Enforcement of journey break restrictions

[elucidate]

Hi,

Last night, in a fit of what I thought to be an ingenious bit of money-saving, I booked an Advance ticket from Cambridge to London Liverpool Street, with the intention of stopping short at Tottenham Hale along the way and doing the rest of the journey by bus to my home, and vice versa on my return a few days later. If I booked my tickets to stop/start at Tottenham Hale then I would have had to pay extra.

This afternoon it suddenly occurred to me that it may not be permissible to stop/start short and thought I'd check up the rules. Sure enough, it's not allowed.

Having already booked the tickets, I want to ask you about how strictly the break of journey prohibitions are actually enforced practically.

If, on my outbound journey, instead of continuing my journey till Liverpool Street, I stop at Tottenham Hale, what would happen? What kind of potential penalty would I be made liable for, if at all, considering the fact that I do not plan to continue my journey on the route?

On my return journey, would I really be prevented from boarding the train, considering the fact that it's the same one that I booked?

Thanks.

 

[Polarbear]

I'm sure one of the site experts will provide a more detailed reply, but to sum up, if you stop short with Advance tickets, you are breaking the terms & conditions of the contract between you & the rail operator. I suspect you would have to pay the full fare for the journey undertaken, not taking account of what you've already paid for the advance ticket.

Tottenham Hale probably has barriers too (been a while since I've been there) & it's also in a Penalty Fare area as well.

As for boarding a train after it's origin, this again is strictly not allowed & you may well find yourself facing the same situation as described above. I very much doubt if anyone would physically stop you as such, though again, you would have to get past the barrier.

 

[jopsuk]

Tottenham Hale does not have automatic barriers but can have "human" ones from time to time.

 

[telstarbox]

More generally, Off-Peak and Super Off-Peak returns either permit or forbid break of journey (BoJ) depending on the restriction code. How likely is it that guards or barrier staff know whether BoJ is allowed without looking up the code?

 

[30907]

Yes, but the OP has Advance tickets and there is at least a chance that staff would know the rules as they apply consistently

 

[telstarbox]

I agree, on an Advance it's likely that staff would notice, but my point was that other tickets which forbid BoJ might not be so obvious.

 

[bb21]

The question regarding how likely it is to get away with it is a difficult one which I doubt anyone would be able to answer.

As to the penalty for breaking your journey when not permitted, it would be the difference between the fare paid and the appropriate fare (cheapest for immediate travel) for the actual journey made plus £10 admin fee.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Breaking a journey early is not allowed on Advance tickets but guidance has been agreed with TOCs internally (following a number of rather unfortunate high profile incidents involving kittens, grannies etc) that unless there is clear intention to deliberately avoid a higher fare someone getting off early should not as a matter of routine be penalised.
Whilst not an absolute guarantee, in these circumstances I would not expect you would have an issue.

 

[TheEdge]

Breaking a journey early is not allowed on Advance tickets but guidance has been agreed with TOCs internally (following a number of rather unfortunate high profile incidents involving kittens, grannies etc) that unless there is clear intention to deliberately avoid a higher fare someone getting off early should not as a matter of routine be penalised.
Whilst not an absolute guarantee, in these circumstances I would not expect you would have an issue.

But...

If an RPI or MTSO picked up on it its a BoJ on an Advance and if it got taken forward it would be un-defendable.

 

[Flamingo]

Breaking a journey early is not allowed on Advance tickets but guidance has been agreed with TOCs internally (following a number of rather unfortunate high profile incidents involving kittens, grannies etc) that unless there is clear intention to deliberately avoid a higher fare someone getting off early should not as a matter of routine be penalised.
Whilst not an absolute guarantee, in these circumstances I would not expect you would have an issue.

In this case, it is to deliberately avoid a higher fare...

 

[elucidate]

Thanks to everyone for their invaluable input.

If I may digress from the original question slightly, what I am really intrigued to find out is the reason why sometimes (such as in this case) shorter journeys are charged at a higher fare than to book till the final destination? Is there any logic behind it?

 

[RJ]

Thanks to everyone for their invaluable input.

If I may digress from the original question slightly, what I am really intrigued to find out is the reason why sometimes (such as in this case) shorter journeys are charged at a higher fare than to book till the final destination? Is there any logic behind it?

I'm writing my dissertation on tickets. There's always a logic behind seemingly bizarre anomalies. There is so much to write about I'm already having to trim the material down.

In this case, most likely because there is competition with First Capital Connect between Cambridge and Central London, so the cheaper fares are a measure to try and entice customers to use their service. Passengers going to Tottenham Hale are probably going to use Greater Anglia anyway, hence the lack of Advance fares.

