Fair treatment of passengers?

[Ferret]

RJ, out of interest, did you mention that staff briefing in the encounter?

 

[RJ]

I think once again there is little judgement anyone can make without knowing what tickets exactly you held. Ok fair enough you probably won't want to divulge the exact details for your own reasons.

It is possible that the Guard had more sympathy for someone who he genuinely thought had missed their stop/made a genuine mistake, whereas your tickets looked dodgy to him as if you were trying to short change the railway (and lets face it that is your intention!)

Yes the Guard should have listened to your explanation and then made the decision, I do think a UFN is rather harsh if your tickets were indeed valid (have to take your word for it on that one!)

Something tells me that you are jealous of Commission that Guards earn though!

The tickets included a season ticket and two non season tickets. The guard's stance was that the train was not stopping at either station where I was splitting, so it was not valid.on that train.

As for being jealous of commission, I don't think so somehow. I purchased two ALRs at £680 each this year. I went out of my way to visit the station I worked at to buy them off a RPI I worked with the first time and a TM I worked with the second time, just so they could have the commission.

I find that these particular staff I encounter are lightening quick to ask me to stump up for an undiscounted SOS, just because I get on a train that doesn't stop where I'm splitting. I'm sure they wouldn't be so bothered if there wasn't any incentive for them to sell tickets on board.

Mind reader as well? How do you know he'd made up his mind before hearing your explanation?

You might want to read my first post and take note of my account of what happened after he asked to see my ticket.

 

[Ferret]

BW - trust me - a TIR is simple. Takes me about 2 minutes to do one back at my home depot, and is far less hassle than doing a UFN, which to be perfectly honest is a hindrance to me doing my job. I end up spending 15 minutes doing a UFN properly, during which time I'm not checking other tickets, or more importantly, dealing with other passengers' customer service needs.

That said, I'll do a UFN when it is appropriate, but only then.

 

[BestWestern]

BW - trust me - a TIR is simple. Takes me about 2 minutes to do one back at my home depot, and is far less hassle than doing a UFN, which to be perfectly honest is a hindrance to me doing my job. I end up spending 15 minutes doing a UFN properly, during which time I'm not checking other tickets, or more importantly, dealing with other passengers' customer service needs.

That said, I'll do a UFN when it is appropriate, but only then.

I don't doubt that they're not rocket science, and I would agree that a UFN is a pain in the rearward region! But I do tend to find for the mainpart that, thankfully, I have little need for revenue paperwork (obviously I would if I was an RPI/RPO). I'm sure I could probably bring back a handful of them after every shift if I really felt that need, and doubtless some do!

 

[AndyLandy]

The thing that intrigues me the most is what kind of bizarre combinations of tickets can you come up with that look suspicious but are actually valid.

I can think of plenty of tricks and loopholes I've played about with, taking advantage of split ticketing or break of journey, but I've never been in a situation where it wasn't obvious that my ticket was valid. About the closest I've ever come is using an off-peak ticket on the 0730 Southampton to Waterloo service. (The ticket had an easement as per restriction code 2V, since it was for a destination outside of the Network area)

 

[Monty]

Another issue is that not all TOCs do TIRs anymore, South West Trains being one of them so sometimes a UFN is all a guard can do.

 

[AndyLandy]

Another issue is that not all TOCs do TIRs anymore, South West Trains being one of them so sometimes a UFN is all a guard can do.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a TIR? I'm not familiar with the term.

 

[soil]

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=72430

 

[bnm]

You might want to read my first post and take note of my account of what happened after he asked to see my ticket.

I'd like to hear the maligned guard's account before coming to any conclusion. Of course that won't happen and it's for that reason I'm sceptical of this one sided story.

As is often said on this forum when it comes to the print media's account of an incident; "There are two sides to every story." At least with the print media they give an opportunity to the company involved to state their side of the story, on behalf of the employee, before publishing.

I trust you'll be informing the TOC involved of this latest incident and keeping us informed of their responses?

 

[RJ]

It is possible that the Guard had more sympathy for someone who he genuinely thought had missed their stop/made a genuine mistake, whereas your tickets looked dodgy to him as if you were trying to short change the railway (and lets face it that is your intention!)

Short changing would suggest I'm doing something illegal. I operate entirely within the rules given or referred to within the NRCoC, just like any other passenger who buys a normal ticket for their journey.

