A question for others who actually make use of creative ticketing. I currently use a ticket to make a long distance journey. I'll admit it - I don't expect any staff to understand why it's valid and they would have at least two compelling reasons to substantiate a belief that it's not valid. To explain why it is valid, I'd have to go through around 7 or 8 detailed bullet points which are more likely to bewilder than explain anything, because it makes use of multiple anomalies, relaxed permissions (like Condition 17) and loopholes from more or less every source of where these can be found. It's also effective in avoiding the peak time charges. Anyone investigating it will also have a hard time determining why it's valid without someone who has specialist knowledge to help. I found it myself. Once you know the system, you kind of know what principles to work on to identify anomalies. In the likely event that a member of staff does take exception to it, yes I'd provide my name and address but I'd be inclined not to explain why it's valid, as strictly speaking, it's their job to know about tickets and experience dictates that often, staff don't listen and will err on the side of enforcement if unsure. Even when I was using simple linear splits, only one point was required to explain the validity but staff struggled to get their heads around that. What would you do/say in such a situation? Obviously I'm keen to avoid getting a UFN as a.) IRCAS aren't likely to have a clue and b.) I don't want to explain it anywhere as I know the likely outcome once my name is mentioned in that TOC's HQ.