I think Megatrain probably should be withdrawn. Fine, keep the website (although I find the branding quite offputting personally!), but it should sell normal Advance tickets IMO. If the price goes up, fine, because hardly any of these £1 tickets are sold - it's a gimmick!
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
When using an advance ticket, do you have to use it EXACTLY as specified....
- Thread starter 4SRKT
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I agree but the tickets only came into existance after the bus was withdrawn hence the "Mega" branding I think Stagecoach have done similar on other routes but this one strikes a memory with me. Megatrain tickets just add more confusion into the oh so perfectly clear** ticketing system
** I was being sarcastic
** I was being sarcastic
Lampshade
Established Member
I'm inclined to agree, although the cheapest advance tickets go quickly and there are usually some £1/£5 megatrain fares left a week or so before departure, so it can be good as a last resort.
I wouldn't say so much that PF collectors are 'charging PFs inappropriately' , more that the scheme itself is fundamentally flawed and inappropriate.
I wouldn't say that the PF scheme is being 'misused'. It's being used in exactly the way it was intended . . . which is what is wrong with it.
As a scheme it's nothing short of blindly vindictive. I can see no justification short of greed for wanting twice what is owed.
Break a vase in a shop and you're liable to pay for the vase. You don't get charged for two.
From South West Trains own website, on the topic of penalty fares, they state:
**You do not have a valid ticket and are approached by a revenue protection employee, who is an authorised penalty fare collector you may be liable to a penalty fare of £20 or twice the full single fare - whichever is the greater amount to the next station at which your train stops.
You do not have a valid train ticket and are approached by a guard, who is NOT an authorised penalty fare collector you may be liable to pay the full single or return fare for the journey you have made or wish to make and you will not be entitled to any discounts (for example, Railcards) or special terms, which would otherwise apply. This is in accordance with the National Rail Conditions on Carriage.
When the guard issues you a ticket a penalty fare, a 'warning' will also be issued, so that you are aware of the penalty fare scheme should you be approached by an authorised penalty fare collector on your next journey.**
So if the company is content to accept only the correct fare that was due on those occasions when only a guard is present then they should be content to receive that at all times. How can they justify applying a penalty fare at other times just because a penalty fares inspector is present? This would, and I'm sure has, resulted in two people receiving two very different levels of treatment for the same situation, simply due to staffing anomalies.
I don't have issues in companies holding passengers to the terms of their ticket or the NRCoC.
I don't have issues with excessing up to the correct fare or the need to purchase a new ticket (where appropriate)
I do take issue with the penalty fares scheme based on it's overly punitive nature.
Honest passengers should not travel in fear of making a mistake. They should be easy in the knowledge that, if they have made a mistake, then all that will happen is that they pay what they would have, or should have, in the first instance. If this means that a 'chancer' or fare evader is only held to pay the same then so be it. Rather that than the other way around. What is it they say? "better to see a guilty man walk free than see an innocent man hang"? As it stands, the penalty fares scheme is licence to lynch everyone.
In the case of persistent fare evaders, let the company build a case to prove it.
Matt Taylor
Established Member
Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that not many of the £1 tickets are sold? I see a lot of these tickets every day and the £1 fares are sold in significant numbers, it is unusual for the sale to be for more than £5 in fact.
I'm sure all the £1 fares are sold usually, I just don't think there will be that many of them. I should have said "I don't think many of these tickets are sold at a price of £1" to avoid confusion.
On the occasions I've looked for Megabus/Megatrain tickets I've very rarely seen £1 tickets, and the only times I've got them is by booking on the day they went on sale. I think I've only ever used Megabus/Megatrain once myself but have booked them for other people several times. I just found the whole thing frustrating as it's difficult to see what the routes are, the times often don't connect with whatever other journey needs to be added on, or are just at inconvenient times.
