking at it. Avanti and TPE run quite different trains and they’ve clearly come to an arrangement which works for both of them. It may not be the best outcome for the passengers affected - if I’d paid for SP on Avanti I’d certainly prefer to sit in First on TPE - but if ticket acceptance is needed then something has gone wrong and the priority is getting people where they need to go.

The priority should be to comply with the law.

 

[Belperpete]

In the normal way I absolutely agree with you, however in the situation under discussion it was the train company’s own failing that lead to the customer arriving early. They can’t have it both ways.

Or would they rather pay out delay repay, and have a dissatisfied customer telling their friends what a (literal!) waste of time they are?

It was down to a combination of the train company's failing and the passenger's decision to travel early that he arrived at Brum early. It was the passenger's decision alone to take advantage of that and arrive two hours early at Liverpool, when he could have caught his booked train and arrived on time.

Sadly, passengers who leave early in order to avoid delay do seem to draw the short straw. Rightly or wrongly, there is no compensation for doing so . So by catching the earlier train from Brum, the OP wasn't saving the TOC from paying out any compensation. You don't get any compensation for leaving early, or for wasted time at an intermediate stop, you only get compensation for late arrival at destination. So I don't see your point about them having it both ways, or Par's comment about opening the company up for compensation.

I agree that it was good customer service that the guard allowed him to travel early. But if the guard had decided otherwise, I am not convinced the OP would have had much of a leg to stand on.

And sadly, many TOCs do seem to prefer to just pay out delay compensation rather than taking any proactive steps to avoid the delay in the first place.

 

[43066]

The best thing is to always ask the guard before boarding, that’s what I tell people to do as I’m a Gateline assistant as the guard can say yes or no.

Some people ask but others worry they won’t find them in time and jump on to ask which mean they can be asked to leave or fined if revenue on the train.

but if they said it’s ok and revenue are on the train they can’t get in trouble as it’s under the guards discretion but like I say always check as might as not always gonna be a ticket acceptance.
Most of the time they just say yes and let you on it’s only the odd few what won’t.

Absolutely. Most will be helpful where they can, but if people are told “no” they should accept that with good grace. Revenue also cannot overrule a decision by the guard. Being rude or worse still kicking off at the guard only makes them less likely to show discretion in future.

I accept that I should have waited for the guard to appear but thought I had a sound case, especially as it’s all the same company.

Out of interest, why didn’t you simply wait for the guard as advised?

I don’t see any point in expecting already disrupted passengers to kill two hours at Birmingham, or alternatively to stick with the train after their cancelled first leg and arrive at destination an hour late.

Presumably the “point” is to maintain a difference between cheaper advance tickets and more expensive flexible ones. The correct remedy in your situation is recourse to delay repay.

Ultimately that’s the way the system is intended to work. You have a choice of whether to use the system but by choosing to use it and ignoring the rules, and especially by not checking with the guard as advised to, you do run the risk of getting into hot water with revenue.

You're absolutely right on safety grounds of course. But the guard does not have 'absolute authority' as you put it, they cannot unilaterally decline to accept passengers they have been instructed to accept.

The question of a train being over loaded from a safety perspective is a different matter, and declining agreed ticket acceptance isn't something a guard can do unilaterally to resolve the situation.

It logically follows from the above that traincrew could unilaterally deny ticket acceptance on grounds of safety. I’ve certainly known guards at my operator to deny LNER first class ticket holders seats in our first to prevent customer hosts facing an overcrowded first class, and potentially abuse.

I don’t see any reason in principle why a TM couldn’t say “I’m almost full, I’m concerned I might become dangerously overcrowded later in the journey, so am no longer taking any LNER tickets”. Indeed I suspect it has probably happened at my operator. And why not? Nobody is suggesting this would be done vexatiously. However guards are trusted to exercise their professional judgment and can absolutely override control’s instructions based on what’s going on the ground.

 

[GoneSouth]

How’s this - I’ve an Advance Hereford to Liverpool today, timed departure from Brum 12:34. However I discovered on checking first thing that both the 09:39 and 10:40 from Hereford are cancelled.

I managed to get to Hereford for the 08:37, and headed for the Liverpool 10:34 platform at New Street. Asked three different people in LNR uniform if they were the guard, all said no but he’d be along before the train departed. The third chap asked what I needed the guard for, and when I explained he said he didn’t think there’d be any problem and watched me get on.

Just had a ticket check and explained about the cancellations, to be told he didn’t have a problem but I should always ask the guard first. He also said the rules are that if there’s a cancellation you can take the train after but not the one before, whereupon we had an animated discussion about missing appointments etc.

I accept that I should have waited for the guard to appear but thought I had a sound case, especially as it’s all the same company.

Is he correct in saying I’m only ‘entitled’ to take the train after a cancelled one, not the one before? I know that used to be the case but thought we’d moved on to a more sensible and customer focused approach.

Guards should have a distinctive head wear, bright red feather or something, so they are easy to find!

Be careful what you wish for here, LNERs new approach is all about removing fully flexible tickets, but in your case you would have been able to use the train before you’re booked one, Sounds great doesn’t it, but the devil is in the detail, namely pricing. Pay more for less. Anyway, it would have benefited you on this occasion.