Travelled on the next available train (after cancellation) but being charged.

[najaB]

Because tomorrow it will be TOC B's cancelled train and passengers looking to travel on TOC A and they have already paid.

No the real question is why shouldn't they take them.

That is what ticket acceptance agreements and/or endorsement is for. And, believe it or not, it happens all the time.

I have no problem with the railway coming down like a ton of whatever on to fare evaders, disruptive or abusive passengers and anybody else trying to scam the system but penalising people who are trying to complete their journey after another part of the railway has failed them is just mean spirited, nasty and unnecessary.

The customers weren't penalised for trying to complete their journey. They were (as far as we can tell) on TOC B's train with a TOC A only ticket and were asked to pay the fare that was due just like anyone else would have been.

 

[talltim]

There has been no claim made by the OP that the TOC they booked with denied them travel. We also don't know exactly what the passengers were told vs what they heard.

I ask again - why should TOC B take TOC A's passengers at no cost without any ticket acceptance being put in place?

And yet it is often said on these forums that the details of fare allocation is not the passengers' problem

 

[Quakkerillo]

The OP hasn't posted in two days, yet the convo has been going on. Could we wait for their response with more details, instead of all sorts of hypotheticalities and other opinions (vaguely) relating to this?

 

[najaB]

And yet it is often said on these forums that the details of fare allocation is not the passengers' problem

No, they aren't. However, travelling on TOC B with a ticket that says TOC A in the route field is.

 

[sheff1]

However, travelling on TOC B with a ticket that says TOC A in the route field is.

Only if we accept your interpretation of 'next available train' in preference to other poster's interpretations.

 

[najaB]

Only if we accept your interpretation of 'next available train' in preference to other poster's interpretations.

As I pointed out, that term has no relevance to the situation in the OP. That term is about delays that occur after your journey has commenced.

 

[Steveoh]

As I pointed out, that term has no relevance to the situation in the OP. That term is about delays that occur after your journey has commenced.

So you're talking about this term from http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46546.aspx

If the train you purchased a ticket for is cancelled or is delayed and you still decide to travel, special arrangements will be made to accommodate you on another train (although a seat cannot be guaranteed).

This makes no reference to be being the first train on a journey - it might be implied but it's not clear. But lets take it that it is prior to the first train. There is nothing in the terms and conditions that says you're allowed to take the next train over the same route for the same TOC as your original journey would be. It just says special arrangements will be made. Who makes the arrangements? Who would you expect a passenger to talk to to confirm those arrangements, it's not written down? There appears to be nothing in the NRCOC regarding this scenario at all.

Turning to delays on journey.

Tickets may only be used on the services of the Train Company (or geographic route where applicable) shown next to ‘Route’ on the ticket.

If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey.

I've an advance ticket in front of me here, on the Midland Main Line - There is no mention of a TOC just that the ticket is "Valid only on the booked services below". I'm on the same route if I use East Midlands Trains and Thameslink between Bedford and London St Pancras. I'd read those T&Cs as meaning in disruption I could change TOC. Same up the East Coast say between York and Newcastle for example.

However the NRCOC says:

If you purchase an Advance ticket, you must use that ticket in the train specified when you book your ticket. However, if you miss this service because a previous connecting train service was delayed you will be able to travel on the next service provided by the Train Company with whom you were booked to travel without penalty.

That seems quite clear, but it is not the same as the advice on NRE. Which should I use as a passenger? It wouldn't take much to update the NRE website to make the meaning clear.

The industry does not help itself.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The industry does not help itself.

Precisely, and this is by no means exclusive to this area. Reading of the Disputes and Prosecutions forum gives loads more examples.

The rules need to be clear, consistent, written down and understood by all staff in a TOC uniform, or if the latter is not possible (as indeed it probably isn't) those staff should be well aware that they must not say anything ambiguous that could lead to a passenger getting a wrong impression of authority to travel. For instance, a cleaner should know never to give any suggestion it's OK to get on without a ticket, as this is well outside their remit.

 

[najaB]

I've an advance ticket in front of me here, on the Midland Main Line - There is no mention of a TOC just that the ticket is "Valid only on the booked services below".

The T&Cs need updating to match the new ticket format.

That seems quite clear, but it is not the same as the advice on NRE. Which should I use as a passenger? It wouldn't take much to update the NRE website to make the meaning clear.

The industry does not help itself.

Which I why I said that there's room for improvement, but it's not a complete and total mess. And the NRCoC would take precedence if there's any doubt as all tickets state that they are subject to the NRCoC - it's on the back of that ticket you're looking at just now.