RJ, in very limited defence of the Guard, a genuinely confused traveller will pretty much always get let off...

I'd love to meet you in my proessional capacity while you're using these random splits cos I'm curious as hell to know exactly what you get up to, and why some Guards think they aren't valid. I appreciate why you don't want to reveal details on an open forum though!

Well, my creative ticketing started off with a need for a 100+ mile commute as cheaply as possible. I swapped a full time job for a weekend job on the railways so was using an Annual Zone 1-2 Travelcard along with a few Priv SORs at stations on the line of route. When that season expired, I switched to a Priv season for the first 4 miles along with a load of SORs. A few guards took exception because I was splitting at places where the train did not stop but presumably as I was on Priv, they were not charging me for a new ticket.

As I wanted to explore more of England, I sometimes varied by using a weekly flexi rover along with multiple SORs, again at stations on the line of route. The first UFN came when I travelled at a time the ticket office was shut and tried to obtain the above on board.

I got bored of using multiple SORs due to the trouble they always caused, so I started up this "validity manipulation" thing where I identified potentially useful tickets and found a way to make them valid. Sometimes it involved irregular NRG analysis, other times it involved trawling through the eNRT looking for mileages, other times strict interpretation of the rules that work in my favour. Then, it'd only be the season and one non season. You'd think this would cause less problems, but it didn't as guards got suspicious when they see two stations on the ticket they've never heard off which are both miles off route.

I then switched to using Off Peak Returns with the Y-P discount. This is when the problems really kicked off. I was doing things like using cheap Off Peak tickets on services out of London at any time I pleased, often on early morning trains after I finished my night shift work . I was also using Not Via London tickets on trains out of London and combining them with season tickets with validity on the line of route, but not necessarily to/from stations on the line of route. I was getting numerous UFNs and what other people classify as "loopholes" I was "exploiting" were actively being shut down, presumably for my benefit. Whenever this happens, I just move onto the next arrangement of tickets I have lined up. Plus, I never use the same combination twice, I always switch the stations around. I don't enjoy playing cat and mouse. The way I see it, I'm just one person. If other people were doing what I was doing, it would have been flagged ages ago. I don't see the need for the furore it causes, but there you go.

So I've had my summer holiday and now I'm back, with brand new arrangements. Only my first day commuting with a short distance season, at the provincial end this time and the two YP SVRs, the same nonsense has already started again. Tomorrow, I have to travel again and I will be using the season, along with a completely different SVR and an ODT as my travel needs will be different. All I want is for the tickets to be inspected and the inspector to go about their business.

Hope that provides some information on the kind of tickets I use. I did the donkey work to find these validities without assistance from any members. Given that nobody has ever posted on this forum to ask for advice on a journey identical to mine (which are always different anyway,) I've never seen a real reason to publicise my findings. I have good reasons not to, as I don't need any catalyst to get loopholes shut down. So sorry if that upsets anyone, but I don't profess to be an advisor or someone generally knowledgeable on tickets. I just find what's best for the journeys I need to do and take it from there.

The golden rule is that the combinations are always valid, I always know precisely why they are valid and I'm always willing to explain, invariably to staff who are not willing to listen. I've not yet convinced any member of staff who questioned me that my tickets are valid so they way I see it, it's a waste of time anyway. That said, some staff have given me the "benefit of the doubt," whilst one of two have clipped my tickets knowing exactly why they are valid and carried on.

The problem is not that staff don't have the knowledge - it's their reaction to someone else's claims that conflict with their own understanding that is the problem. That said, some do make an effort to double check with another member of staff, who also has no idea what they are on about. Being outnumbered by time served railway staff makes things significantly more difficult, but thankfully, over time the process of getting these actions against me cancelled has become increasingly streamlined.

I felt today was very bad customer service. He kept telling me I could appeal and be successful if my tickets were valid. So I asked why he issed a UFN if he was not certain my tickets were invalid. His response was simply "to cover myself." As if there was any chance I could get him in trouble! So much for customer service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd like to hear the maligned guard's account before coming to any conclusion. Of course that won't happen and it's for that reason I'm sceptical of this one sided story.

As is often said on this forum when it comes to the print media's account of an incident; "There are two sides to every story." At least with the print media they give an opportunity to the company involved to state their side of the story, on behalf of the employee, before publishing.

I trust you'll be informing the TOC involved of this latest incident and keeping us informed of their responses?

