Updated Easement List? + 030098

Discussion in 'Fares Advice & Policy' started by Starmill, 5 May 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Starmill

    Starmill Established Member

    Messages:
    8,836
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    There is a new List of Easements here, (linked to from here and scroll down to Section E). The date is 29/04/2015. The text at the top has changed to now include: "An easement which narrows permission is a negative easement.". What's that old quote about the more times you repeat something that isn't true, you make people believe it is?

    Anyway moving on from their latest attempt to 'get one over' on people, by using the most convoluted and nonsensical wording imaginable (either that or simply major levels of incompetence I guess!), may I draw attention to 030098 a 'Routeing Point' easement (no definition of that appears to be given?) which states:

    "Journeys from Chandlers Ford via Eastleigh and Basingstoke are permitted regardless of fares. This easement applies in both directions."

    Which journeys are not permitted regardless of fares? They are permitted according to... well, weather they are permitted or not, as per the Routeing Guide, as set out in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. Why would fares influence that? Therefore the only remaining logical interpretation is that all journeys from Chandlers ford are permitted via Eastleigh and Basingstoke.

    So Chandlers Ford to Romsey via Eastleigh, Basingstoke and Salisbury is fine, right?
     
    Last edited: 5 May 2015
  2. cool110

    cool110 Member

    Messages:
    267
    Joined:
    12 Dec 2014
    Location:
    Preston
    That easement is removing the requirement to apply the fare-check rule when finding an appropriate pair of routeing points.

    As for your example. Chandlers Ford and Romsey share one or more routeing points so only the shortest route +3 miles is permitted and direct trains to and from one of the common points, therefore the fare-check rule and the easement don't come into play at all.
     
  3. greatkingrat

    greatkingrat Established Member

    Messages:
    1,843
    Joined:
    20 Jan 2011
    If they mean that Eastleigh is always an appropriate routeing point for Chandlers Ford then fine, but I don't see what Basingstoke has to do with it?
     
  4. Starmill

    Starmill Established Member

    Messages:
    8,836
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    I see. But it says 'regardless of fares'. Surely if thy mean what you say it would say 'without the need to apply a fares check' or similar.

    Then again there are so many hilarious mistakes in these new 'negative easements', such as:

    "030156 For journeys to Pokesdown and Christchurch via Southampton Central may doubleback from Bournmouth. This easement applies in both directions."


    I don't suppose they can be trusted to proof-read even once!
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    I completely agree yes. But then why not simply say that?
     
  5. TUC

    TUC Established Member

    Messages:
    1,518
    Joined:
    11 Nov 2010
    Cannanyone explain the purpose of 030236 'customers traveling from Durham and Chester-le-Srreet to Northallerton and beyond may travel via DarlIngton'? That would presumably be valid on a shortest route basis anyway (and is the logical route that almost all passengers would take so I'm not sure what it's seeking to address).
     
  6. Merseysider

    Merseysider Established Member Fares Advisor

    Messages:
    3,599
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2014
    Location:
    North West
    Perhaps it's patchwork to resolve a bug eg some tickets only being offered via Sunderland and Thornaby? Your guess is as good as mine
     
  7. kieron

    kieron Established Member

    Messages:
    1,697
    Joined:
    22 Mar 2012
    Location:
    Connah's Quay
    It could be meant as something like "If there is a permitted route from Eastleigh to (say) Trowbridge via Basingstoke, you are allowed to travel from Chandler's Ford to Trowbridge using that route between Eastleigh and Trowbridge."

    There isn't a permitted route from Eastleigh to Trowbridge via Basingstoke, and Eastleigh-Trowbridge single tickets cost the same as Chandler's Ford-Trowbridge ones anyway, so it doesn't affect this route.

    I don't know what tickets it would affect now. As this is an old easement, it may well be obsolete now.
    It is if you're going to Northallerton, but may not be if you're going beyond there. For instance, take Durham to Barrow-in-Furness.

    The shortest route is via Carlisle.
    Barrow is associated with Carlisle and Lancaster Group (Bare Lane, Lancaster and Carnforth).
    Durham is associated with Newcastle and Darlington.
    A Durham-Barrow anytime day single costs £50.50.
    Lancaster, Carlisle and Newcastle pass the fare check, but Darlington does not.
    Routes from Newcastle to Carlisle and Lancaster all go via Hexham.
    So no routes via Darlington are offered before I reach the easements.

    NRE offers itineraries via Darlington, although sadly only via Manchester rather than Skipton.
     
    Last edited: 6 May 2015
  8. Starmill

    Starmill Established Member

    Messages:
    8,836
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    Some easements there at first appear 100% redundant.

    For example 030018:

    Gosh, how generous of them. I would never have imagined you're allowed to go from Ludlow to Shrewsbury ('or beyond') via Craven Arms...

    Capture8.PNG

    Ditto 030031:

    Really? Would never have guessed!

    But of course there may be journeys which would not otherwise be valid without these. I'll be very impressed if anyone can come up with some, but take care with your interpretation of 'and beyond'! :p

    PS Another prize if anyone can tell me what the difference is between 'Via X and beyond' and 'To X and beyond' :lol:
     
    Last edited: 6 May 2015
  9. mattdickinson

    mattdickinson Member

    Messages:
    285
    Joined:
    14 Nov 2010
    Location:
    Uxbridge
    "Via X and beyond" would exclude journeys finishing at X while "To X and beyond" would include journeys finishing at X.
     
  10. pennine

    pennine Member

    Messages:
    144
    Joined:
    8 Aug 2010
    Location:
    Redcar
    Could someone please dumb this down for me? :D
     
  11. Merseysider

    Merseysider Established Member Fares Advisor

    Messages:
    3,599
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2014
    Location:
    North West
  12. pennine

    pennine Member

    Messages:
    144
    Joined:
    8 Aug 2010
    Location:
    Redcar
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page