Where is the Maltese cross/dagger?

[Joe Paxton]

I have to say I find Yorkie's rather combative attitude and willingness to demonise the LU gateline staff in advance for something they haven't yet done (and may well not do) in this thread a bit unnecessary.

 

[yorkie]

I have to say I find Yorkie's rather combative attitude and willingness to demonise the LU gateline staff in advance for something they haven't yet done (and may well not do) in this thread a bit unnecessary.

I find the above post a bit unnecessary.

If you are referring with my post above yours, which was only posted in reply to philthetube's doubts regarding acceptance, then I challenge you to come up with anything inaccurate in it?

There is no "demonising" but there are valid concerns about behaviour of some gateline staff because we have experienced issues before. Perhaps you've never encountered problems at LU gatelines? Many of us have. philthetube and I are far from the only ones who thinks there is a possibility of problems...

Given the OP's itinerary, I wouldn't fancy having to debate with a member of LUL Paddington gateline staff at 05.30 in the morning with the deadline for the 06.30 departure from Kings Cross rapidly approaching.

The reality is that we do need to prepare people for potential disputes. I am not saying a dispute is likely in this particular case but it is a possibility. I would offer similar advice and warnings to people using tickets valid on the Great Northern Route into Moorgate/King's Cross using the inter-availability rule (see http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=2803929&highlight=moorgate#post2803929)

There is no point waiting until after the event to give advise. If you can prepare people in advance, then that's all the better. I've only had to reiterate the point because others have posted expressing further doubts about acceptance!

 

[Joe Paxton]

OK, maybe my comment was a bit strong Yorkie. I'm just not sure whether quoting parts of the LU CSA job description back to a CSA would necessarily be a good idea in a dispute!

I can't think of any significant problems I've had at LU gatelines. (Wracking my brain, one comes to mind where someone I was with had a problem, but it turned out it was their fault not the CSAs.) I'm not suggesting problems don't or can't happen though.

I just think the villain of this piece is the 'big' railway that's managed to make such a hash of implementing a new ticket format, one whereby a newly issued ticket manages to omit the long established (30 or so years) marker for cross London Tube transfers.

 

[philthetube]

If someone turns up at a gateline with a ticket, which I know through my training to be invalid, having been told that network rail tickets must have a Maltese cross to be valid I would dispute it and refer the passenger to the station supervisor to resolve, for all I might know there may be tickets which do not include underground travel. I don't get network rail ticket training.

 

[Hadders]

If someone turns up at a gateline with a ticket, which I know through my training to be invalid, having been told that network rail tickets must have a Maltese cross to be valid I would dispute it and refer the passenger to the station supervisor to resolve, for all I might know there may be tickets which do not include underground travel. I don't get network rail ticket training.

The point is the training is inadequate. Some tickets without the maltese cross are valid on the Underground.

Take the example in this thread - no maltese cross but even someone with a very basic knowledge should be able to deduce that a journey involving an arrival at Paddington followed by a departure from Kings Cross needs to involve Underground travel to get between the two.

Yorkie's link above to a post of mine on another thread about the inter-availability between Finsbury Park/Kings Cross and Moorgate also demonstrates that training is inadequate on something that should be known by anyone working on the gate line at Kings Cross St Pancras.

 

[dvalts]

Many thanks for all the advice (and interesting points raised ), I was reading intently but have just had chance to reply.

(Spoiler Alert)

The ticket was rejected by the LU barriers at Paddington and exiting at Kings Cross - but the gate staff waived me through without any close inspection of it.

 

[yorkie]

I'm glad to hear you made it!

 

[Haywain]

I understand that the Maltese cross will be making a return early next week, all being well.

 

[Haywain]

Or is it dated the 7th because the journey from Lympstone Village could conceivably begin before midnight, i.e. still on the 7th? (Though yes there is a train from there at 0008 which gets to Exeter St D at 0037, in time for the booked 0106 to Paddington.)

In my view, as all travel is on the 8th, the ticket should be dated for the 8th. That is how other booking channels treat this so, in my view, this is a fault with the booking channel used - namely the Great Western web site.

 

[some bloke]

In cases like these (concerns that staff might mistakenly question ticket validity, for tube travel or otherwise), would a practical solution be to show the printed itinerary - or the itinerary in the National Rail Enquiries phone app?

The Android app shows the tube journey. I'm not sure what objections staff could raise then, even if their training was inadequate.

Recently at a National Rail station I asked for an excess which should cost 55p. The clerk took a while and said "that'll be £2.60". I raised the phone with the screen already on the fare I wanted to excess to, which may have been quicker than explaining.

 

[yorkie]

In cases like these (concerns that staff might mistakenly question ticket validity, for tube travel or otherwise), would a practical solution be to show the printed itinerary - or the itinerary in the National Rail Enquiries phone app?

The Android app shows the tube journey. I'm not sure what objections staff could raise then, even if their training was inadequate.

Recently at a National Rail station I asked for an excess which should cost 55p. The clerk took a while and said "that'll be £2.60". I raised the phone with the screen already on the fare I wanted to excess to, which may have been quicker than explaining.

Potentially, yes.

I believe most staff would either accept what you said, or be happy to look into it.

However I have encountered a small minority of staff who refused to look at anything, e.g. the occasion when Hadders was denied travel on GTR by VTEC staff at King's Cross, none of the staff would agree to look at the text associated with the restriction code on the ticket, even though I had it on my phone. They said they did not need to look because they knew the restriction already.

 

[Hadders]

In cases like these (concerns that staff might mistakenly question ticket validity, for tube travel or otherwise), would a practical solution be to show the printed itinerary - or the itinerary in the National Rail Enquiries phone app?

The Android app shows the tube journey. I'm not sure what objections staff could raise then, even if their training was inadequate.

Recently at a National Rail station I asked for an excess which should cost 55p. The clerk took a while and said "that'll be £2.60". I raised the phone with the screen already on the fare I wanted to excess to, which may have been quicker than explaining.

There's no guarantee that LU staff will take any notice of the National Rail app. They'll take the view that 'we're TfL - nothing to do with National Rail'.

 

[Ralph Ayres]

Without a secure way of validating a display on a phone, LU staff have no way of knowing if it's genuine or just something cobbled together in Adobe Acrobat. A printed itinerary on plain paper is no better even if it has a pretty TOC or Trainline logo, as that can be photoshopped far more easily than anyone can forge a printed ticket. There are agreed standards for how tickets should be printed and coded, and if they are followed then problems like this need not arise.

 

[Wallsendmag]

Without a secure way of validating a display on a phone, LU staff have no way of knowing if it's genuine or just something cobbled together in Adobe Acrobat. A printed itinerary on plain paper is no better even if it has a pretty TOC or Trainline logo, as that can be photoshopped far more easily than anyone can forge a printed ticket. There are agreed standards for how tickets should be printed and coded, and if they are followed then problems like this need not arise.

In this case the agreed standard places the cross to the right of the printing area on the ticket.

 

[Haywain]

In this case the agreed standard places the cross to the right of the printing area on the ticket.

But the agreed standard also has a character consisting mainly of a blank space with the cross to the right of it. Just off the printed area of the ticket! So the TIS supplier has to go against the agreed standard for it to appear.