I recall once looking for Megabus for a group wanting to do Wick to London, Megabus price was something like £25 from Inverness, but only £1 from Edinburgh on the day they went on sale. It was then cheapest to buy AP from Wick to Sheffield with an overnight stay in Edinburgh, rather than Wick to Edinburgh, for which you have to leave the station thus a BOJ is enforced so no-one can complain at you then getting Megabus.... anyway as soon as I got them the price jumped up.
I've looked at Sheffield - London a few times and only once was it worth me making a booking. I don't bother now as it's £10 on EC direct.
It should be an affordable fare from anywhere to anywhere, inclusive of connections and covering you for the whole journey without debate across any mode. If we do not get this, the car will be the mode of travel of choice for the vast majority even when oil is ridiculously expensive (as it will be).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I just looked at York - London (Megabus Plus) and there are a few £1 fares available. But change it to 5 people, and guess how many days are showing the fare as £5 for the group? None. Zero.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
I am not persuaded that the offer of Megatrain tickets should be withdrawn - if there IS a pricing mechanism which encourages passengers to travel on specific journeys WHICH THEY WOULD NOT OTHERWISE TAKE, then it has merit.
The difficulty then arises of how to deal with passengers who stop short.
As I'm opposed to Penalty Fares in all but certain restricted cases, I couldn't justify a PF for stopping short. But I wonder if a Megatrain ticket could be Excessed instead? A "Under-Distance Excess", calculated as for an overdistance Excess, by subtracting the fare already paid from the correct ticket? No, maybe not. (We don't want even more fares complexity).
There seem to be most sense in MikeW's suggestion of simply charging them the £3.20 for a single for the Southampton to Eastleigh journey (the journey whih they didn't actually take but which would have been valid and the most simple journey using their Megatrain tickets).
The difficulty then arises of how to deal with passengers who stop short.
As I'm opposed to Penalty Fares in all but certain restricted cases, I couldn't justify a PF for stopping short. But I wonder if a Megatrain ticket could be Excessed instead? A "Under-Distance Excess", calculated as for an overdistance Excess, by subtracting the fare already paid from the correct ticket? No, maybe not. (We don't want even more fares complexity).
There seem to be most sense in MikeW's suggestion of simply charging them the £3.20 for a single for the Southampton to Eastleigh journey (the journey whih they didn't actually take but which would have been valid and the most simple journey using their Megatrain tickets).
OwlMan
Established Member
Why do Stagecoach want to take fare revenue from SWT and give it to Megatrain (MegaBus)? There must be some internal accounting reason why. Why can't SWT just not sell advance tickets for the same fare as megabus?
This at least would remove one set of t&c
Peter
This at least would remove one set of t&c
Peter
No, most of the journeys I make are advance fares, and I would be put off from travelling if there weren't any. Yes I may take up a seat that someone else wants who has a season ticket or a normal ticket, but I'm not too bothered about that.
This is in response to an earlier thread as well :"Couple fined for alighting early at Eastleigh"
When the company sells you a ticket then that is a contract between you and the company . The company is under an obligation to provide the service provided at the AGREED price . The company cannot rely on the small print to avoid honouring the contract. I believe that is well established in law .The company must show good reason for charging extra. But will you get off the station?
When the company sells you a ticket then that is a contract between you and the company . The company is under an obligation to provide the service provided at the AGREED price . The company cannot rely on the small print to avoid honouring the contract. I believe that is well established in law .The company must show good reason for charging extra. But will you get off the station?
EM2
Established Member
Indeed. And the contract entered into by these passengers was to travel between Waterloo and Southampton, NOT between Waterloo and Eastleigh.
SWT were happy to keep their side of the contract by taking them to Southampton, it is the passengers who broke the contact by alighting at Eastleigh, which is not was agreed by them when they clicked the Terms and Conditions box on the Megatrain website.
SWT were happy to keep their side of the contract by taking them to Southampton, it is the passengers who broke the contact by alighting at Eastleigh, which is not was agreed by them when they clicked the Terms and Conditions box on the Megatrain website.