It has become quite apparent that you have some personal issues with me. As such, you are at liberty to get into contact privately if you would like to discuss anything.

 

[wellhouse]

It is, perhaps, understandable that RJ's ingenuity in using sophisticated combinations of tickets attracts special scrutiny from Guards and RPIs, but there is a substantial issue across the National Rail Network of staff who are inadequately trained in the National Conditions of Carriage, and who do not know how to determine the validity of a ticket.

This issue is aggravated by the approach of some of these staff to passengers who may well be more familiar with the validity of a particular ticket that they regularly use.

Example

I have just requested a refund from Virgin because an Excess Fare was wrongly charged for a colleague travelling on a valid ticket, Off Peak Return Manchester Reading (Route Any Permitted) when he attempted to board a train at Euston.

This ticket is shown Valid Route London (as well as on direct trains and other mapped routes) in the Routeing Guide.

It happens to be cheaper than a Manchester-Reading (Route London) Ticket. It also has less restrictive Time Restrictions, so is good value.

It does not carry a Maltese Cross to show validity on London Underground, but the Routeing Guide specifically states that some Cross-Country tickets are valid Route London despite having no Maltese Cross.

Nobody can be expected to know the full validity of every ticket in the land, but all staff should know how to check, and all staff at London Terminals stations should be familiar with Cross-London validity..

What was unforgivable in this case was that the barrier RPI was extremely discourteous, and refused to listen to the passenger's explanation. He further declared that the absence of a Maltese Cross proved the ticket was invalid, which is just plain wrong.

A more courteous member of booking office staff said that it was a matter of discretion whether or not to accept the ticket (again plain wrong - there is no discretion to deny use of a valid ticket) but also said there were often problems with passengers presenting this ticket at Euston. So this is far from a freak incident with an obscure ticket.

It is unacceptable that staff should be so inadequately trained, and that nobody has seen fit to investigate why so many passengers are presenting the same ticket if it is considered invalid.

It is an even more serious matter if a Company is deliberately overcharging passengers in contravention of the NCoC as a matter of policy.

 

[maniacmartin]

wellhouse, do you mean a Manchester - Reading ticket by chance?

 

[barrykas]

Whilst I agree that, using the Routeing Points table alone, via London would be a Permitted Route from Reading to Manchester, the fact that via London is a higher priced route surely means it is inherently not valid as the requirement to check that comes before doing the fares check for "appropriate" routeing points?

Admittedly the wording in the Routeing Guide instructions appears to have suffered an attack of bad drafting in that it states "An "any permitted" ticket cannot be used for travel on a route not listed in the Routeing Guide for which a higher priced route specific fare exists. It can be used on any route not listed in the Routeing Guide for which a lower priced route specific fare exists." which I believe has two superfluous 'nots', given that a route not listed in the RG is inherently not valid! (Except the shortest route and when travelling on a through train).

YMMV of course...

Cheers,

Barry

 

[tony_mac]

the requirement to check that comes before doing the fares check for "appropriate" routeing points?

The requirement to check what, exactly? The prices of all other routed fares between origin and destination? I don't recall seeing anything like that in the routeing guide.

given that a route not listed in the RG is inherently not valid! (Except the shortest route and when travelling on a through train).

I think that the point is, for example, a 'route London' fare, is valid for travel via London even when travelling via London is not a permitted route.
However, in that case, the 'Any Permitted' fare would only be valid for travel via London if it was more expensive than the 'route London' fare.
This all seems perfectly reasonable, so I think it is the most likely meaning.
(Particularly bearing in mind the previous sentence, which also implies the same)

You may only use all the permitted routes if the fare is unrouted or the route
is described as "any permitted"

 

[soil]

It's not very clear.

Sometimes the specified route is not a permitted route.

E.g., East Croydon - Dorchester Stations via Barnham.

So it would be reasonable to read that as meaning if

£12 'via Barnham'
£10 'Any Permitted'
£8 'via London'

the Any Permitted ticket is not valid via Barnham, since via Barnham 'is a route not listed in the Routeing Guide'

Of course the fares are actually cheaper via Barnham, but just an example....