One for the regulars, I'm intrigued as to why Cambridge to Tottenham Hale routed Not Via London has a Cross London marker. Is it valid via Finsbury Park? I also thought the powers that be were trying to get rid of season tickets on flows where there is a Cross London marker. There are still loads of them!

 

[maniacmartin]

One for the regulars, I'm intrigued as to why Cambridge to Tottenham Hale routed Not Via London has a Cross London marker. Is it valid via Finsbury Park? I also thought the powers that be were trying to get rid of season tickets on flows where there is a Cross London marker. There are still loads of them!

Not this can of worms again! Route: Not via London with a Maltese cross and using LONDON mapped routes came up quite recently; the example was also a fare set by Greater Anglia

 

[cuccir]

There's always a logic behind seemingly bizarre anomalies.

I'm not sure there's always a logic. There are also frequently oversights, administrative errors, tickets not updated simply because no-one can be bothered doing it, miscalculations of passenger flows and preferences etc...

 

[John @ home]

I'm intrigued as to why Cambridge to Tottenham Hale routed Not Via London has a Cross London marker.

Mainly to allow travel via Seven Sisters and the Victoria Line when Cheshunt - Tottenham Hale is closed.

Is it valid via Finsbury Park?

There is no doubt that a Cambridge - Tottenham Hale via Finsbury Park is a mapped Permitted Route using map combination WA+OV to travel via Highbury & Islington and Gospel Oak. In addition, the cross-London marker allows the option of travel on the Victoria Line Finsbury Park - Tottenham Hale.

My opinion is that travel is also Permitted using the Victoria Line Highbury & Islington - Tottenham Hale because Finsbury Park (FPK) and Finsbury Pk Und (ZFP) are regarded as separate stations (even though at some points they share the same platform island), so there is no doubling back.

 

[Hebden Bridger]

More generally, Off-Peak and Super Off-Peak returns either permit or forbid break of journey (BoJ) depending on the restriction code. How likely is it that guards or barrier staff know whether BoJ is allowed without looking up the code?

Also according to the latest Conditions of Carriage, you need to be specifically told by the ticket seller that BoJ is not allowed for the ticket you are buying.

Your Rights - A Summary says "You can start, break or resume your journey using trains on which your ticket is valid unless you are told about particular restrictions that apply to the use of your ticket. Note that you cannot break your journey except to change trains with Advance tickets."

Section C - Use Of Tickets says "You may start, or break and resume, a journey (in either direction in the case of a return ticket) at any intermediate station, as long as the ticket you hold is valid for the trains you want to use. You may also end your journey (in either direction in the case of a return ticket) before the destination shown on the ticket. However, these rights may not apply to some types of tickets for which a break of journey is prohibited, in which case the Ticket Seller must make this clear when you buy your ticket."

Quite how can a ticket collector know whether or not a ticket seller has made it clear that a BoJ is not allowed?

 

[Flamingo]

Or more to the point, how can a passenger prove they were not told...

 

[Hebden Bridger]

Or more to the point, how can a passenger prove they were not told...

Which is totally wrong and shows a deplorable attitude.

This is the legal contract between the train company and the passenger. If the train company (or one of its employees) wants to accuse a passenger of breaking the contract, it is up to them to prove they have done so. If they cannot do so there is no onus on the passenger to prove anything.

 

[Urban Gateline]

Not at all, many Advances are bought online, where the terms are stated as you progress through the transaction, many people unfortunately don't read those terms as they also don't read them on other sites or when installing software etc. These people were shown the terms but didn't bother to read them so they should not be able to claim ignorance.

If the Advance is bought at a ticket office it will of course be dependant on the clerk, but I am sure some will say the restrictions of the ticket to the passenger.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Going to try to stay out of the whole "who to believe" thing as that will just go around in circles!

What I have had before though is my ticket stamped with a "restrictions advised" stamp. Now, there is the risk that staff could just stamp the ticket without mentioning anything to the passenger, but it is maybe something that could be used.

 

[Flamingo]

Which is totally wrong and shows a deplorable attitude.

This is the legal contract between the train company and the passenger. If the train company (or one of its employees) wants to accuse a passenger of breaking the contract, it is up to them to prove they have done so. If they cannot do so there is no onus on the passenger to prove anything.

Again, (as my last post to you was deleted by mods), I'm raising a valid point, while you are just having an anti-staff rant. Which I think demonstrates a lot more about your attitude than mine.

And to raise a point from my last post (deleted) how does a forum member of two posts know that I am staff? Again, which banned/moderated previous member are you?

