Ticket office queries

[island]

Courts can and do make changes to the law when they see a situation that defies reason or natural justice exactly like this. A ticket that was perfectly valid on the train suddenly becomes invalid by alighting after travelling fewer miles than the ticket allows, what nonsense.

Your argument is a fallacy, because it is based on the presumption that a ticket from A to C gives the right to travel to B just because B is on the way.

Many on the forum criticize supermarket analogies, but perhaps they will suffer mine on this occasion: buying a 2-litre bottle of Coke does not entitle you to take a 6-pack of cans (and leave one behind in the supermarket), despite that they are the same* volume.

*yes there's a 1% difference, let's not get overly hung up

 

[142blue]

Well the TOCs could use some common sense which I experienced when in the face of disruption I needed to get someone on an earlier than booked train
The Avanti ticket office issued what they called an ATT ( Authority to travel)
I cannot imagine why this is not standard procedure if a ticket office does give permission to change as it instantly solves any potential issue further down the line

Can only be issued on Avanti service

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Dec 2021 ==

A few mystery shopper visits would soon sort out ticket office clerks who are not complying with the rules but it will never happen

I've never known anyone be in trouble for common sense, discretion and empathy to another person
Start intentionally selling splits without asking or selling further than destination is different
Example if a day return from station a to station b is more expensive than a GM wayfarer what do you want me to sell you? What if the few journeys you want to make is more expensive than a Cheshire Day Ranger. Or a 7 day traincard costs less than your P2P season?
What if the SVR return you want isn't available on your journey but if I book to next stop or previous station it is; do you want me to sell it or charge you more for two singles?

So many grey areas and all I can do is best match what you are asking for

 

[AlterEgo]

If it went to a higher Court I wonder if charging more for a shorter journey on the same train would be found unreasonable and unenforceable.

Don't ever buy a plane ticket if "longer journey is cheaper" plays with your sensibilities!

 

[jumble]

The rules are that if you miss a train through no fault of the railway, you buy a new ticket. The example that I originally responded to was a suggestion that being told to ask the guard in those circumstances may yield a different result. I am not sure saying that to the customer is "not complying with the rules" even if it is unhelpful to both guard and customer.

Sorry I appear to have confused matters
Back in the days of East Coast Main Line there was an FOI that revealed that Ticket offices were given guidance that if there was a delay on for example the underground then the passenger was allowed to travel on a later train without being sold a new ticket even so the IKB says different
I have no idea but cannot help but wonder if there may be similar guidance that gives ticket office staff discretion to issue an ATT in some circumstances
My reference to rules is the if a ticket office is given that discretion and exercises said discretion then they should follow it up in the form of an ATT
( unless we believe that a ticket office never says "Its OK to take a later train just to get rid of the customer "

 

[Haywain]

My reference to rules is the if a ticket office is given that discretion and exercises said discretion then they should follow it up in the form of an ATT

Of course they should but if they don't I don't know how you would identify that they actually have given authority.

 

[Rob Gibson]

Your argument is a fallacy, because it is based on the presumption that a ticket from A to C gives the right to travel to B just because B is on the way.

Many on the forum criticize supermarket analogies, but perhaps they will suffer mine on this occasion: buying a 2-litre bottle of Coke does not entitle you to take a 6-pack of cans (and leave one behind in the supermarket), despite that they are the same* volume.

*yes there's a 1% difference, let's not get overly hung up

Ask any non rail person if a ticket to C allows travel to B they will say of course it must as you pass through B! In a shop you know exactly what you’re buying and if you don’t like the price at checkout can simply walk away.

The ticket is valid at B the “offence” only happens when exiting B (as with shoplifting) only in the railways fantasy world can a ticket validity be changed by crossing a notional boundary instead of real world mileages.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Dec 2021 ==

Don't ever buy a plane ticket if "longer journey is cheaper" plays with your sensibilities!

What is the likelihood of a plane landing at two airports so close together that it’s not clear which is best for my ultimate destination until I’ve done some checking during the flight?

 

[AlterEgo]

What is the likelihood of a plane landing at two airports so close together that it’s not clear which is best for my ultimate destination until I’ve done some checking during the flight?

Not very likely you’d be that disorganised when flying, but it is not related to the mere premise of the reasonableness of charging more for a shorter journey.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Your argument is a fallacy, because it is based on the presumption that a ticket from A to C gives the right to travel to B just because B is on the way.

Where travelling to C is cheaper than B this is called alighting short and was covered in the old Ticket Inspectors Handbook. It generally applies to time or boundary restricted tickets or where break of journey is not permitted. Here's an example:-
Yeoford to Exeter Central before 0845 was Peak but Yeoford to Polsloe Bridge on the same train was Off Peak and therefore cheaper (remember selective pricing?). So the passenger buys a CDR to Polsloe. If they alighted at Exeter Central and were caught with the CDR they would be excessed to the Peak fare.

 

[tspaul26]

The ticket is valid at B the “offence” only happens when exiting B (as with shoplifting) only in the railways fantasy world can a ticket validity be changed by crossing a notional boundary instead of real world mileages.

