Break of journey advice

[CallySleeper]

Re: this journey - an off-peak return (SVR) from Nottingham to Edinburgh with restriction code 8X.

A BoJ appears to be valid on the outward portion of this ticket but does anyone know if the outward validity would be 2+ days i.e. would an overnight BoJ be valid.

I'm not willing to push the 'if your journey isn't completed by 04.29 the day after you can still complete it on the second day' rule.

 

[yorkie]

The conditions say:

Off-Peak Singles and the outward portion of Off-Peak Returns are valid for travel on the date shown on the ticket and until 04:29 the following morning. If the journey cannot be completed in this time, the ticket may be used to continue the journey on the following day. Unless otherwise indicated in the relevant restriction code, time restrictions apply as from the initial origin station on both days. The appropriate restrictions for the actual day on which travel is being undertaken apply (for example, it may be that day 1 is on Sunday, no restrictions apply, but on day 2, the Monday-Friday restrictions apply). All travel must be completed by 04:29 in the morning after this second day. Please note that break of journey is not permitted on some journeys, as detailed in the ticket restrictions.

Sadly the wording of this is awful and open to interpretation. See this post for more information. My head hurts thinking about it

 

[kieron]

I'm not willing to push the 'if your journey isn't completed by 04.29 the day after you can still complete it on the second day' rule.

That's all you've got on the second day with the outward part of that ticket. The journey planners all implement the rule in one way or another. If you want to check that someone finds your interpretation of the rule reasonable, you can ask for a reservation on the second day at a ticket office.

 

[CallySleeper]

The information which is unclear in the restriction codes in my opinion is the length of validity of the outward portion.

I have anytime returns which have five days on the outward portions as well as anytime single tickets which have two days validity. However all my off-peak returns of a similar length only have one day validity on the outward. I conclude then since there is no concrete evidence available to the contrary, that the ticket in the OP would also only be valid for one day.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The wording is "if the journey cannot be completed in this time". IMO there is a difference between 'if the journey cannot be completed' and 'if the passenger chooses not to complete the journey because Great Aunt Bessie has made dinner (and it would be rude not to)'. I realise this is not a popular opinion on this forum.

 

[DarloRich]

The wording is "if the journey cannot be completed in this time". IMO there is a difference between 'if the journey cannot be completed' and 'if the passenger chooses not to complete the journey because Great Aunt Bessie has made dinner (and it would be rude not to)'. I realise this is not a popular opinion on this forum.

I agree that that is, probably, the intention of the restriction but not the wording of the restriction! It is far too vague and should be changed to a much tighter definition. Until it is the interpretation exemption allows for much more usage than intended.

 

[yorkie]

I agree that that is, probably, the intention of the restriction but not the wording of the restriction! It is far too vague and should be changed to a much tighter definition. Until it is the interpretation exemption allows for much more usage than intended.

On the contrary; the intention is to allow customers more choice than is worded.

 

[Paul Kelly]

However all my off-peak returns of a similar length only have one day validity on the outward.

Off-Peak Returns show the validity as "AS ADVERTISED". IMHO this is implicit acknowledgement that the validity is more complicated than Anytime Returns (shown as "FIVE DAYS") or Anytime Singles (shown as "TWO DAYS").

 

[John @ home]

the intention is to allow customers more choice than is worded.

Agreed. The best information we have is in this post in the 2011 Revised NRCoC thread by thedbdiboy, who appears to speak with authority on these matters. It includes:

The new rules simplify what had become a bit of a mess regarding overnight validity, and now make it clear that you can use them the next day if you can't complete your journey. It doesn't say you have to give reasons why you can't complete your journey. There is nothing to stop anyone breaking their journey at anytime the first day and resuming it the second day. The rule says 'if the journey cannot be reasonably completed on the first day' allowing for a very wide and sensible use of interpretation. The only requirement with off-peak/super off-peak tickets is that the journey is commenced on the first day. Believe it or not this is a genuine attempt to balance commercial requirements and passenger needs!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I guess the definition of 'cannot' has changed recently then......

 

[bnm]

I guess the definition of 'cannot' has changed recently then......

"I cannot complete my journey in one day as I'm stopping overnight en route."

Anything wrong with using 'cannot' in that context?

Interpretation most favourable to the consumer... blah blah blah.

 

[bnm]

To add. What about that brief sent out by ATOC to retail staff in September 2011 that said any necessitation of break of journey is the customer's decision alone?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

"I cannot complete my journey in one day as I'm stopping overnight en route."