Last edited:
Helvellyn
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,013
Exactly. And the contract was between the passenger and Stagecoach, with SWT carrying the passengers between the two points (Waterloo and Southampton). By breaking the journey at Eastleigh the passengers are at fault.
The equivalent on the bus would be asking the bus driver to drop you a few miles out of town because it's closer to your home than going all the way to the bus station!
Personally I'd like to see megatrain withdrawn, as it is harder to enforce than on a bus where you can ensure people make the journey booked. But while it is in place if someone boards my train at other than the station from which they've booked (e.g. at Clapham or Eastleigh) they can expect to be sold a Condition 2 ticket for that journey.
I appreciate it looks harsh, but do you agree or disagree that both parties in a contract are obliged to honour the terms and conditions they have agreed upon?
Been away for a week; I gave up reading this thread when people started making spurious comparisons to breaking bowls and drinking cans; this is a service, not a product, they're priced and consumed differently!
My tuppence on the whole issue: TOCs have some logic behind their pricing which, whilst it might not make much sense on the ground, often has some sense behind it in regards to loading and profit maximization. That said, the complexity of fares and the variety of journeys means that a number of anomalies will crop up - some to the benefit of the customer, some to the benefit of the TOC.
From a more philosophical viewpoint, what people are concerned about is fairness. They expect to receive a service whose value is somehow proportional to the amount that they have paid, and whose cost is proportional to the amount of effort they put in and service they receive. At the moment, the pricing structure does not often deliver this - the OP's case being a good example. That doesn't mean that it needs reforming, as it clearly offers a reasonable financial return if done properly, but reform might help improve customer/TOC relations and increase fairness. Read Machiavelli's The Prince: you don't have to be virtuous and good, but it helps to at least seem it!
In an ideal world, if we're to keep a fare system similar to our current one (with advances, off peaks, etc), then I'd like to see more flexibility in how 'fare evaders' (by which I mean anyone with an invalid ticket, intentional, trivial, or serious) are dealt. I think the following three measures would increase a sense of fairness and also ensure that people who try it on pay the full price:
* Ability to claim a refund on penalty fares/full prices fares if absent documentation is produced at a station at a later date (I'm thinking of this sort of example where the customer forgot a railcard. This could also cover forgotten advance tickets where a customer has the seat reservation etc)
* The TOCs draw up a list of 'minor evasions', which might include travelling short on an advance ticket, travelling incorrectly on a peak service with an off-peak ticket, over travelling by 1 stop, and other situations where a customer has paid but is not technically on the correct ticket. For these, customers would have to pay the cost difference between their existing fare and the appropriate fare plus a £10 or 20% of full priced ticket, whichever is greater, admin fee (this last bit would stop people habitually buying off-peak tickets for peak trains in the hope that they don't get charged). Essentially, this would cover most occasions where passengers have purchased a ticket, unless it has already been used, it out of date or way off route.
* Introduce penalty fares of £50 + the full price fare for the journey nationally for those travelling without tickets at all. And maybe a day in the stocks.
My tuppence on the whole issue: TOCs have some logic behind their pricing which, whilst it might not make much sense on the ground, often has some sense behind it in regards to loading and profit maximization. That said, the complexity of fares and the variety of journeys means that a number of anomalies will crop up - some to the benefit of the customer, some to the benefit of the TOC.
From a more philosophical viewpoint, what people are concerned about is fairness. They expect to receive a service whose value is somehow proportional to the amount that they have paid, and whose cost is proportional to the amount of effort they put in and service they receive. At the moment, the pricing structure does not often deliver this - the OP's case being a good example. That doesn't mean that it needs reforming, as it clearly offers a reasonable financial return if done properly, but reform might help improve customer/TOC relations and increase fairness. Read Machiavelli's The Prince: you don't have to be virtuous and good, but it helps to at least seem it!
