XC - Leave our train early and use another company

[Iskra]

But, realistically, what's the solution?

The TM can't pull another 4 coach voyager out of their cash float to tag on the back, so extra capacity is out of the question.

Refunds wouldn't be offered by XC and no one at XC management will give a hoot about it (remember, 2010-2020 XC was 'get on the train if you're lucky' levels of capacity).

So those options out of the window, I don't think there's any harm done by offering anyone who'd care for some more space the option to disembark and take another service. Admittedly, yes, the TM should have specified that you must not be on a train specific ticket, but otherwise, I don't see the problem with a colleague thinking on their feet and doing what they can to help people have a more enjoyable journey (in this case, offer an alternative option).

Appreciated.

A lot comes down to the exact wording and quality of the way it was communicated. If it's clearly a suggestion, for those on more flexible tickets to use a potentially more spacious train to Wakefield then that's fair enough. Swamping other services to Sheffield that you know full well are inadequate anyway is clearly not a professionally wise decision, and that's before you start thinking about ticketing implications.

XC on this route is still 'get on the train if you're lucky,' between Leeds and Sheffield and this proves the point that (very inefficiently laid-out) 4-car services are not fit to be anywhere near this route in the first place, yet we still see 4-car formations booked to work singularly.

The XC network is not fit for purpose in terms of capacity; workable temporary solutions would be better utilisation of the HST fleet, Voyager fleet (they must have spare somewhere because they don't run all the services they used to) or the displaced Avanti Voyagers. Alternatively, relief buses should be provided or York-Sheffield via Doncaster services should be reinstated to relieve the Leeds route. In the medium/long term, additional rolling stock is needed. If that's not justified on a route with high passenger numbers and high fares, then there's something very wrong somewhere.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Does anyone know if this is company policy and whether XC still claims the Orcats for journeys ending at Wakefield or Sheffield in these circumstances?

That isn’t how ORCATS works.

As for the suggestion, it makes sense, it lets people on who are going further than Wakefield, why would it be a conspiracy?

 

[irish_rail]

And its all gonna get worse with all single voyagers by this time next year. Oh dear. BTW think TM in this situation did exactly the right thing.

 

[323235]

I’d personally rather just stay on the overcrowded train if it’s only like 12 minutes to Wakefield than wait for another train, which also might be short and busy.

 

[dosxuk]

I'm waiting for the thread for someone trying to get from Leeds to Birmingham, but couldn't board this service because it was full of people going to Wakefield, wondering why the train crew couldn't have kicked them all off onto other services and let them get home.

 

[Twingo37175]

I’d personally rather just stay on the overcrowded train if it’s only like 12 minutes to Wakefield than wait for another train, which also might be short and busy.

You mean like this?

 

[irish_rail]

I’d personally rather just stay on the overcrowded train if it’s only like 12 minutes to Wakefield than wait for another train, which also might be short and busy.

Its not about commuters though. Xc is about longer trips , what about if a Plymouth bound passenger can't physically board because you don't want the extra 5 minutes the stoppers take....

 

[323235]

Exactly so the majority of passengers won’t be commuters (especially on a Monday the quietest day of the railway week) and won’t want the hassle of taking all their luggage off the train.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The XC network is not fit for purpose in terms of capacity; workable temporary solutions would be better utilisation of the HST fleet, Voyager fleet (they must have spare somewhere because they don't run all the services they used to) or the displaced Avanti Voyagers. Alternatively, relief buses should be provided or York-Sheffield via Doncaster services should be reinstated to relieve the Leeds route. In the medium/long term, additional rolling stock is needed. If that's not justified on a route with high passenger numbers and high fares, then there's something very wrong somewhere.

That would be the DfT then who clearly have absolutely zero interest in trains being overcrowded regardless of circumstance. Their only interest now is what they see as the bigger picture in terms of costs with no concern about the results for paying passengers. Sadly this is what happens when politicians and civil servants get to apply dogmatic policies while micro-managing the organisations for which they have responsibility. Who needs managers?

 

[Iskra]

That would be the DfT then who clearly have absolutely zero interest in trains being overcrowded regardless of circumstance. Their only interest now is what they see as the bigger picture in terms of costs with no concern about the results for paying passengers. Sadly this is what happens when politicians and civil servants get to apply dogmatic policies while micro-managing the organisations for which they have responsibility. Who needs managers?