Anything wrong with using 'cannot' in that context?

Interpretation most favourable to the consumer... blah blah blah.

'Cannot' is an inability to do something. e.g. "I cannot travel on another train because there are no more trains".

In your sentence, there is no indication of inability to carry on, only an unwillingness, so 'cannot' should be replaced with something like 'will not' or 'choose not to'.

To add. What about that brief sent out by ATOC to retail staff in September 2011 that said any necessitation of break of journey is the customer's decision alone?

Allegedly there was a brief, I, and I suspect many others, never saw it and the only place I have heard mention of it is on here. However, without having actually seen it, I might suggest the 'decision' is one of deciding if they should stop where there are, knowing there is no chance of them getting to their destination and that they can get accommodation overnight there, rather than have staff tell them that they must carry on and wait eight hours overnight at an exposed un-manned station, with no nearby facilities, in the middle of winter, but as I say, I didn't see that brief.

The implication some are giving out here is that I could buy a ticket from, say, Manchester to Liverpool, travel out of Manchester Victoria at 0838, spend 24 hours at Huyton and then continue the next day to Liverpool, claiming that I 'cannot' continue on day one "because Aunt Bessie is making lunch and dinner (and it would be rude not to)". That is not an inability to continue, it is a choice not to.

 

[yorkie]

The implication some are giving out here is that I could buy a ticket from, say, Manchester to Liverpool, travel out of Manchester Victoria at 0838, spend 24 hours at Huyton and then continue the next day to Liverpool, claiming that I 'cannot' continue on day one "because Aunt Bessie is making lunch and dinner (and it would be rude not to)". That is not an inability to continue, it is a choice not to.

You certainly can buy such a ticket, without doubt that would be valid (SOR). Whether the SVR also permits this is a matter for debate.

However, where there is ambiguity, I do not believe it is correct to apply the terms that are least favourable to the customer which appears to be what you're arguing for?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

You certainly can buy such a ticket, without doubt that would be valid (SOR). Whether the SVR also permits this is a matter for debate...

I think you know what I meant.

...However, where there is ambiguity, I do not believe it is correct to apply the terms that are least favourable to the customer which appears to be what you're arguing for?

I'm suggesting people use a dictionary.

 

[yorkie]

I don't like the wording by ATOC, and I will agree with you it should be clearer, but I still think bnm's interpretation is correct (and is what we know to be intended).

 

[Haywain]

Allegedly there was a brief, I, and I suspect many others, never saw it and the only place I have heard mention of it is on here. However, without having actually seen it, I might suggest the 'decision' is one of deciding if they should stop where there are, knowing there is no chance of them getting to their destination and that they can get accommodation overnight there, rather than have staff tell them that they must carry on and wait eight hours overnight at an exposed un-manned station, with no nearby facilities, in the middle of winter, but as I say, I didn't see that brief.

I can't recall seeing an ATOC brief on this subject, but those we have had within the TOC are very clear on the subject. The decision on whether the journey can be completed is the customer's alone, and they do not have to explain why the journey cannot be completed on day one.

As for definition, the word cannot may inidicate an inability to do something, but what you seem to be seeking is a reason that you agree with. It can equally be another reason, e.g. "I cannot travel on another train because I am not at the station", or "I cannot travel on another train because Aunt Bessie's hospiitality is too good to miss."

You suggest that a journey should not be started if it cannot be completed, but what of the person who wishes to travel from London to Thurso? Should they not be permitted to travel to, say, Edinburgh on day one and then continue on day two? Many much shorter journeys present such possibilities which by allowing this overnight stop (which is not necessarily seen as break of journey) allow an earlier arrival at the destination.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

.... Whether the SVR also permits this is a matter for debate....

....(and is what we know to be intended).

If we know what is intended, and if what is intended is to the passenger's benefit, it isn't debatable, is it?

I can't recall seeing an ATOC brief on this subject, but those we have had within the TOC are very clear on the subject. The decision on whether the journey can be completed is the customer's alone, and they do not have to explain why the journey cannot be completed on day one....

As I haven't seen it, I can only take your word for that. That, unfortunately, means it is no more 'official' to me than it was before.

....As for definition, the word cannot may inidicate an inability to do something, but what you seem to be seeking is a reason that you agree with. It can equally be another reason, e.g. "I cannot travel on another train because I am not at the station", or "I cannot travel on another train because Aunt Bessie's hospiitality is too good to miss."....