 

[yorkie]

Sorry najaB, but I agree with just about everyone else on this thread! Passengers should not be penalised for using a different Train Company when their train is cancelled (though the reasonableness of this may vary depending on the exact circumstances, each situation should be considered on its merits)

If a Company does not want to carry passengers on any ticket for which it receives no revenue, then it must NOT bid for any franchises. Likewise, for open access operators, they must NOT participate in inter-available ticketing (ie, they would be unviable as a business). Don't like it? Tough!

I do not think there is any doubt passengers should not be discriminated against at times of disruption, but ir the T&Cs are unclear, the consumer wins anyway.

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

Written contracts
7. - (2) If there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1999/19992083.htm

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So perhaps threads should be locked until such time as all the required information is received, in accordance with the sticky thread? Then and only then will the thread be open for assistance? Save the OP from having to read a lot of argument that has little or no relevance to their actual problem?

It's too late now, but in future people should post the full information at the start to avoid the problem in the first place. However if they forget, then yes we could lock it, if the OP uses the report button (

) to make a request, we will consider that request.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Some XC guards appear to have their own (incorrect)policy (which would not be tolerated in many industries) of not adhering to this policy, which can be found on the XC website...:

https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/media/380138/atoc_approved_code_of_practice.pdf

The nature of the rail network means that many passengers use connecting trains travelling with more than one Railway Undertaking in a single journey. During disruptive incidentspassengers should not be discriminated against on the basis of operator and efforts should be made to deliver the same high standards to every
one. This includes passengers travelling on Railway Undertaking-specific tickets who have be
en re-routed onto another Railway Undertaking’s trains because of disruption.

If a Train Company does not want to adhere to this, give up your franchise now.

If a Train Guard does not want to adhere to this, find another job.

If a bystander finds it unfair, then: you can lump it!

 

[Steveoh]

The T&Cs need updating to match the new ticket format.
Which I why I said that there's room for improvement, but it's not a complete and total mess. And the NRCoC would take precedence if there's any doubt as all tickets state that they are subject to the NRCoC - it's on the back of that ticket you're looking at just now.

So it does, you learn something new every day.

So as there's nothing in the NRCoC about the first train being cancelled or delayed do we need to look at NRE? There's nothing on the ticket about that. NRE only refers to "special arrangements will be made". Who makes them and how do I find out what they are?

 

[rjholt]

"We were booked with trainline , the woman gave me details for the train we caught which was a different company I think virgin , but the woman forgot to notify Virgin so we were charged we had return tickets and and I can't remember the times specifically now but we had direct tickets originally to Newcastle and but had to go to Leeds then on to Newcastle ! Hope that enough info ! Thank you so much Maria xxx"

"Trainline originally and it's possible I can't remember the train was red if that's any clue haha sorry xx
Cross country it was !
We travelled from Manchester Victoria
Transpennine express and the problem was on the Leeds to Newcastle one CXx"

I've just posted the quote directly from what my Mum's friend told her. Unfortunately this is the only info I can get for now. As I'm just trying to help them out as best as I can. So I assume they were originally booked to go direct to Newcastle via TPE, which was cancelled. So they had to go to Leeds and change their and get on a Cross Country train. Looking at gray1404's post about TPE Only trains I assume this may have been the issue, boarding a XC train they weren't supposed to do.

I assume that they were not informed properly of what they needed to do and in a stressful situation they didn't think. The woman who is asking for my help works in a School and I assume she wouldn't want anything bad against her name in terms of a criminal record anything.

From browsing these forums before I assume what she has received is a PF Notice. Is the best thing to do to write to them operator who issued this and try and settle before it goes any further?

I'll try and get more info when possible.

Thanks.

Genuinely feel sorry for 'Joe Public' in instances such as these - how would 83 year old Doris know (or indeed care) that the next service was run XC or TPE. This is one of the biggest failings of our current rail set up. The reality is, it isn't the Trainlines fault, the XC guard was doing their job but ffs they needed to have a heart and really, TPE should stump up the difference as they cancelled a service and didn't give appropriate advice via staff.

 

[najaB]

Sorry najaB, but I agree with just about everyone else on this thread! Passengers should not be penalised for using a different Train Company when their train is cancelled (though the reasonableness of this may vary depending on the exact circumstances, each situation should be considered on its merits).

It may surprise you, but if you add two words to your statement we aren't in disagreement: "Passengers should not be penalised for using a different Train Company with permission when their train is cancelled."

The reason that I think "with permission" is important is because without that permission the guard on the second service has to allow ticketless travel because 'the man on the platform' said so. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect passengers to ask what to do rather than choosing do to their own thing. For all we know the first TOC may be arranging rail replacement buses or taxis.

 

[talltim]

As I pointed out, that term has no relevance to the situation in the OP. That term is about delays that occur after your journey has commenced.

