FGW at Paddington still getting evening Off Peak validity spectacularly wrong.

[Flamingo]

Perhaps, but I think the OP in this thread just wants rail industry staff to apply the rules the rail industry created. There aren't that many variations to learn - it seems the problem is the "can't be arsed" attitude or the "we've always done it this way" approach.

An analogy would be the energy market, where there used to be lots of interesting tariffs available for those people who could be bothered to put some effort in to find one that suited their usage profile best. Then the nanny state government decided that that was too complicated and imposed limits on the number of tariffs energy companies could have - so all the variations have been smoothed out and market innovation killed off.

It's the same for rail tickets - if I decide to spend time finding a novel combination of tickets offered by the rail industry, which either saves me money or offers more useful periods of validity, then I should be able to use them without being treated like a fare dodger.

But if it's too complicated for rail industry staff to learn their own products, then we'll probably end up with more nanny-state simplification, to the detriment of the more clued-up passengers.

So you want simpler tickets but still with loopholes you can exploit, but the staff to know all the loopholes?

Enjoy your cake.

 

[RJ]

But if it's too complicated for rail industry staff to learn their own products, then we'll probably end up with more nanny-state simplification, to the detriment of the more clued-up passengers.

Whatever system is in place, no matter how simple it is, will require some level of training. TOCs have been left to their own devices in this respect - there's no accreditation or anything and even within TOCs, strange local customs are adopted that don't make any sense or agree with formal policy.

It's not too complicated to learn the products - more like training is an area with a lot of room for improvement. It's as much about attitude as it is about knowledge, but this isn't communicated to all staff and not all have a natural inclination to pick up what their training failed to cover.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be fair to the OP on this one, if the railway has decided to have horribly complicated ticket restrictions, it's not too much to ask that each barrier line and on-board inspector has a means, such as a smartphone and an equivalent of brfares.com, of finding out the restrictions applying to a given journey rather than making the assumption that they're all the same as a London Terminals ticket, or indeed finding a way to print them on the ticket. And if in a given situation they can't, they should give benefit of the doubt.

There is an element of the railway wanting to have their cake (complex restrictions to optimise yield management) and eat it (not having to pay to provide proper information to staff) there as well.

Neil

 

[RJ]

To be fair to the OP on this one, if the railway has decided to have horribly complicated ticket restrictions, it's not too much to ask that each barrier line and on-board inspector has a means, such as a smartphone and an equivalent of brfares.com, of finding out the restrictions applying to a given journey rather than making the assumption that they're all the same as a London Terminals ticket, or indeed finding a way to print them on the ticket. And if in a given situation they can't, they should give benefit of the doubt.

There is an element of the railway wanting to have their cake (complex restrictions to optimise yield management) and eat it (not having to pay to provide proper information to staff) there as well.

Neil

The restriction isn't complicated. The problem is with complacent staff who think they know everything about a system where that is positively impossible. Checking the facts is the key, but not a skill that is taught where it really ought to be.

 

[Greenback]

I couldn't agree more with RJ. The railway has the restrictions, they should be ensuring that there is a culture in place which is that it isn't possible to know everything and that things need to be checked.

It isn't necessary to teach people the restrictions, it is necessary to teach them how to find out what they are for the tickets that they come across, and, as Neil says, providing the means to do that as well.

It won't make things right overnight, but a culture change would be a step in the right direction.

 

[Clip]

So you want simpler tickets but still with loopholes you can exploit, but the staff to know all the loopholes?

Enjoy your cake.

Of course they do- and have the routing guide firmly in their head at all times

Of course one way of simplification would be to price tickets so that split ticketing isn't beneficial but then that would penalise those who do the shorter journeys so they wouldn't be happy either so the circle goes round and round.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course one way of simplification would be to price tickets so that split ticketing isn't beneficial but then that would penalise those who do the shorter journeys so they wouldn't be happy either so the circle goes round and round.

The rules on split ticketing are very clear, and (unless you're involving season tickets or BZ tickets which aren't split ticketing per-se) only one ticket is relevant at any given time, so to avoid aggro only one ticket need be shown. To all intents and purposes you are making two journeys end to end, you just aren't getting off the train.

