TPE altering dates on outbound portion of SOR.

[Tracky]

I catch most people mis-using the outward part of SOR's by the rule...

The outward part of an Anytime Return ticket is only valid for travel when accompanied by an unused return part of the same ticket.

It is little known and very effective.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But that would be a major inconvenience for passengers who need their used tickets for claiming expenses or compensation for delay.

Most stations with barriers retain them already. As for expenses, that is what a reciept is for.

For compensation, staff should be provided at gatelines to ensure tickets are clearly endorsed and allow those the holders to exit.

 

[4SRKT]

I catch most people mis-using the outward part of SOR's by the rule...



It is little known and very effective..

This won't help though if the return journey is made more than 5 days after the outward. Or of someone isn't misuing the outward portion but has simply quite innocently not brought the return portion with him. As you say, this rule is little known.

Most stations with barriers retain them already. As for expenses, that is what a reciept is for.

Not so. A receipt shows only the amount paid, without details of the journey undertaken. I could hand in any railway receipt at work and pretend it was for a journey of a lower cost than that on the receipt. My employer will only accept tickets or confirmation e-mails if booked online, and quite rightly so.

 

[Tracky]

This won't help though if the return journey is made more than 5 days after the outward. Or of someone isn't misuing the outward portion but has simply quite innocently not brought the return portion with him. As you say, this rule is little known.

I'm talking outwards (like the one you scanned). If somebody does not have the return, the outward is not valid and they must buy a new ticket. Not being aware does not get them out of it...

Not so. A receipt shows only the amount paid, without details of the journey undertaken. I could hand in any railway receipt at work and pretend it was for a journey of a lower cost than that on the receipt. My employer will only accept tickets or confirmation e-mails if booked online, and quite rightly so.

Unfortunatly while it may seem unfair, and one may be accused of poor 'customer service' the ticket is not the passengers property. If you wan't to go through the gate, stick a ticket in you must!

 

[4SRKT]

I'm talking outwards (like the one you scanned). If somebody does not have the return, the outward is not valid and they must buy a new ticket. Not being aware does not get them out of it...

That doesn't necessarily mean the passenger is cheating on the outward portion of an SOR tho, which is the subject of this thread. I would have thought far more reuse of return portions of SORs and SVRs would go on anyway?

Unfortunatly while it may seem unfair, and one may be accused of poor 'customer service' the ticket is not the passengers property. If you wan't to go through the gate, stick a ticket in you must!

I'm aware of this, but the reality is that if you say to the gateline assistant that you want to keep the ticket, they will in my experience open the gate for you every time. So sticking a ticket in is in fact entirely optional.

Showing the details of the ticket bought on the receipt would get around this. How many other retailers would issue a non-itemised receipt?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

...Not so. A receipt shows only the amount paid, without details of the journey undertaken. I could hand in any railway receipt at work and pretend it was for a journey of a lower cost than that on the receipt. My employer will only accept tickets or confirmation e-mails if booked online, and quite rightly so.

The receipts issued by FasTis, as used by Northern, have on them date, ticket number and type, origin, destination and cost for all tickets issued in the transaction.

 

[Starmill]

The receipts issued by FasTis, as used by Northern, have on them date, ticket number and type, origin, destination and cost for all tickets issued in the transaction.

And many others. FGW at Paddington, for example, issued me with a receipt that stated the day, date, place of issue, time of issue, price (of the ticket, and the total), the ticket type I'd bought, the origin and destination, the fact I'd used a railcard and what type, how much I'd paid in cash, how much I'd paid with an RTV and the fact that the RTV had been issued by someone other than First Great Western.

Pretty bloomin' detailed.

 

[Tracky]

ATW Fujitsu STAR are the same... Fully detailed...

 

[4SRKT]

Well, it's not consistent then. The last time I asked for a receipt (Southeastern) it just had the price paid on it.

None of this changes the fact that simply asking the gateline assistant if you can keep the ticket has for me had a 100% success rate over several years and scores of requests. Maybe I just look honest Therefore I rarely ask for receipts 'cos I know I don't need 'em.

 

[455driver]

You don't need to change the 'valid to' date to stop that from happening. Changing the 'valid to' date could mean the monkey RPIs in Manchester could threaten the 1% of passengers making a genuine break in journey with prosecution for using an invalid ticket.