Only if we accept your interpretation of when the journey commences

 

[gimmea50anyday]

From a con/TM/guard point of view regardless of the booking details, a simple phone call to control or a glance on journeycheck to check wether the story matches and there had indeed been a service cancellation should have been the end of the matter at that point. We are required to check tyrell messages and ideally should also be checking other TOC's messages for this exact scenario. It in my opinion should never have gone to a UPFN or a TI report if the cancellations had been genuine. Indeed in my case with 1F72 being cancelled at Newcastle Not only was it paged out on tyrell but I ensured that EC and XC were aware that my pax were being plumped onto their services. It does help if the information is passed on which is the railways biggest downfall but the XC TM was unaware that his service had a SSO for CLS until I told him as he hadnt received the paperwork!

 

[Starmill]

It would appear that NajaB is the only person here who disagrees with ATOC's guidelines, which are that in times of disruption (which this is, if the train has been cancelled) TOCs must not discriminate against anyone on the basis of having a TOC ONLY ticket, and that all bodies should strive "to deliver the same high standards" to everyone!

 

[455driver]

It would appear that NajaB is the only person here who disagrees with ATOC's guidelines, which are that in times of disruption (which this is, if the train has been cancelled) TOCs must not discriminate against anyone on the basis of having a TOC ONLY ticket, and that all bodies should strive "to deliver the same high standards" to everyone!

But one train being cancelled does not constitute disruption so the quote above does not come into it.

 

[najaB]

It really is very simple - the passenger has a contract with TOC A, the failure of TOC A to transport them at the time that they want gives them no right to travel on TOC B's trains. Simple contract law.

I don't get why everyone is suddenly saying that it is okay to travel on the 'wrong' TOC for your ticket without getting permission from that company. I don't really care how that permission is gained - either by TOC A arranging it with TOC B (by endorsement or ticket acceptance being agreed) or by the passenger speaking to the Guard on TOC B's train - but without that permission being granted it is undeniable that their ticket is not valid on TOC B's train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm also not saying that TOC B *shouldn't* carry the passenger, just that the passenger doesn't have a right to be carried by TOC B. Based on the OP's description of events either permission had not been arranged, or it had and the guard on TOC B's train wasn't aware of it. In the former situation he was correct (in law, I'm making no comment on morality) to charge them as they didn't have a valid ticket, if the latter then he did not. We still do not know which case applies.

 

[yorksrob]

But one train being cancelled does not constitute disruption so the quote above does not come into it.

It does if you're booked on that train.

 

[Starmill]

But one train being cancelled does not constitute disruption so the quote above does not come into it.

It's a shame you also don't agree with ATOC's guidence on best practice then too!

 

[najaB]

It does if you're booked on that train.

I've never seen a single train cancellation listed on NRE's travel news page.

 

[yorksrob]

It really is very simple - the passenger has a contract with TOC A, the failure of TOC A to transport them at the time that they want gives them no right to travel on TOC B's trains. Simple contract law.

I don't get why everyone is suddenly saying that it is okay to travel on the 'wrong' TOC for your ticket without getting permission from that company. I don't really care how that permission is gained - either by TOC A arranging it with TOC B (by endorsement or ticket acceptance being agreed) or by the passenger speaking to the Guard on TOC B's train - but without that permission being granted it is undeniable that their ticket is not valid on TOC B's train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm also not saying that TOC B *shouldn't* carry the passenger, just that the passenger doesn't have a right to be carried by TOC B.

In such a circumstance, such permission should be implied as a matter of course.

TOC B shouldn't have the right to throw it's toys out the pram when it feels like it. If a train is cancelled, it is perfectly reasonable for a passenger to expect to go on the next train, and it is for the TOC concerned to ensure that the correct people in the other TOC are informed of the situation.

As a passenger and taxpayer, if there is an issue with one part of the railway, I expect the rest of it to pitch in seamlessly for passengers. If you don't fancy doing that, don't bother bidding for a franchise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I've never seen a single train cancellation listed on NRE's travel news page.

If I'm booked on a cancelled train, I don't really see how whether that train features on a fairly unreliable website, which I might not even have access to at the time anyway, bears any relevance to my onward travel plans at all.

 

[najaB]

TOC B shouldn't have the right to throw it's toys out the pram when it feels like it.

But they aren't throwing any toys out of any pram. They're just not carrying people for free. I don't know of any other industry where people expect Company B to provide service to Company A's customers for free, without any prior arrangement.

Especially since there's been no indication in the OP's post that it was the last service of the day, so the passengers would not have been stranded. They could still have been transported by TOC A (and delay repay would probably have covered the cost of their tickets!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If I'm booked on a cancelled train, I don't really see how whether that train features on a fairly unreliable website, which I might not even have access to at the time anyway, bears any relevance to my onward travel plans at all.