Neil

 

[Wolfie]

Perhaps, but I think the OP in this thread just wants rail industry staff to apply the rules the rail industry created. There aren't that many variations to learn - it seems the problem is the "can't be arsed" attitude or the "we've always done it this way" approach.

Spot on. The rail indutsry expects passengers to understand the mess it has created and uses draconian laws to punish those who don't. Natural justice says that at the very least it puts some effort into complying with it's own rules. Indeed natural justice says that there should be draconian punishments for it if it fails to do so.

 

[Clip]

The rules on split ticketing are very clear, and (unless you're involving season tickets or BZ tickets which aren't split ticketing per-se) only one ticket is relevant at any given time, so to avoid aggro only one ticket need be shown. To all intents and purposes you are making two journeys end to end, you just aren't getting off the train.

Neil

Im well aware of the rules on using split tickets thanks but I think you miss my point.

So ill use a popular example of Manchester to somewhere in the south west where the splits are generally Brum,for the sake of ease.

Now that journey would say save you £20 so you then price those two journeys up by a tenner each to make splitting not worth doing. That's fine for the long distance passenger but those who just do MAN to Brum they are being penalised by a higher fare.

And its that sort of issue which is why ticketing is a complex web and splitting can save you money without penalising those who don't do the longer journeys

 

[Tetchytyke]

The railway system is complex and you will never have simplicity. Even supposedly simple solutions like CrossCountry barring use of off-peak tickets before 0930 creates its own complexity. People use split-tickets for long journeys to get around the fact that XC seem to think that wanting to arrive before 3pm is a 'peak' journey.

Some restrictions are very complicated. I guess what's irritated bnm is that this restriction is not complicated, if only someone had the gumption to read some words and see that they have meaning. The TM wasn't the appropriate person at the time, sure, but the gateline staff should have the skills and equipment to read "return: valid by any train" and understand that, on your return, you can use any train.

 

[RJ]

Of course they do- and have the routing guide firmly in their head at all times

I don't know about that, but it would be nice if staff were able to establish the time restriction on a ticket when presented with one that is unfamiliar with them. ATOC are designing tickets which advise passengers to "ask staff" about time restrictions, yet we get still get situations like this one at Paddington. It's not hard to imagine other people with valid Off Peak tickets are told to go to the ticket office and upgrade to the Anytime.

A typical punter who wants to travel from Didcot to Tonbridge at 10:30 and return at 16:30 would be advised by NRE or any online booking engine that a Off Peak Day Return is the most appropriate ticket to buy. People should be able to trust that information and be able to travel without railway staff creating unnecessary confusion, upset to their journey and causing them to pay extra money where it's not necessary. If customers can access this information, why are staff so reluctant to, yet so defiant in their opinion?

As for routing issues, it's not really good enough that staff training on permitted routes consists of "pass it if it looks right, require them to buy a new ticket if it doesn't." We know the routeing guide is arcane and we know it throws up anomalies. Making staff aware of those points at least provides a basis to train them on how to deal with unfamiliar routes without creating unnecessary problems. Having read several guard's reports after issuing UFNs for £70+, I can't say I was very impressed with their own admissions of them not being sure if they were doing the right thing. Some guidance from management of how to deal with the situation appropriately wouldn't go amiss.

 

[Greenback]

Again, I agree with RJ. I had no routeing guide or permitted routes training at all. It was all left to individual staff , if they were interested enough to try and make sense of the guide.

It was pretty much the same for ticket restrictions. It leads to a situation where some staff try to understand these things, get one or two (or more) things wrong and then pass it on to others who don't even try to check things out for themselves.

 

[sarahj]

Someone mentioned staff using the advantix, but TBh, that is sometimes useless. A few weeks ago I was looking up priv fares to Newcastle during a break and came across a fare called SSR. Guessing this had some restrictions I clicked on the restriction box. What you hope to get is a list of what this ticket, between the destinations noted, is restricted to. But no, you get pages and pages of what a SSR is restricted to, including lists and lists of trains from Milton Keynes.

