Can you excess a ticket bought with a railcard?

[yorkie]

Though there is an argument that obtaining the excess counts as 'buying' the ticket for someone else.

No, that does not mean it is for someone else (which would actually be legitimate if it was purchased on behalf of an organisation, business or similar entity), though in this particular case the OP admits that it would be.

 

[najaB]

No, that does not mean it is for someone else (which would actually be legitimate if it was purchased on behalf of an organisation, business or similar entity), though in this particular case the OP admits that it would be.

No, what I'm saying is that while tickets aren't transferable - meaning I can't give or sell my ticket to someone else - you are allowed to buy a ticket *for* someone else. So the argument would be that the ticket was originally bought for me, but I then bought an excess in order to let someone else use it.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Hence transferring it!

 

[yorkie]

No, what I'm saying is that while tickets aren't transferable - meaning I can't give or sell my ticket to someone else - you are allowed to buy a ticket *for* someone else. So the argument would be that the ticket was originally bought for me, but I then bought an excess in order to let someone else use it.

Yes, most tickets are not transferable (except when purchased on behalf of an organisation, business or similar entity) and in this case, the OP has admitted that he was planning to do this.

But in many other cases that isn't true at all.

 

[najaB]

Hence transferring it!

I agree, but was wondering if buying the excess *for* someone else had the same effect as buying a ticket for someone else.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I agree, but was wondering if buying the excess *for* someone else had the same effect as buying a ticket for someone else.

Not at all.

It is perfectly acceptable for a person to bring someone elses's ticket into a ticket office to arrange an 'excess' for whatever reason. There would be no preumption that the person requesting the change was also the passenger.
A friend. Family member. Staff. A carer. An attorney. An agent. - it doesn't matter

 

[MikeWh]

So in summary, whilst an excess fare may or may not be offered to remove a Railcard discount (and my view is that it should not be)

I'm inclined to agree with your brackets after the journey has started, but I'm really struggling to understand why a customer who seeks to regularise a potential problem before the journey starts should be penalised. After all, the TOC is getting more money than they thought they were going to. Please can you explain why you feel this way?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Sorry for going back a bit, but I was on a 12 hour shift yesterday......

....I know FGW, Northern and Virgin Trains East Coast do them, for a start. The first two I know of staff who do it but I do not know if they have a policy either way, and the last one I have seen the policy is to do it and seen it happen numerous times.

Northern do not have a policy to issue these excess fares. Every time this subject comes up in briefings I have been to, it has been discouraged, firmly.

....There is no rule to say it can't be done!....

Every document I have access to, in regards to excess fares, tells me when I can do an excess fare. Logically, therefore, if it is not listed it is not to be done.

....So some TOCs apply common sense, and some leave it to their staff to decide, and some lack common sense....

I guess common sense depends on what side of the fence you sit. As a passenger you want the train companies to bend over backwards for you even though you are in the wrong. As a train company, you'd just like passengers to abide by the terms they agreed to because that's what they expect of you.

Some companies have seemingly decided that "the passenger is always right" in this regard, but that doesn't mean it is common sense.

....If we had a proper ombudsman standing up for our rights and ensuring fairness and consistent common standards, then we could avoid all this uncertainty and get the excess done anywhere.

The reasons for excess fares to be given are clearly stated in the TSA, the only way you will get "consistency" is to enforce the TSA the way it is (no excess for lack of Railcard), or get all train companies to agree to change it (good luck with that!).

 

[bb21]

Every document I have access to, in regards to excess fares, tells me when I can do an excess fare. Logically, therefore, if it is not listed it is not to be done.

AIUI the general consensus amongst those higher up in the industry is that if it is not explicitly forbidden, it can be done, but obviously having these messages filtered down the levels consistently across all TOCs can be a problem.

Middle management probably all have their own ideas and for those on the ground, doing something not explicitly permitted can land one in hot water with line managers, etc, so it is unsurprising that there is huge discrepancy in what actually gets done.

 

[Starmill]

Every document I have access to, in regards to excess fares, tells me when I can do an excess fare. Logically, therefore, if it is not listed it is not to be done.

A unique brand of perverse logic which you share with very few people I'm afraid.

There's no sense in the industry (or you) saying something isn't allowed to customer disbenefit without corresponding benefit elsewhere. The above attitude inspires this "deadweight loss" of inefficiency which is one of many reasons why the industry is so stuck in the past.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I guess common sense depends on what side of the fence you sit. As a passenger you want the train companies to bend over backwards for you even though you are in the wrong. As a train company, you'd just like passengers to abide by the terms they agreed to because that's what they expect of you.

Some companies have seemingly decided that "the passenger is always right" in this regard, but that doesn't mean it is common sense.

If a company sets a condition that a majority of passengers ignore or fail to understand, and the company will have great difficulty in enforcing, and if it's successful is likely to lead to bery bad press, is it sensible to offer passengers a way to buy their way out of said condition if they're willing to do so?