Aunt Bessies hospitality is a choice not to continue, it is not an inability to do so, further, at some point you would have had to be at the station to be in a position to start (and break) the journey. Leaving the station is a person's choice, unless it closes overnight or there are no further services.

....You suggest that a journey should not be started if it cannot be completed, but what of the person who wishes to travel from London to Thurso? Should they not be permitted to travel to, say, Edinburgh on day one and then continue on day two?...

If a ticket is so restricted that a journey cannot be completed in one day then it stands to reason that use the next day would be okay, because it cannot be completed that day, it is an inability to do so.

In addition, if a delay causes the last connection to be missed, it is then not possible to complete the journey that day and requesting the passenger buy a new ticket for the next day would be very unfair, particularly if the railway is at fault for the delay.

If, however, upon arrival in Edinburgh, there are two trains that can be used to complete the journey, it is possible to complete it, isn't it? That being the case, it would be a choice not to continue rather than an inability.

....Many much shorter journeys present such possibilities which by allowing this overnight stop (which is not necessarily seen as break of journey) allow an earlier arrival at the destination.

As I say, if it is not possible to complete the journey, then it cannot be completed, but can you honestly say it is not possible to complete a journey from Manchester to Liverpool, a journey of approx. 30 miles, if I depart Manchester at 0838 on a direct train?

 

[bnm]

I've seen the brief and I'm a mere punter.

Would you like me to see if they've still got it at my nearest staffed station? Been a few years, but you never know. Or you could ask ATOC, through the proper internal channels, yourself HHF.

Ultimately though, we don't need to know what is intended by the wording. Legislation allows for the most favourable interpretation for the consumer to apply. Even if, with a Liverpool-Manchester SVR, they want to use that interpretation to stop at Huyton for 24 hours. God knows why anyone would want to do such a thing though.

You argue for the strict negativity of the word 'cannot' HHF. For what greater purpose to the rail industry? Revenue implications? Obdurateness? Or is it just the semantics?

 

[DeeGee]

If, however, upon arrival in Edinburgh, there are two trains that can be used to complete the journey, it is possible to complete it, isn't it? That being the case, it would be a choice not to continue rather than an inability.

What about if the last train to your destination arrives after an onward connection by, say, bus?

Using the Thurso analogy, you arrive in Edinburgh from Kings Cross, but the next train to Thurso arrives after a Citylink bus to your actual final destination of, say, Tongue (don't know if the actual timings match up, or even if such a connection is available).

Should the passenger stay in Thurso to wait for the bus, or could the passenger not reasonably expect to be able to stay in Edinburgh and enjoy the wider range of hotels and find one either with availability or more suiting the budget?

And if the passenger can reasonably stay overnight to finish that journey, why should he not be able to travel up a bit earlier to get a good feed and an appropriately early night for the next day's jaunt?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

What about if the last train to your destination arrives after an onward connection by, say, bus?...

Assuming you are referring to a bus trip that is not included in the rail fare, why would that make a difference?

....Using the Thurso analogy, you arrive in Edinburgh from Kings Cross, but the next train to Thurso arrives after a Citylink bus to your actual final destination of, say, Tongue (don't know if the actual timings match up, or even if such a connection is available).

Should the passenger stay in Thurso to wait for the bus, or could the passenger not reasonably expect to be able to stay in Edinburgh and enjoy the wider range of hotels and find one either with availability or more suiting the budget?...

If the rail ticket ends at Thurso and the journey to Thurso can be completed that day, why would there be validity on the second day? Other tickets would be available that would allow the option of stopping overnight by choice, an Anytime Single (SOS) or Return (SOR) for example. The passenger also has the choice of buying a ticket to Edinburgh and a separate ticket for the next day to get to Thurso if they wish.

....And if the passenger can reasonably stay overnight to finish that journey, why should he not be able to travel up a bit earlier to get a good feed and an appropriately early night for the next day's jaunt?

Ask yourself a simple question. Can the journey be completed in that day?

 

[DeeGee]

Ask yourself a simple question. Can the journey be completed in that day?

Fair enough. But what's the difference between buying a SVR, getting the last train out of London King's Cross [KGX] to Edinburgh Waverley [EDB] and having to stay overnight, and getting the first train out of KGX for which the fare is available, with which I can get to Thurso by changing in EDB, and getting there in the day?

It's an identical ticket isn't it? So what if I buy the SVR online, book the last possible train forcing an overnight stop, reserve both portions, but then decide to travel up earlier? Does the existence of reservations for the second leg of the journey not make my itinerary valid?