So instead of London to Newcastle SSR. Restrictions : Not from London before 09.30 or between 16.00 and 19.00 Mon-Fri (I'm guessing here). Not for trains arriving in London before 09.30 Mon -Fri.

You get, blah blah blah blah Milton Keynes, blah blah blah blah blah blah milton keynes, watford junction, blah blah blah, for ever and ever. :-x


And as for training. Nothing on permitted routes, B1/B2/B3 restrictions. Did spend 3 hours on transport tokens, which I've never ever seen. Nothing on Brit rail passes, all line rovers, southern day saves, Inter rail passes etc etc etc. In fact on day 5 they sent us 'out on the patch'. This may have changed. A lot I've learned is through trial and error, looking things up, coming here. And I still feel guilty for selling a SDR on a Shoreham to Worthing ticket after 09.00. not long after I passed out. Tought myself the B3 restrictions after that.

 

[Greenback]

I think that the wording of restrictions is a lot more complicated now than it was in my day. You have my sympathies, it's another fly in the ointment!

 

[RJ]

Someone mentioned staff using the advantix, but TBh, that is sometimes useless. A few weeks ago I was looking up priv fares to Newcastle during a break and came across a fare called SSR. Guessing this had some restrictions I clicked on the restriction box. What you hope to get is a list of what this ticket, between the destinations noted, is restricted to. But no, you get pages and pages of what a SSR is restricted to, including lists and lists of trains from Milton Keynes.

So instead of London to Newcastle SSR. Restrictions : Not from London before 09.30 or between 16.00 and 19.00 Mon-Fri (I'm guessing here). Not for trains arriving in London before 09.30 Mon -Fri.

You get, blah blah blah blah Milton Keynes, blah blah blah blah blah blah milton keynes, watford junction, blah blah blah, for ever and ever. :-x

Yes, some of them are an absolute headache to read and still open to interpretation. Each sentence may make sense in isolation, but when there are reams and reams of lines to get through, it becomes difficult for a lot of people to follow. One thing I don't like is restriction codes within restriction codes, but it's a necessary evil.

What you're talking about, restriction 9D is an absolute mess, even in the "tidier" format shown on the NRE website. Many people would take one look at that and have a breakdown - or just close the page down.

I don't bother trying to learn these restriction codes, because they can change up to 3 times a year anyway. I work at a lot of different stations, each of which seemingly has slightly different restrictions so I just look up the journey using RJIS, job done. If I was on a mobile, I'd use the NRE journey planner.

 

[WelshBluebird]

So you want simpler tickets but still with loopholes you can exploit, but the staff to know all the loopholes?

Enjoy your cake.

Not at all.
No one is saying all stay should know all the loopholes.
But what should be possible is for a member of staff to easily look up restrictions of a particular ticket. If that is not possible then I really fail to see how passengers are expected to know the restrictions either!

 

[infobleep]

One way of handling this (used I think by SWT) is for there to exist a Super Off Peak cheaper than the Off Peak but with evening restrictions, and the latter not to have them.

A further way is single-ticket pricing, so you only pay for the peak you actually use.

Neil

Interestingly their is no first class super off peak ticket on SWT and first class off peak ticket holders can't travel during the evening peak, unlike standard class off peak passengers. So it's a more expensive ticket with greater restrictions.

 

[Deerfold]

That, to be fair, can also be written as follows:

"An analogy would be the energy market, where suppliers used to add lots of confusing tariffs, in the hope that only a few people could be bothered to put in some effort to find the one that suited their usage profile best".

The system was a mess, and it *wasn't* for the benefit of the majority of customers.

Is there any evidence that this simplification in the energy market saved money for customers or was it just those who'd found an exotic plan that suited them that lost out?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is there any evidence that this simplification in the energy market saved money for customers or was it just those who'd found an exotic plan that suited them that lost out?

I suspect the income is broadly the same but more fairly (evenly) distributed between customers.