Thankfully, a general election is looming

 

[yorkie]

It’s a bit sad that people (presumed enthusiasts) will go out of their way to potentially get railway workers in trouble

Are you suggesting wrongdoing on the part of the TM?

People are entitled to say what has been publicly announced on their trains; I trust you don't disagree?

I'm waiting for the thread for someone trying to get from Leeds to Birmingham, but couldn't board this service because it was full of people going to Wakefield, wondering why the train crew couldn't have kicked them all off onto other services and let them get home.

No-one with half a brain would be suggesting that.

Okay, but as well all know, some men’s are very revenue-happy, and what would happen if some poor sod got MG11’d for using an XC-only ticket on Northern, supposedly acting on a TM’s advice which can’t be proven - it’s not official ticket acceptance.

As we know, TOC restrictions can’t be excessed away.

If the announcement was made as stated, ticket acceptance must surely have been in place?

Its not about commuters though. Xc is about longer trips , what about if a Plymouth bound passenger can't physically board because you don't want the extra 5 minutes the stoppers take....

Should passengers travelling from Edinburgh / Newcastle to Wakefield be expected to change at Leeds, and are you suggesting they are doing anything wrong by not wanting to make an additional change of trains? Are you suggesting they change onto the following LNER or the Donny stopper? The latter would have added 12mins to the journey, not 5.

Also are you talking exclusively about Wakefield here? Sheffield was mentioned in the original post and the delay today would have been 61 minutes, which is a bit more than the 5 minutes you refer to; it would also qualify passengers for 100% delay repay for their entire journey, so suitable arrangements would need to be made to ensure such claims are not rejected (even though industry systems would show the originally booked train to be on time).

 

[Wolfie]

That would be the DfT then who clearly have absolutely zero interest in trains being overcrowded regardless of circumstance. Their only interest now is what they see as the bigger picture in terms of costs with no concern about the results for paying passengers. Sadly this is what happens when politicians and civil servants get to apply dogmatic policies while micro-managing the organisations for which they have responsibility. Who needs managers?

When it comes to finance HMT and not DfT are driving things....

Thankfully, a general election is looming

True but any new Government will be facing the same awful fiscal situation.

 

[Skymonster]

Certainly sounds like giving passengers an opportunity was sensible here.

If you’re approaching Leeds from York (or further North) and you’re going to Wakefield and you have the choice of staying on the full and standing train or getting off, waiting 10 minutes and getting a less heavily loaded one and in doing so you also make it more bearable for the people going through to Plymouth then any reasonable person would consider it. Of course, not everyone will be in a position to do that.

What? So I’ve got a seat on a train approaching Leeds, albeit one full and standing, I’m going to Sheffield or Wakefield, and the guard suggests I get off at Leeds to get a later train which I don’t know the loading of. So I’ll be later than expected getting to where I’m going , and I’m now sitting but I might be standing if I take the guard‘s suggestion, or not even be able to get on. My thoughtful but unvoiced response to this idea would be foxtrot oscar, I’m staying put.

 

[Wolfie]

What? So I’ve got a seat on a train approaching Leeds, albeit one full and standing, I’m going to Sheffield or Wakefield, and the guard suggests I get off at Leeds to get a later train which I don’t know the loading of. So I’ll be later than expected getting to where I’m going , and I’m now sitting but I might be standing if I take the guard‘s suggestion, or not even be able to get on. My thoughtful but unvoiced response to this idea would be foxtrot oscar, I’m staying put.

Truthfully in those circumstances l would do the same. It is, though, self-interest rather than the greater good.

 

[Horizon22]

Driving?

Yeah I’ll just get my car when I’m already on the train at a completely different city…

What? So I’ve got a seat on a train approaching Leeds, albeit one full and standing, I’m going to Sheffield or Wakefield, and the guard suggests I get off at Leeds to get a later train which I don’t know the loading of. So I’ll be later than expected getting to where I’m going , and I’m now sitting but I might be standing if I take the guard‘s suggestion, or not even be able to get on. My thoughtful but unvoiced response to this idea would be foxtrot oscar, I’m staying put.

It’s a suggestion not an order. By all means ignore the advice, but some may find the alternative useful if they are standing.

I find it bizarre so many are up in arms about an alternative that is available (and not mandatory) and suggested by a conscientious member of on-board staff

 

[yorkie]

Providing ticket acceptance was in place, I have absolutely no issue with this suggestion; as you say it's not an order.