In an ideal world, if we're to keep a fare system similar to our current one (with advances, off peaks, etc), then I'd like to see more flexibility in how 'fare evaders' (by which I mean anyone with an invalid ticket, intentional, trivial, or serious) are dealt. I think the following three measures would increase a sense of fairness and also ensure that people who try it on pay the full price:
* Ability to claim a refund on penalty fares/full prices fares if absent documentation is produced at a station at a later date (I'm thinking of this sort of example where the customer forgot a railcard. This could also cover forgotten advance tickets where a customer has the seat reservation etc)
* The TOCs draw up a list of 'minor evasions', which might include travelling short on an advance ticket, travelling incorrectly on a peak service with an off-peak ticket, over travelling by 1 stop, and other situations where a customer has paid but is not technically on the correct ticket. For these, customers would have to pay the cost difference between their existing fare and the appropriate fare plus a £10 or 20% of full priced ticket, whichever is greater, admin fee (this last bit would stop people habitually buying off-peak tickets for peak trains in the hope that they don't get charged). Essentially, this would cover most occasions where passengers have purchased a ticket, unless it has already been used, it out of date or way off route.
* Introduce penalty fares of £50 + the full price fare for the journey nationally for those travelling without tickets at all. And maybe a day in the stocks.
Last edited:
shinkansen1966
Member
"Minor evasions ?"
"When using an advance ticket, do you have to use it EXACTLY as specified.... "
"more flexibility in how 'fare evaders'... "
The TOCs view ticket enforcement like the shops view shop lifting. Purchasing the ticket and you agree to the conditions. TOCs want their money and penalty fares are source of money for them.
I dislike this lousy rail ticket system as much as anyone else. These TOCs have to make a profit to pay their shareholders and finance their bank overdrafts. They need to pay their staff, rolling stock and track charges. And that all has to come out ticket sales and penalty fare revenue (plus money from DfT, where they get it). It's all about £££.
"When using an advance ticket, do you have to use it EXACTLY as specified.... "
"more flexibility in how 'fare evaders'... "
The TOCs view ticket enforcement like the shops view shop lifting. Purchasing the ticket and you agree to the conditions. TOCs want their money and penalty fares are source of money for them.
I dislike this lousy rail ticket system as much as anyone else. These TOCs have to make a profit to pay their shareholders and finance their bank overdrafts. They need to pay their staff, rolling stock and track charges. And that all has to come out ticket sales and penalty fare revenue (plus money from DfT, where they get it). It's all about £££.
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
Revenue enforcement costs money. I don't see any reason why the cost of that should not be borne by the people that have not paid the correct fare. The vast majority of passengers manage to do it.
So what do you suggest? We all work for nothing so you can get a free ride :roll:
Agreed - my suggestions are tentative and perhaps would not be financially valid. However we see plenty of examples on here, in newspapers and on other forums of passengers who have received often heavy fines, penalties or extra charges because of failing to fully follow the terms and conditions of their ticket. Whilst the reason for different pricing might be clear to those who know the revenue allocation system, the restrictions can seem petty and confusing to others. How many people are put off rail travel because of stories of fines or otherwise due to passengers with valid tickets having to make extra payments?
No-one thinks passengers should get a free ride. I don't think that the OP should be able to travel short on an advance. But I do think that there is a significant difference - both morally and in revenue received by the TOCs - between that sort of practice and those who try and travel without paying. I don't think its unreasonable to ask that revenue enforcement reflects that.
Only possibly..
The passenger is entitled to the same rights as he would have had if he had paid for a full priced ticket.So any conditions the company might make which infringe those rights are invalid . If a shop sell goods in a sale the purchaser has the same rights as he would have if he had paid the full price for them.
The couple at Eastleigh had a valid ticket so the company was not entitled to levy a penalty charge if this was done.