 

[PermitToTravel]

Again, (as my last post to you was deleted by mods), I'm raising a valid point, while you are just having an anti-staff rant. Which I think demonstrates a lot more about your attitude than mine.

And to raise a point from my last post (deleted) how does a forum member of two posts know that I am staff? Again, which banned/moderated previous member are you?

To be honest, your user title ("Guarding the Train") might have been a bit of a clue

 

[Flamingo]

To be honest, your user title ("Guarding the Train") might have been a bit of a clue

You may not have seen the vitriolic post that was there before it was "tidied". As I said, for a newbie, he picked up on my being staff very quickly!

 

[Deerfold]

You may not have seen the vitriolic post that was there before it was "tidied". As I said, for a newbie, he picked up on my being staff very quickly!

Perhaps they've been reading for a while. I read the forum for several months before I joined up and started posting.

 

[cjp]

Not at all, many Advances are bought online, where the terms are stated as you progress through the transaction, many people unfortunately don't read those terms as they also don't read them on other sites or when installing software etc. These people were shown the terms but didn't bother to read them so they should not be able to claim ignorance.

If the Advance is bought at a ticket office it will of course be dependant on the clerk, but I am sure some will say the restrictions of the ticket to the passenger.

Not so.
There may be links but the web sites I go to do not show the terms progressively as I make my purchase just ask me to click to confirm I have read them at the end.
Who bothers?

I did once last month read some T&C and I queried what I read - after having accepted them and was told.

Hi,



Thanks for getting in touch,



I have amended the VAT rate in our T's and C's, thanks for bringing this
to our attention. Indeed, it is interesting that VAT went up to 20%
almost 3 years ago and you are the first person to mention it, just
shows that people (including myself of course) never read these T's and
C's.



Distance selling regulations do indeed apply to all online transactions,



Many Thanks

It is all a farce and I wondered if even having looked at the T&C the courts might be dimissive of them as "too small print" in consumer legislation.

 

[Deerfold]

Not so.
There may be links but the web sites I go to do not show the terms progressively as I make my purchase just ask me to click to confirm I have read them at the end.
Who bothers?

I did once last month read some T&C and I queried what I read - after having accepted them and was told.


It is all a farce and I wondered if even having looked at the T&C the courts might be dimissive of them as "too small print" in consumer legislation.

So you click to confirm you've read them, but haven't read them so regard that as not being given them?

How obvious do they have to make them?

I'd guess so long as there's nothing ridiculous in the Ts&Cs that'd count as a reasonble way to give them to you.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It depends on the website.

EastCoast's website make it abundantly clear that advance tickets have onerous restrictions.

Where EC fail is the stuff they send out. The wallet holding my tickets says I must have my reservation with me and be on the right train, otherwise I'll have to buy a new one. Great, except I've bought an SVR not an advance.

 

[Deerfold]

It depends on the website.

EastCoast's website make it abundantly clear that advance tickets have onerous restrictions.

Where EC fail is the stuff they send out. The wallet holding my tickets says I must have my reservation with me and be on the right train, otherwise I'll have to buy a new one. Great, except I've bought an SVR not an advance.

And they've been doing that for years - I remember that on the wallets and it's along time since I've bought off them and not used TOD.

 

[orpine]

So you click to confirm you've read them, but haven't read them so regard that as not being given them?

Lets be honest here, who actually reads terms and conditions for anything let alone everything? Have you read the ones for this website? For google/bing/whatever? Heck, I've had mulitple ticket inspectors who didn't even know what was in the NRCoC and that's a set of Terms and Conditions that are part of their job!
I think it should have to be explicitly advised, not including in thousands of words of legalese.

What I have had before though is my ticket stamped with a "restrictions advised" stamp.

I've only ever seen that on Adv tickets purchased from Cardiff Central, and that was ~ 5 years ago. I wonder how many stations even have a stamp for it?

 

[Deerfold]

Lets be honest here, who actually reads terms and conditions for anything let alone everything? Have you read the ones for this website? For google/bing/whatever? Heck, I've had mulitple ticket inspectors who didn't even know what was in the NRCoC and that's a set of Terms and Conditions that are part of their job!
I think it should have to be explicitly advised, not including in thousands of words of legalese.

Anything? Me. Including the ones for this website.
Everything? Not me.

However if I'm told by a website that the conditions of use of my ticket are in the conditions and I click to say "Yes, I've read them" I wouldn't expect to be able to argue that I shouldn't know the conditions - so long as they are actually contained in the bit I've said I've read.

I've read the ones for the site where I buy my tickets - though I don't read them every time.