Or for a shorter journey that can easily be achieved in a day, booking something like this?

With a lovely overnight in Lincoln on the way...

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Fair enough. But what's the difference between buying a SVR, getting the last train out of KGX to EDI and having to stay overnight, and getting the first train out of KGX for which the fare is available, with which I can get to Thurso by changing in EDI, and getting there in the day?

It's an identical ticket isn't it? So what if I buy the SVR online, book the last possible train forcing an overnight stop, reserve both portions, but then decide to travel up earlier? Does the existence of reservations for the second leg of the journey not make my itinerary valid?

What's the difference between buying an any permitted SVR ticket from London to Edinburgh for travel via Warrington, and buying one for travel via Doncaster?

It's an identical ticket isn't it? So what if I buy an SVR online, select a change of trains at Doncaster, reserve both portions, but then decide to travel from Euston to Warrington, find my own way to Doncaster, and continue from there? Does the existence of reservations for the second leg of the journey not make my itinerary valid?

It's perfectly okay for one or the other, but mix and match?

 

[DeeGee]

But I can't make the journey planner give me that route, therefore it can't be permitted, right? I can't BoJ off the permitted route, can I?

But if I wanted to change at Birmingham and Donny...?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

But I can't make the journey planner give me that route....

You mean via Warrington and Doncaster? That's the whole point of the example. If you put in a journey via Warrington, you get a valid itinerary. If you put in via Doncaster you get a valid itinerary. You can get a ticket that would allow travel by either route. So if it's valid on both routes, surely I can use the first half of one and the second half of the other? It is the same ticket after all.

 

[ainsworth74]

This comparison might have some merit if it was possible to ask for a break of journey on a journey planner otherwise I don't see the point...

 

[MikeWh]

Whilst I can see the ridiculousness of making one stop of a relatively short journey and then spending 24 hours at that place, I can also see the many reasons why people would not want to get "as far as they can" before being forced to stop. Some of them, like a friend who'll put you up for free, might even benefit the railway. Generally being able to sort out an overnight stay in the early evening, rather than at say 1am, has to be preferable for all concerned.

I'm sorry that you haven't seen the brief yourself, hhf, but given the post by thedbdiboy who appears to speak with considerable authority on such matters, I'm afraid your refusal to admit to the customer friendly interpretation is not showing you in a good light.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Whilst I can see the ridiculousness of making one stop of a relatively short journey and then spending 24 hours at that place, I can also see the many reasons why people would not want to get "as far as they can" before being forced to stop. Some of them, like a friend who'll put you up for free, might even benefit the railway. Generally being able to sort out an overnight stay in the early evening, rather than at say 1am, has to be preferable for all concerned....

You misunderstand slightly. If it is not possible to complete the journey that night you can stop for overnight accommodation, I don't disagree with that and I don't see that it really matters where you stop off. I'm not saying you have to go as far as you can, because that is not implied or stated in any documents I have seen.

Where I seem to disagree with others is when it is possible to complete the journey that day. Someone choosing not to complete the journey is not the same thing as it not being possible for someone to complete it.

...I'm sorry that you haven't seen the brief yourself, hhf, but given the post by thedbdiboy who appears to speak with considerable authority on such matters, I'm afraid your refusal to admit to the customer friendly interpretation is not showing you in a good light.

I'm sure someone somewhere has a copy of it, or copies of something similar, maybe it's possible to reproduce it here? I'm sure that would put an end to the matter, if it is as people say it is. By PM is also fine by me. Or even just point out where I can find this information, if it exists it must be somewhere.

I don't know thedbdiboy anymore than I know you or DeeGee, or Yorkie, or ainsworth74. For all I know you are the same person. I can't simply trust something here because it appears to be the case, when the information I have access to doesn't agree with it. I'm sure you can understand that.

 

[bnm]

You have access to information that says overnight break of journeys are not of the customer's choice and must not be taken when the journey can be completed in one day?

Or is it just your interpretation of the restriction texts' uses of the word 'cannot'?

Quid pro quo. If I can get a copy of the brief shown to me in September 2011 by a local ticket office, will you show us details of the information you have access to which contradicts said brief?

Remembering of course that it's not only interpretation that favours the consumer in a contract, but also ambiguous or contradictory terms.

 

[krus_aragon]

I don't know thedbdiboy anymore than I know you or DeeGee, or Yorkie, or ainsworth74. For all I know you are the same person.

You just wait, they'll all start standing up and saying "I'm Spartacus" now :P