The detailed instructions however give a different message:

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/nrg_detail.pdf

F17

London-Huddersfield

The yellow pages list 5 routes for this journey. If the ticket is unrouted or has the
route “Any Permitted”, any of these routes may be used. There is also a routed fare
via Manchester. A ticketholder with a ticket routed “Manchester” must go via
Manchester and therefore only has a choice of those routes in the list that include
Manchester. This excludes MM. If the “Any Permitted” fare is less than the
“Manchester” routed fare, the ticketholder may not go via Manchester. If the “Any
Permitted” fare is more than the “Manchester” routed fare it may be used via
Manchester.

Accordingly in this case the Reading-Manchester fare is NOT permitted via London, because via London is a more expensive fare.

I think you could however argue the plain meaning of the words should stand, namely that an 'any permitted' ticket cannot be used for a route NOT in the routeing guide, but obviously it can be used for a route that IS in the routeing guide, the ticket being Any Permitted and all....

 

[tony_mac]

Yes, I didn't mention the example - but it's not the only apparent contradiction in the examples section.

There are some pretty clear statements that 'Any Permitted' should mean all of the permitted routes are allowed.

If a choice of routes is available and the fare for the
journey is described as "Any Permitted" route or is unrouted, you are free to
choose any of the routes listed in the Guide.

But, I think we are drifting somewhat from the original topic....
(and the Manchester Reading example has been discussed in-depth before)

 

[northwichcat]

Relating to the above if you buy a 'via Barnham' return and use the cheaper route avoiding Barnham for the return journey only, isn't that valid if you ask for an 'excess.'

 

[wellhouse]

wellhouse, do you mean a Manchester - Reading ticket by chance?

Quite right - corrected!

 

[island]

Whilst I agree that, using the Routeing Points table alone, via London would be a Permitted Route from Reading to Manchester, the fact that via London is a higher priced route surely means it is inherently not valid as the requirement to check that comes before doing the fares check for "appropriate" routeing points?

No. Reading-Manchester is valid via London in the Routeing Guide, so an Any Permitted ticket is valid via London, and the existence of a †VIA LONDON fare does not change that. The rule you're thinking of is that an ANY PERMITTED ticket is valid via a route not in the Routeing Guide only if a cheaper fare with that route exists, and not if a more expensive fare with that route exists. This doesn't come into play since the route via London is permitted.

The fares check doesn't get a look-in as Reading and Manchester are both members of routeing point groups.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

And what would the take on Lancaster-Carlisle be?

Rte Any Permitted SOS - £27.60
Rte Penrith SOS - £29.50

Rte Any Permitted SOR - £33.80
Rte Penrith SOR - £59.00

 

[SS4]

Quite the contrary - a brief went out to all retail/revenue protection staff working on that particular line stating that if I was seen using a combination of tickets, they should be accepted as valid.

I stand corrected

 

[island]

And what would the take on Lancaster-Carlisle be?

Rte Any Permitted SOS - £27.60
Rte Penrith SOS - £29.50

Rte Any Permitted SOR - £33.80
Rte Penrith SOR - £59.00

Don't even need to go to the maps for that. The Any Permitted ticket is clearly valid on Virgin trains via Penrith because it's a through train, although you'd be better off buying the Via Penrith SVR if wanting a return. You do not have to go via Workington (or Settle) on the Any Permitted ticket.

 

[soil]

Lancaster - Carlisle has a shortest route via Penrith, it's a through train and it's also a mapped route (twice!)

There's no doubt then that an Any Permitted ticket is valid that way.

The fares are priced by two different operators, VWC, and Northern, and are just done that way for consistency:

VWC:
Wigan - Carlisle - £38/£76
Preston - Carlisle - £32.50/£65
Lancaster - Carlisle - £29.50/£59

Northern:
Wigan - Carlisle - no fare
Preston - Carlisle £32/£37.40
Lancaster - Carlisle £27.60/£33.80

Northern's fares reflect their pricing policies, on local routes, whereas VWC's fares reflect their fares on what are long-distance, express trains.

I guess Northern's network is probably heavily subsidised also, but it's quite logical that there are these fare discrepancies - Northern shouldn't whack up their fares where their flows overlap with VWC.

 

[wellhouse]

So we have had a merry debate about some fares and validities here, but the Topic was originally about Fair Treatment of passengers when staff doubt the validity of tickets.

We have all used our knowledge AND referred to the Routeing Guide, aware that there are anomalies, and that it may be necessary to check and clarify the position rather than assume we instinctively know the answer.