If ticket acceptance was not in place, then such a suggestion would have to be qualified with a mention of ticket validity; it wouldn't be appropriate to suggest that everyone who is on that train heading for Wakefield changes at Leeds and boards the 1615 LNER* or 1621 Northern service regardless of ticket held, if TOC specific tickets were invalid. I can only assume that's not being alleged here; if it was the case, that would be a serious matter in my opinion.

(* The 1615 wouldn't be a 'valid' connection anyway, so shouldn't be suggested)

Sheffield would be even more problematic than Sheffield; the next available train would have qualified for 100% Delay Repay (1755 arrival compared to scheduled 1654). Again providing special arrangements were in place to ensure Delay Repay claims were not falsely rejected, then I'd have no problem with that.

Can anyone verify if such arrangements were in place? Providing they were, I'd say this was very pragmatic of the TOCs concerned and I fully support it, though I would say that passengers should be given reassurances of the arrangements, to avoid any potential doubt.

 

[LickeyIncliner]

I heard a similar announcement on XC recently and (speaking purely as a passenger) thought it was a very sensible suggestion - at least if there is likely to be more space on the alternative services. The 1305 from Edinburgh should have been approaching Leeds about 1600 when that's probably reasonable. As regards ticketing, are there XC-only tickets from York or beyond to Sheffield or Wakefield, other than Advance tickets that come with a reservation for a specific train? If not, and assuming that Advance ticket holders would simply stay in their reserved seats, then the question of ticket acceptance doesn't arise. (I'm just thinking that the TM may have thought this out more thoroughly than some of the comments above would suggest...)

 

[yorkie]

I heard a similar announcement on XC recently and (speaking purely as a passenger) thought it was a very sensible suggestion - at least if there is likely to be more space on the alternative services. The 1305 from Edinburgh should have been approaching Leeds about 1600 when that's probably reasonable. As regards ticketing, are there XC-only tickets from York or beyond to Sheffield or Wakefield, other than Advance tickets that come with a reservation for a specific train? If not, and assuming that Advance ticket holders would simply stay in their reserved seats, then the question of ticket acceptance doesn't arise. (I'm just thinking that the TM may have thought this out more thoroughly than some of the comments above would suggest...)

Most people travelling longer distances on XC would be on Advance tickets; the holders of such tickets may or may not have seats (bear in mind this was only a 4-car train; notwithstanding the possibility of the reservation system not working, it may not be physically possible to reach your reserved seat when only 4 cars are available on a train which should be 9 cars!)

 

[Whistler40145]

What would’ve happened if other TOCs had refused to cooperate with ticketing and extra passengers?

 

[Starmill]

If not, and assuming that Advance ticket holders would simply stay in their reserved seats, then the question of ticket acceptance doesn't arise.

Just so you are aware, not all advance tickets will be issued with a reserved seat. In addition, it's common for reserved seats not to be honoured when some carriages aren't in the train. Likely both were relevant here.

Also the question would still arise because some people may have a CrossCountry complimentary ticket, friends and family ticket, staff pass valid on XC but not Northern or LNER, and so on and so forth.

What would’ve happened if other TOCs had refused to cooperate with ticketing and extra passengers?

Are you saying what would happen if there were no ticket acceptance in place, and revenue protection staff on the alternative train?

LNER would have anyone with a CrossCountry ticket charged for a new one, or a Penalty Fare in the case of Northern. If anyone refused to pay, likely they'd have their details taken and they'd be threatened with prosecution.

 

[Whistler40145]

Just so you are aware, not all advance tickets will be issued with a reserved seat. In addition, it's common for reserved seats not to be honoured when some carriages aren't in the train. Likely both were relevant here.

Also the question would still arise because some people may have a CrossCountry complimentary ticket, friends and family ticket, staff pass valid on XC but not Northern or LNER, and so on and so forth.


Are you saying what would happen if there were no ticket acceptance in place, and revenue protection staff on the alternative train?

LNER would have anyone with a CrossCountry ticket charged for a new one, or a Penalty Fare in the case of Northern. If anyone refused to pay, likely they'd have their details taken and they'd be threatened with prosecution.

Other TOCs could’ve turned around and said you’re passengers XC, you’re problem

 

[Starmill]

I'm just thinking that the TM may have thought this out more thoroughly than some of the comments above would suggest...

They could have said "if you're using an Off Peak or Anytime ticket, and it doesn't say CrossCountry only on it, you can choose to travel on a different service from Leeds for a more comfortable journey" then that's obviously fine. They'd need to choose their words carefully to make that kind of announcement easy to understand though.