Neil

 

[Deerfold]

I suspect the income is broadly the same but more fairly (evenly) distributed between customers.

Neil

Not quite what I asked. Is there any evidence to support that?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not quite what I asked. Is there any evidence to support that?

I'm not aware of any to either support or refute it, as it is probably commercial in confidence.

The reason I didn't answer your direct question was that it was too vague. Any change to a pricing structure other than a straight increase is likely to save *some* people money while costing others more.

Neil

 

[pne]

Advances were introduced at the beginning of what could now be called a move by Br towards yield management, which is really defined as maximising the amount of yield that can be extracted from a particular service by management of the fares available.

This is related to, but not exactly the same as, load management.

Ah! It makes more sense to me now that you put it into those terms.

Thank you!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ah! It makes more sense to me now that you put it into those terms.

Thank you!

I think VT see it very clearly in those terms. The very high Anytime fares apparently maximise income but *don't* fill the trains.

Neil

 

[Greenback]

It's not just VT, though their fares may be an extreme case!

 

[talldave]

So you want simpler tickets but still with loopholes you can exploit, but the staff to know all the loopholes?

Enjoy your cake.

This thread isn't about loopholes, it's about customers using tickets sold by the rail industry being refused the ability to travel by rail industry staff.

Passengers didn't create this mess, the TOCs did - so it's down to them to manage it correctly too.

 

[455driver]

It's the same for rail tickets - if I decide to spend time finding a novel combination of tickets offered by the rail industry, which either saves me money or offers more useful periods of validity, then I should be able to use them without being treated like a fare dodger.

You started it!

But if it's too complicated for rail industry staff to learn their own products, then we'll probably end up with more nanny-state simplification, to the detriment of the more clued-up passengers.

So go and learn all the restriction codes and what they mean to each ticket they can be applied to!

Let us know how long this 'not too complicated' task takes you!

 

[Deerfold]

I'm not aware of any to either support or refute it, as it is probably commercial in confidence.

The reason I didn't answer your direct question was that it was too vague. Any change to a pricing structure other than a straight increase is likely to save *some* people money while costing others more.

Neil

But if all the simplification did was remove the less popular tariffs I'm struggling to see how anyone saves.

 

[jon0844]

But fares will be simple, isn't that what everybody wants?

What you need is a clearly defined peak and off-peak. Thus busy trains out of Paddington in the evening will be peak and Off peak tickets will not be valid, without paying an excess.

However, through tickets from elsewhere may be valid and marked as such.

Which is, erm, pretty much as it is now! (In other words, don't change it).

The best solution IMO is to have all tickets marked with restriction codes and for those codes to be easily checked via a look-up, and if necessary with the restriction code data to be made easier to understand by staff and passengers alike. In an ideal world, the same system (for those with connected devices) could even state valid services to the passenger, or staff, on request.

Gates should be able to accept or reject tickets correctly, and if someone does board with the wrong ticket they're just excessed (as people are if travelling in the evening peak on GTR). At least people can then travel earlier if they want. I assume this does already happen?

Now I do still think there are far too many ticket types and simplification was a total joke, but we can't start having certain tickets being axed that have a purpose, simply to make it easier for staff that should either be looking things up or giving the passenger the benefit of the doubt (or at least warning them that although they're being allowed to travel, if the ticket is found by the TM to be invalid then they're liable to pay an excess).

 

[talldave]

You started it!


So go and learn all the restriction codes and what they mean to each ticket they can be applied to!

Let us know how long this 'not too complicated' task takes you!

I've learnt the ones that apply to the journeys I make - and I already know more than some of the Southern ticket barrier staff I've encountered. I think it's only fair to expect them to know their own TOC's ones. And as this thread has highlighted, there needs to be a culture change, so that when an unknown code is encountered, there's a willingness to look it up and not refuse travel based on staffroom rumour & gossip.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But if all the simplification did was remove the less popular tariffs I'm struggling to see how anyone saves.

It removed a few obscure fares e.g. the Weekender. But the Advance fare quotas may have been adjusted to deal with that. I expect it was revenue neutral.

Neil