LexyBoy
Established Member
Should be fine: FGW don't have any peak restrictions on the ALR (and it doesn't say "Off Peak" on it
).
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
FGW at Paddington still getting evening Off Peak validity spectacularly wrong.
- Thread starter bnm
- Start date
- Status
Should be fine: FGW don't have any peak restrictions on the ALR (and it doesn't say "Off Peak" on it
).
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Unlikely to have issues on an ALR.
Blindtraveler
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 10,544
Thats reasuring as whilst I was aware of the lack of restrictions I was concerned that they might misunderstand what ticket type it was and refuse it, given how there favourite words appear to be `No This isnt Valid`
Kite159
Veteran Member
You will probably get told it isn't valid on the HST departures, but fine to use on the Turbos / 16Xs
Update, of sorts.
All of the correspondence between myself and FGW has been forwarded to London Travelwatch.
My (re-elected) MP is also back on the case.
Word has reached me of another traveller given the third degree late afternoon at Paddington gateline with an F3/C4 restriction ticket.
All of the correspondence between myself and FGW has been forwarded to London Travelwatch.
My (re-elected) MP is also back on the case.
Word has reached me of another traveller given the third degree late afternoon at Paddington gateline with an F3/C4 restriction ticket.
Jonfun
Established Member
At our place there are little easy to carry around "cheat sheets" with the restriction codes likely to be seen and a brief summary of when each one is valid. Perhaps something like that could be suggested on your next correspondence? Even if it didn't contain your specific restriction it would at least drill in that "off peak" isn't one blanket time restriction and encourage them to check.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,312
One of the earlier suggestions in this thread was to have an online enquiries computer at the gateline for use by staff; and now buried in the Sept 15 direct award franchise agreement is a requirement for FGW to fit 'Gateline PCs':
Perhaps they could add a mag stripe reader and a nice big simple GO/NOGO splash screen - although I guess there'll be some staff who just wouldn't believe it anyway.
Perhaps they could add a mag stripe reader and a nice big simple GO/NOGO splash screen - although I guess there'll be some staff who just wouldn't believe it anyway.
Mag strips just can't store enough data. A cheat sheet would be good, but there are apparently way too many combinations. Surely there can't be that many, or at least not many that are likely to be presented. Those that aren't on the list can be checked, or the traveller given the benefit of the doubt.
In most cases, they'll get a subsequent check on the train. Perhaps gateline staff can simply mark the ticket in the endorsements box to state they've checked and passed the ticket but subject to a further 'check'?
Surely something can be done!
In most cases, they'll get a subsequent check on the train. Perhaps gateline staff can simply mark the ticket in the endorsements box to state they've checked and passed the ticket but subject to a further 'check'?
Surely something can be done!
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,312
Not at all, they'd all need the routing guide and the fares embedded.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
My suggestion is that a gateline PC simply reads the origin, destination and ticket type off the mag stripe (or Aztec code or whatever) of tickets that are flagged up, and then looks up the validity and provides a GO/NOGO output.
We know that individual gates do not have the processing power of a PC, or the data storage to do this.
Last edited:
These suggestions are pretty sensible, however what impact would they have on the ground? FGW have claimed to bnm numerous times they have informed their staff about the specific restrictions but despite clear instructions they still they get it wrong. The staff have allegedly been told in no uncertain terms the ticket is valid, yet despite being given this explicit guidance still refuse to accept it. So how would providing yet even more information to staff who continue to steadfastly refuse to accept the validity of valid tickets (whether intentionally or not) despite all the facts to the contrary improve the situation? This seems to be more of a staff management and training issue, than it does with the actual provision of information on validity.
Yes, I got that impression. In my case, one member of staff who did know, and was clued up (and stepped in having clearly observed things from afar), and one who was insistent that a bit of creased paper on a wall was to be treated as gospel, despite it not actually having restriction codes but instead a series of times, trains and long passages of text. And his interpretation was that you could travel on slow trains, but not HSTs... no doubt with other staff having their own interpretations. Oh, and stating that the National Rail website could be wrong as things change all the time (without perhaps acknowledging that surely a website that could change things would be more up to date than a bit of paper some years old).
You'd think it quite easy to round up all staff and inform them that there's a problem, and how they should deal with tickets in the evening peak. In theory that's all you'd need to do. Staff would know that any ticket being shown COULD be valid, and to take steps to check if not absolutely sure.
Currently I do believe staff read a staff bulletin and disregard it as they think they know better, or that the content of the memo doesn't apply to them and is about something slightly different.