 

[43066]

A lot comes down to the exact wording and quality of the way it was communicated. If it's clearly a suggestion, for those on more flexible tickets to use a potentially more spacious train to Wakefield then that's fair enough. Swamping other services to Sheffield that you know full well are inadequate anyway is clearly not a professionally wise decision, and that's before you start thinking about ticketing implications.

That isn’t what you said earlier, though. You just piled in and started complaining that it was XC ignoring responsibilities to their passengers, or words to that effect.

What? So I’ve got a seat on a train approaching Leeds, albeit one full and standing, I’m going to Sheffield or Wakefield, and the guard suggests I get off at Leeds to get a later train which I don’t know the loading of. So I’ll be later than expected getting to where I’m going , and I’m now sitting but I might be standing if I take the guard‘s suggestion, or not even be able to get on. My thoughtful but unvoiced response to this idea would be foxtrot oscar, I’m staying put.

Wow! Do you understand the concept of a suggestion of an alternative option being suggested, rather than an instruction? If a waiter offers you a range of options in a restaurant do you tell them to foxtrot Oscar?

It’s a suggestion not an order. By all means ignore the advice, but some may find the alternative useful if they are standing.

I find it bizarre so many are up in arms about an alternative that is available (and not mandatory) and suggested by a conscientious member of on-board staff

Indeed. Bizarre but not surprising.

Providing ticket acceptance was in place, I have absolutely no issue with this suggestion; as you say it's not an order.

If ticket acceptance was not in place, then such a suggestion would have to be qualified with a mention of ticket validity; it wouldn't be appropriate to suggest that everyone who is on that train heading for Wakefield changes at Leeds and boards the 1615 LNER* or 1621 Northern service regardless of ticket held, if TOC specific tickets were invalid. I can only assume that's not being alleged here; if it was the case, that would be a serious matter in my opinion.

(* The 1615 wouldn't be a 'valid' connection anyway, so shouldn't be suggested)

Sheffield would be even more problematic than Sheffield; the next available train would have qualified for 100% Delay Repay (1755 arrival compared to scheduled 1654). Again providing special arrangements were in place to ensure Delay Repay claims were not falsely rejected, then I'd have no problem with that.

Can anyone verify if such arrangements were in place? Providing they were, I'd say this was very pragmatic of the TOCs concerned and I fully support it, though I would say that passengers should be given reassurances of the arrangements, to avoid any potential doubt.

It depends what was said. If the guard was simply making people aware of the presence of other services without mentioning ticketing at all then that’s perfectly in order as there will almost certainly be people on the train with tickets valid on all services. If the TM was falsely telling people that all tickets were guaranteed to be valid that’s a little different, but there’s no suggestion of that.

In the same way I have been on heavily delayed trains at London Bridge where drivers have announced that, due to delays, it may be quicker to continue by underground (and have made such announcements myself). That does not in any way imply ticket acceptance.

I heard a similar announcement on XC recently and (speaking purely as a passenger) thought it was a very sensible suggestion

It’s a sensible, helpful suggestion as far as most passengers and staff are concerned!

 

[Starmill]

Other TOCs could’ve turned around and said you’re passengers XC, you’re problem

There's no onus on other operators to carry XC's passengers for free unless there's an issue which is affecting all operators on a particular route, yes. XC can ask, and they can agree, and that does happen sometimes. Or XC could offer to pay. Obviously if the original terms of the ticket mean it's valid on another operator anyway then this doesn't come into play.

 

[LickeyIncliner]

Most people travelling longer distances on XC would be on Advance tickets; the holders of such tickets may or may not have seats (bear in mind this was only a 4-car train; notwithstanding the possibility of the reservation system not working, it may not be physically possible to reach your reserved seat when only 4 cars are available on a train which should be 9 cars!)

Very true, thanks - and to @Starmill for similar points

 

[Whistler40145]

Thanks @Starmill

 

[yorkie]

It depends what was said.

It does indeed, but...

If the guard was simply making people aware of the presence of other services without mentioning ticketing at all then that’s perfectly in order as there will almost certainly be people on the train with tickets valid on all services.

Did they just make passengers aware of the presence of other services, or did it go beyond that? It was stated that the TM 'suggested that passengers continuing to Wakefield or Sheffield alight and use other services'; I don't think a suggestion of that nature should be made without mentioning any ticketing restrictions or clarifies that this is only referring to passengers holding inter-available fares.