Have you encountered the G4S clowns at Manchester ?

Are they monkies or clowns?

 

[londiscape]

Most stations with barriers retain them already. As for expenses, that is what a reciept is for.

Sorry Tracky, must protest here. The validity of receipts for expenses entirely depends on the policy of one's employer. At the moment I am lucky enough that my company permits TVM issued receipts for expenses, but my previous employer did not - only tickets showing start and end points would do, apparently so that the expenses policy could not be 'abused' by taking personal journeys.

 

[PG]

I would also like tickets to be taken out of circulation by staff or barriers at major stations.

But that would be a major inconvenience for passengers who need their used tickets for claiming expenses or compensation for delay.

Since the ticket remains the property of the railway those wishing to claim expenses need to obtain a receipt when purchasing and use that. Anyone intending to claim compensation for delay can mention that at the barrier so that they are permitted to retain the ticket.

Opps beaten to it!... must check for last page before posting

 

[Harpers Tate]

That doesn't necessarily mean the passenger is cheating on the outward portion of an SOR tho.....

I think it important to recognise that in the eyes of certain employees of TOCs and their respective sub-contractors of the TOCs and, indeed, certain of the TOCs themselves, being wholly innocent isn't any kind of defence. If you can't prove your innocence when asked, fully and immediately and on the spot, then it appears you render yourself potentially liable to the full force of railway policy and/or law, with all the attendant costs and proceedings that brings with it. I suspect the Railway as an entity may be unique in this respect.

 

[Tracky]

Sorry Tracky, must protest here.

My point is that if the railways actually did what they are able to do, mis-use of tickets would drop massivly...

 

[island]

Well, it's not consistent then. The last time I asked for a receipt (Southeastern) it just had the price paid on it.

None of this changes the fact that simply asking the gateline assistant if you can keep the ticket has for me had a 100% success rate over several years and scores of requests. Maybe I just look honest Therefore I rarely ask for receipts 'cos I know I don't need 'em.

Southeastern booking offices issue fully-detailed receipts. TVMs only give the number of tickets and price.

Tribute (FCC, LM, c2c) includes the full detail of the first ticket bought in a transaction; if there are more it just adds "and other tickets" on the receipt.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I think it important to recognise that in the eyes of certain employees of TOCs and their respective sub-contractors of the TOCs and, indeed, certain of the TOCs themselves, being wholly innocent isn't any kind of defence. If you can't prove your innocence when asked, fully and immediately and on the spot, then it appears you render yourself potentially liable to the full force of railway policy and/or law, with all the attendant costs and proceedings that brings with it.

Oh, dear!

The "full force" you refer to requires a high standard of evidence to demonstrate the Guilt of such a passenger - it must be 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It is a high standard to achieve, so the sad fact that hundreds of passengers each week find themselves having such guilt demonstrated is, to my mind, a consequence of the great extent of Fare Evasion on the railways. Meanwhile, passengers enjoy the 'benefit of assumption', requiring no evidence or proof to sustain their innocence.

As for being able to "prove your innocence . . . on the spot", I'll guess you read the recent thread "You do not have to say anything but..." in which some regulars on here wanted to justify not answering questions about their travel.

I suspect the Railway as an entity may be unique in this respect.

It is not.

 

[34D]

Sorry Tracky, must protest here. The validity of receipts for expenses entirely depends on the policy of one's employer. At the moment I am lucky enough that my company permits TVM issued receipts for expenses, but my previous employer did not - only tickets showing start and end points would do, apparently so that the expenses policy could not be 'abused' by taking personal journeys.

I suppose that your previous employer also required you to submit the packaging from your sandwich along with your coffee cup?

 

[4SRKT]

Southeastern booking offices issue fully-detailed receipts. TVMs only give the number of tickets and price.

Tribute (FCC, LM, c2c) includes the full detail of the first ticket bought in a transaction; if there are more it just adds "and other tickets" on the receipt.

All of this is very interesting, and shows how out of touch I am re receipts, but my point stands that it is academic because I never ask for receipts because I know I will always be allowed to keep my ticket. The one time a gateline assistant looked dubious I suggested he marked it, which he did.

therefore, putting a ticket through a barrier is entirely optional.

 

[snail]

Since the ticket remains the property of the railway those wishing to claim expenses need to obtain a receipt when purchasing and use that.