The passenger is entitled to the same rights as he would have had if he had paid for a full priced ticket.So any conditions the company might make which infringe those rights are invalid . If a shop sell goods in a sale the purchaser has the same rights as he would have if he had paid the full price for them.
The couple at Eastleigh had a valid ticket so the company was not entitled to levy a penalty charge if this was done.
Yes, it is all about money,as with most things in life. The real question is how should people be treated when they break the rules? And are the rules fair int he first place? That's the debate that these kinds of topics always end up with!
Personally, I think that the T&C's for these types of rpducts should be much clearer (see the earlier posts on how to buy megatrain tickets). Perhaps specific warnings should appear on the screen, such as 'You cannot break your journey, start or leave the train at any place other than the origin and destination stations on your ticket'. This would then clear the TOC of any accusation that the T&C's were difficult to find, or unclear in any way. It would also be easier to justify a penalty fare in the circumstances that led to this thread.
I don't think he was suggesting that! I think he was saying that, under this system, PF's are an integral source of TOC revenue, and I can't disagree with that view! I also can't disagree with the notion that honest travellers should subisidise those that have no intention fo buying a ticket at all, or those who buy railcard discounted tickets despite not having a railcard and having no intention to buy one unless they have to!
The troubkle is, it's very hard to distinguish between a genuine mistake, and an intent to defraud! There have been lots of examples on the forums wher epassnegers have made what seems like an honest error, and been penalised for it, and there also seems that a lot of the situations described could also be an instance where the same excuse could have been used by a dishonest passenger seeking to 'cheat the system'. But PF's where they exist, seem to be an easy way for TOC's to extract money having to investigate passneger claims, or their own services, very closely.
Oh, that was a bit longer than I intended!
EM2
Established Member
No they didn't. Their ticket was ONLY valid between Waterloo and Southampton. Whether a PF was the appropriate punishment in this case is another point, but the fact remains that their ticket was NOT valid to Eastleigh.
As cuccir said, you are comparing products (things bought in shops) and services.
I once took out some car insurance and paid an annual premium. There was a clause in Terms & Conditions that said if I cancel the insurance after fewer than twelve weeks after the date of commencement, I would be liable to a penalty, as this was not a product for short-term cover.
When I had to cancel the policy after nine weeks because I no longer needed a car, I paid the penalty
I notice you still haven't answered the question posed by myself and Ferret about the passengers breaking the contract they had entered into.
The passengers boarded the train with a valid ticket however invaildated it when they left the train early as per their agreements with the terms and conditions (their contract with the train company). A penalty fare should not have been charged as per previous posts but they should have been made to pay the difference between the ticket they bought and the one they should have purchased as they did not have a valid ticket for Eastleigh
shinkansen1966
Member
- Ending ticketing anamolies where splitting your ticket is cheaper than buying a through ticket
- Scrapping the £13 minimum weekday Network Card fare.
- The difference between the cheapest advance and dearest anytime fare should be no more than a multiple of 4.
- Only one national website selling rail ticket across the Network. No need for multiple TOC web sites. They offer the same range with occassional exclusive discounts. And scrap these pointless agency sites like trainline.com. Why exactly are they so necessary ?
- Reversal of the steady increase in the hours and services covered by peak travel bans for trains out of London. And have some uniformity which is understood by the public. eg universally 16:00 - 18:30.
- Fixed time when tickets go on sale for future travel. Currently, this varies from TOC to TOC. Let's go for exactly 60 days ahead when all tickets go on sale. Network Rail to agree, without exception.
- Introduce 'half' off peak ex-saver return tickets. This will end the anomoly that some ex-saver return tickets are only sightly dearer than anytime single tickets. Allows passengers to mix their ticket types when buying return tickets.
- Introduce a national rail card for all. Say £70 per annum for a third off all rail fares. People should be rewarded for loyalty. There are many affinity schemes around the counrty - eg airmiles and Nectar. Nationally, the railways should follow with a universal product.