It has no relevance to *your* travel plans, and I agree that *your* plans have been put into disarray. However, Starmill's quote referred to 'times of disruption' (which are generally listed on NRE's website), rather than single trains being cancelled.

 

[Starmill]

At the end of the day I think you're just going to have to accept that in the case of a cancellation, most passengers won't adhere to their TOC restriction if it's quicker for them and there's room. Most TOCs also will follow the code of practice and won't try to stop them, but will sort it out internally.

Some TOCs (and I've no idea which it is in this case) most notably XC, will try to extort as much money as possible in every situation they can so are happy to abuse the system in their favour. It's as simple as that.

Personally I might try purchasing a new ticket if I suspected the new TOC would harras me like this and then insist on a refund of this new ticket cost later. If I had to do this with a cancelled TP service I'd have confidence that their Customer Relations would refund me, because in cases where passengers have had a really rubbish journey because of the huge number of problems that affect their trains (most of which are not things they can control) they are very understanding. I would most certainly not expect XC to issue a refund in similar circumstances. I deed I've had exactly this case before with them where as a result of no ticket acceptence I missed my final train and XC created themselves a very large and very hard-fought delay claim. As it happened, TP unjustly (but very generously on their part, because it was the right thing to do) ended up paying for my taxi!

 

[yorksrob]

But they aren't throwing any toys out of any pram. They're just not carrying people for free. I don't know of any other industry where people expect Company B to provide service to Company A's customers for free, without any prior arrangement.

Especially since there's been no indication in the OP's post that it was the last service of the day, so the passengers would not have been stranded. They could still have been transported by TOC A (and delay repay would probably have covered the cost of their tickets!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It has no relevance to *your* travel plans, and I agree that *your* plans have been put into disarray. However, Starmill's quote referred to 'times of disruption' (which are generally listed on NRE's website), rather than single trains being cancelled.

If you bid to run a public service, you should expect to pitch in sometimes, and yes, that may mean something carrying someone for free. The upside of that is that the other TOC has also bid to run a public service and would have to carry your passengers on occasion.

They may also come to some reimbursement between themselves afterwards, but this should not in any way impact on the seamless passenger experience on the day of disruption.

 

[najaB]

At the end of the day I think you're just going to have to accept that in the case of a cancellation, most passengers won't adhere to their TOC restriction if it's quicker for them and there's room. Most TOCs also will follow the code of practice and won't try to stop them, but will sort it out internally.

I don't disagree with any of that. What I am disagreeing with is the presumption and assertion that in such circumstances passengers have an inalienable right to travel on any train of their choosing, and that the TOC operating that service has an obligation to carry them when no such right or obligation exists.

I think it is extremely bad form for this forum to give the impression that cancellation of a service gives the passenger carte blanche to just plop themselves down onto any train without fear of repercussions.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't disagree with any of that. What I am disagreeing with is the presumption and assertion that in such circumstances passengers have an inalienable right to travel on any train of their choosing, and that the TOC operating that service has an obligation to carry them when no such right or obligation exists.

I think it is extremely bad form for this forum to give the impression that cancellation of a service gives the passenger carte blanche to just plop themselves down onto any train without fear of repercussions.

If there is a failure in privatisation policy, I think this forum has every right to expose that failure, as well as a duty to argue for its rectification.

 

[najaB]

If there is a failure in privatisation policy, I think this forum has every right to expose that failure, as well as a duty to argue for its rectification.

Again, no problem with that at all. However until such time as policies change a passenger plopping themselves down on to TOC B's train with a TOC A-only ticket is liable to be charged, regardless of if TOC A's train has been cancelled.

I, for one, will continue to advise that passengers need to have permission to do so from a representative of TOC B (either directly or by TOC A acting on their behalf), unless general ticket acceptance has been agreed.

 

[yorksrob]

Surprisingly, nobody has picked up the following from the Advance Fares terms and conditions:

If delays occur while travelling, you will be allowed to take the next available train(s) to complete your journey.

There is no requirement in the TnCs to stick to the same company.

-----
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Again, no problem with that at all. However until such time as policies change a passenger plopping themselves down on to TOC B's train with a TOC A-only ticket is liable to be charged, regardless of if TOC A's train has been cancelled.

I, for one, will continue to advise that passengers need to have permission to do so from a representative of TOC B (either directly or by TOC A acting on their behalf), unless general ticket acceptance has been agreed.

The above post suggests that at the very least, there is a clarification required. I, as a non-railway professional, would certainly interpret it as giving permission to travel on the next train, regardless of TOC.

 

[sheff1]

But one train being cancelled does not constitute disruption so the quote above does not come into it.

Disruption - "problem(s) which interrupt an event, activity, or process"

How can you say that cancellation of the train which someone is intending to catch is anything other than a problem which interrupts that person's attempts to reach their destination ?