What happens when such queries arise with Travelling Passengers is that staff too often lack the expertise and/or the inclination and/or the resources to check and clarify the position, even when they repeatedly encounter the same issue (as with the Manchester-Reading via London example above).

They rely on intuition (e.g. 'a cheaper ticket can't be valid when a more expensive ticket exists') and frequently deny the relevance of the Routeing Guide.

It is this behaviour that is unacceptable and must be addressed through effective training.

 

[radamfi]

Think you will find that an unused outward portion is only valid if supported by the unused return portion of ticket. If you are on outward leg you would be expected to have return ticket on your person

If you were found on a train without the unused return portion, would you be expected to buy a new single ticket, new return ticket or just excessed to the return in the proper direction? Could you get a penalty fare, or be reported for prosecution?

 

[northwichcat]

Northern's fares reflect their pricing policies, on local routes, whereas VWC's fares reflect their fares on what are long-distance, express trains.

I guess Northern's network is probably heavily subsidised also, but it's quite logical that there are these fare discrepancies - Northern shouldn't whack up their fares where their flows overlap with VWC.

Look at Manchester to one of Stockport, Crewe, Macclesfield or Stoke - the reverse applies. The VT only tickets offer reductions on the standard tickets, this is due to the number of empty seats Virgin have north of Stoke/Crewe on a lot of Manchester services and they try to fill them with local passengers.

 

[Greenback]

So we have had a merry debate about some fares and validities here, but the Topic was originally about Fair Treatment of passengers when staff doubt the validity of tickets.

We have all used our knowledge AND referred to the Routeing Guide, aware that there are anomalies, and that it may be necessary to check and clarify the position rather than assume we instinctively know the answer.

What happens when such queries arise with Travelling Passengers is that staff too often lack the expertise and/or the inclination and/or the resources to check and clarify the position, even when they repeatedly encounter the same issue (as with the Manchester-Reading via London example above).

They rely on intuition (e.g. 'a cheaper ticket can't be valid when a more expensive ticket exists') and frequently deny the relevance of the Routeing Guide.

It is this behaviour that is unacceptable and must be addressed through effective training.

The ethos of the TOC's needs to change. They do, quite rightly, focus on safety critical training, and the same focus is needed on training for the customer facing staff that deal with tickets.

However, there are some barriers to this. Firstly is the attitude that 'it doesn't really matter, and if anyone feels they have been harshly treated we will investigate and provide a refund'. TOC's basically don't see spending a lot money on this type of training as worthwhile. Way back in the day when I joined a FGW booking office, the RG was not mentioned at all in our training.

The fact is that as the fares system has, somewhat inevitably, become more complicated, more people are taking advantages of loopholes and looking to exploit them wherever they can, in much the same way as TOC's seek to maximise revenue within the price capping regime.

Simply put, this attitude is out of date. It may have been acceptable 15 years ago, but things have changed. Unfortunately, someone will have to compel the TOC's to improve the training though!

Secondly, I have a real fear that many front line staff will struggle with the intricacies of the Routeing Guide and NRCoC. I don't mean this as a slur on the intellectual abilities of anyone, but we can see from the discussions on here that even people with a natural ability and a lot of knowledge in this sort of area don't agree on every interpretation!

 

[northwichcat]

If you were found on a train without the unused return portion, would you be expected to buy a new single ticket, new return ticket or just excessed to the return in the proper direction? Could you get a penalty fare, or be reported for prosecution?

I would suspect discretion could apply.

If your ticket was printed 5 minutes ago then you obviously couldn't have used the return portion even if you didn't have it - you are more likely to have left it in a TVM or dropped it.

If it's an Open Return and 3 days after printing it then you could have already used the return portion.

 

[Flamingo]

From a TOC's point of view, (rightly or wrongly), why spend the considerable expense in time & money training staff to interpret esoteric combinations that they might see once a year?

 

[wellhouse]

From a TOC's point of view, (rightly or wrongly), why spend the considerable expense in time & money training staff to interpret esoteric combinations that they might see once a year?

...because the process is the same to establish the validity of every ticket, and the problem exists widely of (see example above) staff failing to correctly interpret the validity for one ticket used alone, never mind esoteric combinations.

Some of the enthusiasts here may devise intricate combinations that are more difficult to fathom, but having used their expert knowledge to construct the combinations, they will (almost always) be able to assist the staff in their interpretation, and the staff should be willing to listen.