If the TM was falsely telling people that all tickets were guaranteed to be valid that’s a little different, but there’s no suggestion of that.

If the TM was making the suggestion to all passengers heading to Wakefield / Sheffield, then ticket acceptance would need to be in place, or exclusions mentioned.

In the same way I have been on heavily delayed trains at London Bridge where drivers have announced that, due to delays, it may be quicker to continue by underground (and have made such announcements myself). That does not in any way imply ticket acceptance.

This isn't equivalent, as - rightly or wrongly - they are considered to be separate modes (NR vs LU), but I would be curious to learn exactly what is being said, as this may be a potential cause for concern if it could be taken as implying ticket acceptance is in place. Not all passengers are going to be thinking about ticket validity in the way that you or I might do and may simply take any advice at face value without further thought.

 

[AG1994]

Are you suggesting wrongdoing on the part of the TM?

People are entitled to say what has been publicly announced on their trains; I trust you don't disagree?

I don’t know XC’s policies, nor do most, I’ve no idea if the guard did anything wrong.

It just doesn’t sit right with me (and most people here it would seem) when someone goes out of their way to give identifying characteristics whilst inferring the person was guilty of wrong doing from the get go. This question could have been asked in a way which didn’t do that, whilst including enough detail to get accurate responses. I know many guards and drivers will be reading this thinking “why do I even bother with these people sometimes?”

This is why railway staff are quickly being alienated into removing common sense customer service from their daily routine, and instead sticking to the company line which will potentially bring zero benefit to the passengers as that line will be on cost and efficiency rather than passenger satisfaction in most cases.

The weird thing is the amount of enthusiasts which go out of their way to trip railway staff up, I can almost forgive the innocence of those who don’t have a clue posting in places like Twitter, but this guy knew what he was doing when he posted this.

As others have said, hopefully this guard will now think twice about offering friendly suggestions to passengers, whether it be in the company policy or out of it. If I were a guard and knew 1 in 100 pax are going to go out of their way to publicly identify me and question my work I’d rather let the 100 sit like sardines whilst I chill in the comfort of the back cab - funnily enough this is what many do now as they’re once bitten, twice shy.

 

[Starmill]

If I were a guard and knew 1 in 100 pax are going to go out of their way to publicly identify me and question my work

To be fair, nobody has been publicly identified in this thread.

 

[yorkie]

I don’t know XC’s policies, nor do most, I’ve no idea if the guard did anything wrong.#

In that case I am puzzled by what appeared to be a suggestion that they may have done.

It just doesn’t sit right with me (and most people here it would seem) when someone goes out of their way to give identifying characteristics whilst inferring the person was guilty of wrong doing from the get go.

The poster asked if it was company policy rather than automatically assuming the TM did anything wrong.

This question could have been asked in a way which didn’t do that, whilst including enough detail to get accurate responses. I know many guards and drivers will be reading this thinking “why do I even bother with these people sometimes?”

Are you suggesting that people should not be entitled to divulge a public announcement on a train they are travelling on?

This is why railway staff are quickly being alienated into removing common sense customer service from their daily routine, and instead sticking to the company line which will potentially bring zero benefit to the passengers as that line will be on cost and efficiency rather than passenger satisfaction in most cases.

Are you suggesting the announcement may in contravention of the company's policies?

The weird thing is the amount of enthusiasts which go out of their way to trip railway staff up,

In what way did the passenger go out of their way? How is anyone trying to trip railway staff up here?

I can almost forgive the innocence of those who don’t have a clue posting in places like Twitter, but this guy knew what he was doing when he posted this.

What exactly was he* doing?

(* Also how do you know it's a he; did I miss something?)

As others have said, hopefully this guard will now think twice about offering friendly suggestions to passengers, whether it be in the company policy or out of it. If I were a guard and knew 1 in 100 pax are going to go out of their way to publicly identify me and question my work I’d rather let the 100 sit like sardines whilst I chill in the comfort of the back cab - funnily enough this is what many do now as they’re once bitten, twice shy.

Any announcement made through a public address system on a busy train should surely be considered as effectively in the public domain.

To be fair, nobody has been publicly identified in this thread.

Indeed. I see no evidence that anything that should be considered confidential has been divulged; if anyone ever believes confidentiality has been breached, this should not be posted on any forum thread and instead the post should be reported directly to us, using the report button.