....The majority of the travelling public don't even know you can start/stop short anyway....[/QUOTE}
Informative possibly, but utterly irrelevant in this topic.
....The travelling public reasonably consider flexibility when travelling by train to be a choice of times when they travel....
In my experience those who are unsure ask, those who know do one of two things, change the ticket or moan like f**k when they are caught out in an attempt to get the railway to back down, YMMV.
....When he purchased his ticket, he had every intention of boarding a Newton Abbot. Is it really fair and just that we have a set of rules which state that if his circumstances change later, but he still wants to catch that exact same train, he can't hop on at the next stop? This has none of the negative effects taking a different train entirely does....
He had an option, change the ticket before the travel, he didn't do it. Is it really fair that someone who knows they want flexibility of starting station and pays more while someone else buys the cheaper ticket and is not made to pay the difference when he wants that same flexibility?
Fairness is very subjective, the rules apply to everybody equally.
....It is a completely different situation to the train ticket example so I don't know why you persist with it. The reason you pay more for a mobile call to an 0800 number is because your network provider has to pay to terminate the call, whereas your landline provider does not.....
What has a landline got to do with calling an 0207 number from a mobile? You could atleast get the example right if you want to try to say it is not the same.
The point is that I can't make up rules that suit me and I doubt a phone company would change it's tariffs based on what I want. I know that calling an 0800 number costs more than a 0207 number so I make a choice, the same way as the passenger has a choice about how much flexibility they have, it doesn't mean the railway has to change the rules because of that person.
....So if a passenger simply wants to catch the same train but thinks there is perhaps a 5% chance they might pick it up at the next stop, they should instead purchase a significantly more expensive ticket offering a whole bunch of flexibility they neither want nor need but is priced in order to offer?
Flexible tickets are priced to give a tad more flexibility than just boarding the train you booked at the next stop!....
The passenger has a choice, they can have the flexibility or they can pay less for a more restricted ticket, the terms are not hidden nor are they particularly difficult to understand. If the passenger has a "5% chance" they might not go to that station they weigh up the options and make a choice they have to abide by that choice or risk losing out.
.....Two scenarios:
a) He boards at Newton Abbot. He pays £30. Railway gets £30.
b) He boards at Exeter St Davids. He pays £30. Railway gets £30.
Scenario b) in favour of Scenario a) does not leave the railway out of pocket. We'll ignore Scenario c), whereby an Advance from Exeter is £40, because this is a stupid scenario anyway and the fact it sometimes exists (Though not often) is another farce....
You missed an scenario....
d) He paid to travel only from Newton Abbot but actually boards at Exeter St Davids. He paid £30 for his restricted ticket. Railway should have received £100 for a flexible ticket (or £110 if he had changed his restricted ticket)
Scenario c is much more like the actual situation don't you think? So what has the railway lost out on? Oh that's right, they haven't lost out at all, I blame my maths teacher.......
....I suspect this chap knew which station he intended to go from, too. Perhaps he booked months in advance and could think of not a single reason why he wouldnt get on at his home station. Then on the day of his train for whatever reason found himself in Exeter. It's the sort of thing that happens but not frequently enough for anyone to buy a massively more expensive ticket just incase....
Yes it happens, that's life and sometimes we have to accept what happens in life. We also have to accept that cheap tickets have restrictions that are not always in our favour, that is life too, but I guess anything that is anti-passenger is unfair and screw the railway 'cause it's just an evil, uncaring business machine that could never lose out when they take less money than they should, and anyway, who cares if they do lose out? They are just an evil, uncaring business machine........
....Remember - he's not asking for full flexibility here. He's still on the same train he's tied to by virtue of his low priced ticket....
He has two choices, flexibility or low cost, he made a choice, he has to live with that choice and accept the compromise he made, same as everyone else.
....Oh get a grip.
People buy an Advance ticket knowing they must use that train. If you start short, you use that train.
People buy a flexibile walkon fare so they have flexibility to change to a different train at a different time should they need to, or when they dont know which train they wish to use in advance.
Starting short doesn't change this....
Starting short is not allowed by the conditions of the ticket, neither is breaking and resuming nor ending at an intermediate station. It is a specific condition of the ticket and if you can't abide by it don't buy the ticket.
....I appreciate it raises issues around &Connections tickets, but this is a slightly seperate issue anyway because unlike the example being discussed here you never actually board the train you booked originally....
An '&Connections' ticket is valid by the operator named and connecting services, the connecting service may or may not have a reservation on it for the passenger, but, in any case, the only connecting trains you can (officially) use are those shown on the ticket or those shown on a valid travel itinerary, so in most cases, reservation or not, people will travel on the 'booked' connecting service.
....My bottom line is that an Advance ticket should tie you to that particular train you book only. No other trains. If you get on later or even get off earlier then fair enough - but only on that train. You've booked that seat from A to D and you've paid for it. Which points between A and D you choose to occupy it should be your concern. This still denies the passenger of almost all flexibility in return for a cheaper fare, true to the spirit of the Advance. It still allows yield management on certain trains. Infact it still does everything an Advance does now, with the exception of generating ridiculous news stories and silly petty arguments every so often.
So in your head, I could, for example, pay £7.50 for a Rugby-London Euston Advance Single and travel on the same train from Milton Keynes to London Euston, whilst the chap sitting next to me pays £18.50 for the same journey, booked at the same time, because he requested a ticket for the journey he was actually making (because he is joe public and knows nothing of starting short), and you don't see a problem with this system?
And what exactly would you do for break of journey, that is, breaking and resuming at an intermediate station? If starting and stopping short is fine what of that, surely you couldn't keep that stupid rule? Does the passenger have to understand when they can and cannot break their journey? Do they have to put up with "stupid rules"? and what happens when the rule is broken? nothing? Are they asked to pay four times more to do so? That can't be fair, so how exactly would you promote these rules in a simple way that can be understood by a passenger (of any ability) in under five minutes? (I say five minutes on the assumption that it is not peak time and the rapidly expanding queue behind them, as they struggle to get their head around these simple rules, remains at one person)