Last edited:
I think this is the real crux of the matter. I agree with what you say in principle, but I have doubts over whether it is in fact workable on a day to day basis. In this case, I can understand the basic argument being 'I've paid for a longer trip, why should I be penalty fared' as the idea that going a shorter distance costs more is an anathema to most people in our society!
No, they did not have a valid ticket to alight at Eastleigh, because of the T&C's of Megatrain tickets. No one really disputes that, the question is how such breaks of conditions should be treated ,and how to ensure that purchasers are aware of the restrictions.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm not sure how an excess can be charged in this case - is a Megatrain ticket not in effect a TOC specific ticket which cannot be excessed?
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
I don't know if you are right about PF's being an integral part of every TOC's revenue stream.
With my TOC, they can only be issued by Revenue staff (not ordinary train guards). The staff who are authorised to issue them are very few and far between on the trains I work - I can only remember seeing RPI's on my trains twice in the past six months (and I work daytime trains from a main London terminus), and they certainly would have the barriers manned a lot more than they do! If the TOC was relying on the revenue stream, they would have a lot more staff around to enforce them!
I have heard it said that the RPI's actually cost more than they collect, after all the overheads are taken into account (don't forget, the TOC doesn't get to pocket the cash taken).
In my geographic area PF's are there as a deterrent on journeys where the full open fare (if charged) is likely to be relativity small, and there are a large number of unmanned / unbarriered stations where passengers can enter / leave unchallenged, or just buy a short ticket when they get to the barrier (eg Reading West to Reading for example).
As an example of some of the figures involved, here are the passenger flows for Grangetown station in Cardiff by tickets sold (closest unbarriered station to Cardiff Central) source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grangetown_railway_station
2004/05 * 0.601 million
2005/06 * ▼ 0.326 million
2006/07 * ▼ 115,108
2007/08 * ▲ 124,937
2008/09 * ▲ 133,478
What caused the huge fall in passenger numbers between 2004 - 2006 (nearly half a million tickets a year)? Between 2004-06 the majority of South Wales stations were barriered, meaning that passengers could not enter the train without a ticket. Therefore they could not get as far as Cardiff Central before being asked for a ticket to exit the station. (South Wales is not a PF area, by the way).
If TOC's were serious about using PF's as a revenue source, I think Arriva would have jumped on that particular bandwagon a long time ago, given the numbers involved!
I take it you meant using rather than suing?
Whilst I agree that monsters like thetrainline and raileasy should be scrapped, who would run the single site? I think it's fair that each company should be allowed to claim a share of the sales commision for the tickets sold through their site, especially when those like East Coast give some back in the form of discounts on their own fares.
That's how I understand it!
I think some TOC's are much keener on PF's than others! To their credit, Arriva don't seem very interested, whereas many of the First Group companies have heartily embraced the idea! I still think it is easier for TOC's to destaff stations, stick a TVM in, and wait for the PF's!
I was working in Reading station when the barriers came in - before that so many people just used to jump on a London train with no intention of buying a ticket unless they were approached by the guard. In my view, PF's are only really workable when the system is fully barriered, with ticket buying facilities available at the vast majority of stations for most of the traffic day. It isn't much of a deterrent if the chances of being caught are negligible, but prosecution for fare evasion (jumping barriers to access the trains) might be a better one!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I take it you meant using rather than suing?
Whilst I agree that monsters like thetrainline and raileasy should be scrapped, who would run the single site? I think it's fair that each company should be allowed to claim a share of the sales commision for the tickets sold through their site, especially when those like East Coast give some back in the form of discounts on their own fares.
Yes! Another one of my all too frequent typos!
shinkansen1966
Member
I take it you meant using rather than suing?
who would run the single site?
ATOC/NationalRail should run the single site. For each ticket sale, the proceeds would then be divided amongst the TOCs via the Rail Settlement Plan exactly as they are now.
- Status