Imagine someone arrives at your window with a £10 CDS with a railcard. They tell you they have forgotten their railcard, and would like to catch a train in 10 minutes. You could charge them the £5 excess. Do you explain that this is not permitted (even though it isn't against any rules as you correctly state) and refuse? If you do, what are they going to do? Almost certainly, just get on the train. Northern service? Relatively low chance the guard will check tickets. If they do, relatively low chance they will ask to see the railrcard. If they do, relatively low chance that they will do anything other than say "You must remember your railcard next time". What is the guard likely to do? Ask them to purchase a new ticket? Someone with a railcard isn't going to be someone flush with cash. They will likely baulk at the insistence of a new ticket being purchased. Lots of faffing around with a card that won't authorise? Lots more faffing around with a UFN? By this point, the train has probably reached the stop that the person wanted.

So if someone comes to a ticket office offering to pay a difference, it's basically always in the train company's interest to take it. It's all the more likely they'd get £0 extra of they don't!

 

[Jonfun]

If a passenger had the opportunity to regularise their travel at both a ticket office and on the train and "baulked at the insistence of having to purchase a new ticket" then I'd damn well hope they meet a revenue inspector, and preferably the magistrates. This attitude that there is a god given right to travel is ludicrous and needs breaking - if you can't afford to pay for a valid ticket, that's your own problem.

With regard to the discussion on availability of railcard excesses, I'm of the opinion that they should be available, prior to travel only, and incur a mandatory admin fee. It would both reflect the retail time incurred and act as a suitable reminder to ensure the correct ticket was bought in the first place.

 

[Hellfire]

With regard to the discussion on availability of railcard excesses, I'm of the opinion that they should be available, prior to travel only, and incur a mandatory admin fee. It would both reflect the retail time incurred and act as a suitable reminder to ensure the correct ticket was bought in the first place.

But I did buy the correct ticket in the first place. It's just that my plans have changed because of circumstances beyond my control.

I am proposing to the TOC that I give them even more money so someone else can avail themselves of a seat I have already booked and paid for. Everyone wins.

I'm a great supporter of the railways and the majority of rail staff I come into contact with on a regular basis are friendly and helpful. I do think it's time that the minority of people who keep referring to the rule book should remember they are in a customer service industry, no different to Waitrose or Marks & Spencer.

Successful companies take the view that the customer is their lifeblood, and therefore put in place systems and procedures to deal with things that crop up to ensure the customer is satisfied. In my view, the railways should be no different.

 

[crehld]

Northern do not have a policy to issue these excess fares. Every time this subject comes up in briefings I have been to, it has been discouraged, firmly.

I have obtained these excess fares from Northern ticket offices and guards on many occasions. In fact the only time I have been refused such an excess was at a non-Northern ticket office; the guard on the Northern service I then boarded felt "that's a bit harsh - why didn't they just excess it?" (or words to that effect). So many Northern staff appear to be actively flouting company policy... or perhaps management prefers to view it as their staff taking the initiative and offering a good service?

Every document I have access to, in regards to excess fares, tells me when I can do an excess fare. Logically, therefore, if it is not listed it is not to be done.

Of course internal staff-eyes only documents do not constitute the terms and conditions which rail companies and passengers agree to when buying and using railcards and ticket, so mobilizing such evidence here is irrelevant in actually telling us whether or not these excesses can or cannot be issued.

I guess common sense depends on what side of the fence you sit. As a passenger you want the train companies to bend over backwards for you even though you are in the wrong. As a train company, you'd just like passengers to abide by the terms they agreed to because that's what they expect of you.

Some companies have seemingly decided that "the passenger is always right" in this regard, but that doesn't mean it is common sense.

I don't want the railway industry to "bend over backwards" for me. I want to. If I did I'd ask to be let on to the train with my otherwise invalid ticket. Rather, I want to actively approach a ticket office and hand over an extra half of the price of my ticket to ensure it is valid for the journey I wish to make.

As to "the passenger is always right" mentality, I wouldn't go as far to say the passenger is always right. But like it or not the rail industry collectively emphasizes the importance of customer service and it is key factor in the regulation of the industry. It's why the ORR measures and monitors a range of customer satisfaction indicators and why many rail companies go out of their way to make sure the customer is content.

The reasons for excess fares to be given are clearly stated in the TSA, the only way you will get "consistency" is to enforce the TSA the way it is (no excess for lack of Railcard), or get all train companies to agree to change it (good luck with that!).

I accept that it is not currently well defined. But there is nothing to stop the TSA being amended to make such excesses explicitly permitted (remember it is not explicit prohibited at the moment). Indeed, if it provides a mechanism for ensuring people do not travel on invalid tickets (or at least reducing the temptation for them to do so) and for collecting extra revenue and ensuing customer satisfaction I fail to see how the rail industry is harmed by offering these excesses.

We already do it for changing off-peak to anytime tickets, for changing the route one wishes to travel and for permitted over distance travel. I have yet to see any clear, reasonable and rational argument as to why the issuing of such excesses should be prohibited in all circumstances.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If a passenger had the opportunity to regularise their travel at both a ticket office and on the train and "baulked at the insistence of having to purchase a new ticket" then I'd damn well hope they meet a revenue inspector, and preferably the magistrates. This attitude that there is a god given right to travel is ludicrous and needs breaking - if you can't afford to pay for a valid ticket, that's your own problem.