Good thing you don't work for my employer, who only accepts original tickets. It appears from other comments on here I am not alone.

 

[4SRKT]

Good thing you don't work for my employer, who only accepts original tickets. It appears from other comments on here I am not alone.

Of course railway employees who enjoy privelege travel are often both ignorant of and unsympathetic to the hideous cost and practical issues of rail travel to the rest of us......

 

[maniacmartin]

The issues with your employer are a problem with your employer.

island, London Bridge SET ticket office never give me itemised receipts.

 

[4SRKT]

The issues with your employer are a problem with your employer.

island, London Bridge SET ticket office never give me itemised receipts.

The idea that railway companies should be able to dictate the policies of all non-railway companies is so arrogant and for the birds that this has taken my breath away.

Thank you for giving me the heartiest belly laugh i've had for a while. LOL!

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Of course railway employees who enjoy privelege travel are often both ignorant of and unsympathetic to the hideous cost and practical issues of rail travel to the rest of us......

Not necessarily, no.

The cost of this "privilege" travel, in many cases apart from local journeys, is of little benefit.

Manchester - London Off peak return is £77.30
Manchester - London Priv return is £77.00

Whilst the Priv return is an Anytime and thus valid at peak times, if you are travelling off-peak or weekends that doesn't matter anyway, and as members of the public can use railcards to get a discount on the Off peak return they can quite conceivably get a cheaper fare on the day than the privilege staff rate.

In many cases, as staff, it is often cheaper to buy Advance tickets and travel without using the priv card!

 

[4SRKT]

Not necessarily, no.

The cost of this "privilege" travel, in many cases apart from local journeys, is of little benefit.

Manchester - London Off peak return is £77.30
Manchester - London Priv return is £77.00

Whilst the Priv return is an Anytime and thus valid at peak times, if you are travelling off-peak or weekends that doesn't matter anyway, and as members of the public can use railcards to get a discount on the Off peak return they can quite conceivably get a cheaper fare on the day than the privilege staff rate.

In many cases, as staff, it is often cheaper to buy Advance tickets and travel without using the priv card!

I certainly take the point about cheap advances, but then non-priv holders wouldn't see those as a hideous cost. What about your boxes though? They make up for a lot surely?

 

[Tracky]

I certainly take the point about cheap advances, but then non-priv holders wouldn't see those as a hideous cost. What about your boxes though? They make up for a lot surely?

Only ex BR staff get boxes.

Staff under 35-40 missed out on all that.

And the likes of the G4S staff at Picc get very little. Low wages and conditions, poor training and lots of abuse...

 

[4SRKT]

Only ex BR staff get boxes.

Staff under 35-40 missed out on all that.

And the likes of the G4S staff at Picc get very little. Low wages and conditions, poor training and lots of abuse...

Well, the whole G4S business is a disgrace, as much for those employees as for anyone. Doesn't the RMT have something to say about it?

 

[Tracky]

Well, the whole G4S business is a disgrace, as much for those employees as for anyone. Doesn't the RMT have something to say about it?

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=81022

 

[MikeWh]

The issues with your employer are a problem with your employer.

May be so, but if the employer decides not to re-imburse rail travel, the employee might decide not to use rail. Then whose problem is it? It really shouldn't be beyond technology to issue a fully itemised receipt these days.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The idea that railway companies should be able to dictate the policies of all non-railway companies is so arrogant and for the birds that this has taken my breath away.

Thank you for giving me the heartiest belly laugh i've had for a while. LOL!

Which came first?

• The contractual right for the railway to retain it's own property after you have finished using it for travel.
  
• Your employer's current policy on reimbursement of travel costs.

 

[snail]

The issues with your employer are a problem with your employer.

Yes, and one that is not going to go away easily. Welcome to the real world.

 

[4SRKT]

Which came first?

• The contractual right for the railway to retain it's own property after you have finished using it for travel.
  
• Your employer's current policy on reimbursement of travel costs.

The former of course, but the fact that a load of staff and cranks on a railway forum know this arcane piece of practical irrelevance don't make it common knowledge with the public I'm afraid.

I'll reiterate what snail said: welcome to the real world. Where (appalled silence) some people don't work for the railway and , more shocking still, don't care one jot about it.....