You'd think it quite easy to round up all staff and inform them that there's a problem, and how they should deal with tickets in the evening peak. In theory that's all you'd need to do. Staff would know that any ticket being shown COULD be valid, and to take steps to check if not absolutely sure.
Currently I do believe staff read a staff bulletin and disregard it as they think they know better, or that the content of the memo doesn't apply to them and is about something slightly different.
Last edited:
Sadly, this doesn't just apply to gateline staff but is a common thread in customer service industries.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Could GWR legitimately be sued for breach of contract here? Anyone got time to spare?
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Yes. Of course they could.Could GWR legitimately be sued for breach of contract here? Anyone got time to spare?
But sadly, you haven't suggested what they could be sued for! The price of a ticket? Negligence? Malfeasance? Consequential damages?
Yes, they could be sued, but I see little prospect in the merits of any attempt, and no prospect of a possible benefit over loss incurred.
Any 'time to spare' for such a sterile move would have to be at someone's considerable expense. Were you offering?
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I would use a far stronger word than disappointing. Restriction code F3 is very straightforward and should be easy to understand by anyone with a basic grasp of English.
Last edited:
You say suing isn't worth bothering with. Seems fair enough. But out of interest, what recourse should a passenger seek from a company which has repeatedly failed to honour the contract it bound itself to, when all attempts at negotiating with the company directly have failed? What actions would have merits, or do you believe the passenger should be simply content to accept the breach of contract and leave it at that?
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
I wonder about invoicing them for your time on the basis of comparing your ultimate arrival time as it should have been with what it actually was, using your employer's internal charge rate for your time as the rate???
So if you incurred an hour's delay compared to having been let straight through, invoice for an hour of your time.
Agreed. FGW claimed they addressed the training of their staff, so this was either an outright lie and they simply haven't trained staff, or they have trained the staff but the staff refuse to accept instructions from management or follow company policy and these 'rogue employees' (for want of a better phrase) have not been dealt with appropriately. In either case, it's a bad reflection on FGW's ability to effectively manage their personnel.
There is then the hassle of tax and national insurance, more so if you are not registered for self assessments etc.
However as we know BNM is a regular travel maybe compensated in free travel vouchers would bypass tax issues?
Time to report this systematic problem to the DfT as an apparent breach of the franchise agreement perhaps? Maybe the DfT will have more success in persuading the company to resolve the matter!
From the TSA:
And from an existing Breach Notice for another company:
Last edited:
The DSM at Paddington tonight took my details and has told me he will get Customer Services to contact me. I shall wait on that before I decide my next move.
Suing is not an option for the reasons DaveNewcastle gave.
However, reopening a dialogue with London Travelwatch is near the top of the list. As is getting back in touch with my MP.
I stopped those conversations last time as I accepted FGW's (as was) assurances that this wouldn't happen again. I accepted the apologies and goodwill gesture and moved on.
The ball is back in GWR's court. I await their first response with interest.
Now do I post about what happened later when I was met by the BTP...? An unrelated issue except it was GWR staff getting something spectacularly wrong. Again.
Suing is not an option for the reasons DaveNewcastle gave.
However, reopening a dialogue with London Travelwatch is near the top of the list. As is getting back in touch with my MP.
I stopped those conversations last time as I accepted FGW's (as was) assurances that this wouldn't happen again. I accepted the apologies and goodwill gesture and moved on.
The ball is back in GWR's court. I await their first response with interest.
Now do I post about what happened later when I was met by the BTP...? An unrelated issue except it was GWR staff getting something spectacularly wrong. Again.
FGW.... GWR.
You had FGW assurances they wouldn't do it again, but did you have GWR assurances?
There is a lot of incompetence across the board from top to bottom at GWR we see time and time again. The amount of times it is seen their social media being told they've given incorrect info is unbelievable.
You had FGW assurances they wouldn't do it again, but did you have GWR assurances?
There is a lot of incompetence across the board from top to bottom at GWR we see time and time again. The amount of times it is seen their social media being told they've given incorrect info is unbelievable.
FGW.... GWR.
You had FGW assurances they wouldn't do it again, but did you have GWR assurances?
*like* *like a lot*
I dare them to use that excuse.
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,470
Report them to the DfT.
If the DfT show no interest, then the passenger is pretty much screwed. I think the local MP is pretty much the only potentially effective route I can see.
Depends on the effectiveness of the local MP. My current MP gets results, my previous one was more useless than a chocolate fire guard.
I don't see one persons experiences being sufficient to bring any action. Would need to build a case of multiple experiences.
- Status