If an offence is committed then it would be at A or on the train when the passenger forms the intention to make a journey (A to B) for which he has not paid his fare.

What is the likelihood of a plane landing at two airports so close together that it’s not clear which is best for my ultimate destination until I’ve done some checking during the flight?

That is not the point of the comparison.

It is not uncommon for air fares to be cheaper for longer journeys (for example, Frankfurt to Tokyo might cost more than Dublin to Tokyo via Frankfurt), but you cannot generally use the cheaper fare for the shorter journey because the conditions restrict ‘starting short’ in that manner.

The idea behind such differential pricing is (in theory) to increase revenue by charging what the market will bear for different journeys (or to discourage people from making certain journeys altogether if the aim is to manage demand).

In response to the OP:

1. Charge a new fare. The passenger can always try to obtain a refund from customer services later if there are exceptional circumstances which warrant same.
2. Do not sell a ticket that is invalid for the journey actually being made.

 

[Robertj21a]

How can rail staff come up with so many possible answers when, I thought, the railways always say that everything has to be done by the book?
Presumably, there's an indeterminate number of 'books', dependent on the staff member involved!

 

[Ashley Hill]

How can rail staff come up with so many possible answers when, I thought, the railways always say that everything has to be done by the book?
Presumably, there's an indeterminate number of 'books', dependent on the staff member involved!

There was a defining guide that covered the whole network called the Ticket Examiners Handbook which clearly defined the validity of tickets and railcards and how to excess or deal with irregularities. Then along came privatisation and each TOC deals with things their own way. Add to that local easements of restrictions.

 

[Rob Gibson]

How can rail staff come up with so many possible answers when, I thought, the railways always say that everything has to be done by the book?
Presumably, there's an indeterminate number of 'books', dependent on the staff member involved!

Book is ‘Alice in Railland’...starting to understand why so many people won’t get on a train, they see the notice that should be at the entrance to every station “Reason doesn’t apply beyond this point, beware of traps that will cost you loads” So much easier to jump in the car.

 

[142blue]

Book is ‘Alice in Railland’...starting to understand why so many people won’t get on a train, they see the notice that should be at the entrance to every station “Reason doesn’t apply beyond this point, beware of traps that will cost you loads” So much easier to jump in the car.

Off you go then. Drive safely

 

[robbeech]

How can rail staff come up with so many possible answers when, I thought, the railways always say that everything has to be done by the book?
Presumably, there's an indeterminate number of 'books', dependent on the staff member involved!

Consistency on the railway is pretty much non existent. That’s why people buy a ticket from the guard every day for 18 months and then suddenly one day they end up not being able to get that job as a primary school teacher.

Off you go then. Drive safely

Little point encouraging rail travel when it doesn’t fund the operators.

 

[AlterEgo]

Book is ‘Alice in Railland’...starting to understand why so many people won’t get on a train, they see the notice that should be at the entrance to every station “Reason doesn’t apply beyond this point, beware of traps that will cost you loads” So much easier to jump in the car.

You must be new here.

 

[30907]

Consistency on the railway is pretty much non existent. That’s why people buy a ticket from the guard every day for 18 months and then suddenly one day they end up not being able to get that job as a primary school teacher.

What offences did they commit for that to happen?
Unless you have specific evidence, I cannot see how a Byelaws offence would have that result (or even a RoRA one).

 

[6Gman]

Off you go then. Drive safely

Like button pressed.



The steady and consistent increase in passenger volume up to the arrival of Covid suggests the ticketing structure wasn't the disincentive some on here seem to think it was.

 

[robbeech]

What offences did they commit for that to happen?
Unless you have specific evidence, I cannot see how a Byelaws offence would have that result (or even a RoRA one).

Just the extreme example we seem to like here.
The fact remains that as most guards will sell a ticket and definitely won’t remind passengers they should buy before they board as they want to keep getting their commission then it leads passengers to believe that this is acceptable. One day. Boom. Regulation of Railways act section 5. £850 fine in court and a criminal record. I appreciate this has the usual suspects here giggling and feeling all high and mighty.

 

[Starmill]

The steady and consistent increase in passenger volume up to the arrival of Covid suggests the ticketing structure wasn't the disincentive some on here seem to think it was.

What a bizarre conclusion. How can you possibly know that?

 

[Rob Gibson]

The steady and consistent increase in passenger volume up to the arrival of Covid suggests the ticketing structure wasn't the disincentive some on here seem to think it was.

Only a tiny percentage of people over 25 regularly travel by train, the vast majority never travel by train. If that is to really change there will have to be a fundamental rethink of rails attitude to the total travel experience. Online information makes it much easier for new customers to find times and cheaper tickets which should have led to a big increase in usage but it’s only a few percent a year.

Even NR no longer think rail is essential as they increasingly close lines on normal weekdays, how long before people say that if a line can be closed on a working day it isn’t needed and should be closed for good. A weekend and Bank Holiday only railway is plain nonsense.

 

[Llanigraham]

Only a tiny percentage of people over 25 regularly travel by train, the vast majority never travel by train. If that is to really change there will have to be a fundamental rethink of rails attitude to the total travel experience. Online information makes it much easier for new customers to find times and cheaper tickets which should have led to a big increase in usage but it’s only a few percent a year.

Even NR no longer think rail is essential as they increasingly close lines on normal weekdays, how long before people say that if a line can be closed on a working day it isn’t needed and should be closed for good. A weekend and Bank Holiday only railway is plain nonsense.

Top point.
Really? Do you have any actual evidence to support that? Certainly from my observations on the local line the majority of passengers are (well) over 25.

Last para.
Again, can you provide evidence of that? What lines are "closed" on weekdays? Yes there may be temporary closures for short periods for engineering work, such as on the Cambrian Coast section, but I can see no evidence nationally that this is happening on a grand scale.

 

[island]

Just the extreme example we seem to like here.
The fact remains that as most guards will sell a ticket and definitely won’t remind passengers they should buy before they board as they want to keep getting their commission then it leads passengers to believe that this is acceptable. One day. Boom. Regulation of Railways act section 5. £850 fine in court and a criminal record. I appreciate this has the usual suspects here giggling and feeling all high and mighty.

I'm giggling all right, because that doesn't actually happen in reality, now, does it. For one, it would be a byelaw offence, which isn't recordable. For another, it'd probably be settled out of court. For a third, despite popular opinion, having a "criminal record" does not, as you allege, indefinitely bar someone from a job as a primary teacher.

 

[robbeech]

I'm giggling all right, because that doesn't actually happen in reality, now, does it. For one, it would be a byelaw offence, which isn't recordable. For another, it'd probably be settled out of court. For a third, despite popular opinion, having a "criminal record" does not, as you allege, indefinitely bar someone from a job as a primary teacher.

For it to definitely be a Byelaw offence you would have to be suggesting that pay when challenged disproves intent. It doesn’t. It would be the word of the passenger against the word of the railway. The word of the passenger would be immediately discounted.
We have seen people here who have held and have shown perfectly valid tickets appear in court on RoRA offences when a guard or revenue inspector took umbrage to a valid ticket because their knowledge was insufficient. So it’s fine to say they’d be offered an out of court settlement but all that does is generate more revenue for the railway so it can carry on misleading passengers.

 

[yorkie]

Where travelling to C is cheaper than B this is called alighting short and was covered in the old Ticket Inspectors Handbook. It generally applies to time or boundary restricted tickets or where break of journey is not permitted. Here's an example:-
Yeoford to Exeter Central before 0845 was Peak but Yeoford to Polsloe Bridge on the same train was Off Peak and therefore cheaper (remember selective pricing?). So the passenger buys a CDR to Polsloe. If they alighted at Exeter Central and were caught with the CDR they would be excessed to the Peak fare.

There is no restriction on break of journey on such a ticket, and therefore an excess fare cannot be charged. If any customer has been excessed from CDR to SDR in such a case, they are entitled to insist on a refund, apology and assurances that appropriate training will be given to staff, to avoid such an occurrence in future.

 

[Ashley Hill]

There is no restriction on break of journey on such a ticket, and therefore an excess fare cannot be charged. If any customer has been excessed from CDR to SDR in such a case, they are entitled to insist on a refund, apology and assurances that appropriate training will be given to staff, to avoid such an occurrence in future.

There was at the time (early 90s) hence the example given.

 

[yorkie]

There was at the time (early 90s) hence the example given.

I'm not convinced.

Does anyone have a copy of the break of journey restrictions applicable to CDRs at the time? (@thedbdiboy?)

 

[Wolfie]

Off you go then. Drive safely

Say that to enough taxpayers and they will vote for the first party promising heavy cuts on the railways.

 

[thedbdiboy]

I'm not convinced.

Does anyone have a copy of the break of journey restrictions applicable to CDRs at the time? (@thedbdiboy?)

Ordinary CDRs have always permitted unlimited break of journey within the validity/route. There may have been some local/PTE day tickets with break of journey restrictions but not with ordinary Day Returns.

 

[Graham H]

I once used a period return from Bristol to Reading and broke the journey both ways at Didcot. This was probably 1979 and in those days ticket checks were the norm. I went Bristol to Didcot Friday to get home, then Didcot to Reading and back to join a railtour on Saturday and back to Bristol Sunday. No questions asked so was this acceptable back then ? It was obviously a lot cheaper than buying Bristol to Didcot and then Didcot to Reading as separate tickets.
On a second occasion I was commuting from Angmering to Havant in 1981 using standard day returns. One day I was going to look at a house in Rowlands Castle, one stop north of Havant and requiring a change at Havant. However as I was working in Havant I did my normal work commute then later in the day did the short trip to Rowlands Castle and back. Then back to Angmering. For whatever reason, Angmering to Rowlands Castle was a cheap day return, I checked at the booking office at Angmering and was told that was correct, travel at any time of day was a CDR to Rowlands Castle but CDR to Havant was after a certain time only. Needless to say it was cheaper so from then on I would buy the CDR to Rowlands Castle and simply leave at Havant. Again always a ticket check at the stations but never an issue.