Eh? I actively approach a ticket office offering to pay more money to the rail company to regularize my ticket ... in what way is this demonstrative of a God given right to travel or lack of affordability to pay the appropriate fare?

With regard to the discussion on availability of railcard excesses, I'm of the opinion that they should be available, prior to travel only, and incur a mandatory admin fee. It would both reflect the retail time incurred

What an interesting suggestion! Would you propose adding a mandatory admin fee to all tickets sold at ticket offices to reflect the retail time incurred??

and act as a suitable reminder to ensure the correct ticket was bought in the first place.

In all cases I have bought the correct ticket in first place. However I have sought excesses because (on very rare occasions) I have forgotten to pick up my railcard or because (the vast majority of the time) plans have changed last minute and I would like to board an earlier train when the railcard discounted ticket might otherwise be unavailable (e.g. using a two together ticket before 09:30). Offering excesses reflects the fact that people's plans change and permits the rail industry to offer flexible options for travel.

 

[yorkie]

But I did buy the correct ticket in the first place. It's just that my plans have changed because of circumstances beyond my control. ....

There are two separate issues here.

Most of the thread is discussing excess fares (and in the case of Railcard discount to non-Railcard discount there are many legitimate reasons why this may be appropriate)

In this post you are arguing the case for transferability (which in most cases could be done - whether permitted or not - without any excessing) which is an entirely separate matter. If the ticket was bought on behalf of an organisation it would be fine for someone else in that organisation to use it. If the ticket was bought for you, it's not allowed for most tickets, and the main reason is to prevent touting. In practice, the rail industry cannot prevent transferring most regular tickets among friends and family and is unlikely to be particularly bothered in the circumstances you describe. However the rules have to bar transferring tickets, at least for Advance fares, to prevent touts snapping up all the cheap tickets and selling them on at a higher price.

A good compromise can be found in the T&Cs of VTEC Rewards tickets; they are transferable but may not be sold. So that stops someone advertising them for sale, but doesn't stop friends and family sharing the benefits. That seems sensible to me.

 

[Hellfire]

However the rules have to bar transferring tickets, at least for Advance fares, to prevent touts snapping up all the cheap tickets and selling them on at a higher price.

Just how common is this practice of snapping up Advance tickets and selling them on? Why would anyone buy a rail ticket from a tout when they can legitimately get one online or at a ticket office, Why would anyone buy a touts rail ticket at a higher price than that printed on the ticket. I can't say I've ever seen people hating around rail stations selling tickets.

On the wider issue, why is transferring tickets such a problem? A ticket has been bought and paid for, someone turns up with it and gets on the train. It doesn't really matter whether that is the person who originally bought the ticket or someone else. The TOC has been paid.

 

[yorkie]

Just how common is this practice of snapping up Advance tickets and selling them on?

Not common because it's not allowed.

Why would anyone buy a rail ticket from a tout when they can legitimately get one online or at a ticket office, Why would anyone buy a touts rail ticket at a higher price than that printed on the ticket. I can't say I've ever seen people hating around rail stations selling tickets.

Let's say someone looks at the FA Cup draw and realises that there will be high demand for travel from, say, Manchester to London, and buys all the cheapest tiers. People may then be prepared to pay a higher price than printed on the ticket as this will be cheaper than the price offered by the rail industry once the cheap fares are snapped up.

On the wider issue, why is transferring tickets such a problem? A ticket has been bought and paid for, someone turns up with it and gets on the train. It doesn't really matter whether that is the person who originally bought the ticket or someone else. The TOC has been paid.

Ticket touting is a big problem in other areas, and I wouldn't want it to affect the rail industry.

However what you say does reflect my view on transferring tickets among friends and family, and is perhaps the reason why some tickets/products are transferable (e.g. a capped unaccounted Oyster card can be 'transferred'; there is no realistic prospect of touting in that case).

 

[Starmill]

If a passenger had the opportunity to regularise their travel at both a ticket office and on the train and "baulked at the insistence of having to purchase a new ticket" then I'd damn well hope they meet a revenue inspector, and preferably the magistrates.

This is precisely my point. What's the chance that somebody will end up in front of a magistrate for this? Small indeed!

This attitude that there is a god given right to travel is ludicrous and needs breaking - if you can't afford to pay for a valid ticket, that's your own problem.

This attitude is the problem with so many staff in the contemporary railway industry and needs breaking - if the railway can't be modern dynamic and focussed on getting people where they need to be it's not going to prosper.

 

[bb21]

This attitude is the problem with so many staff in the contemporary railway industry and needs breaking - if the railway can't be modern dynamic and focussed on getting people where they need to be it's not going to prosper.

An obvious problem with that theory is that the railway industry have a largely captive market. We talk about competition with other modes but I remain unconvinced how much competition there really is, especially in respect of the clientele that provide the vast majority of the income.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just how common is this practice of snapping up Advance tickets and selling them on? Why would anyone buy a rail ticket from a tout when they can legitimately get one online or at a ticket office, Why would anyone buy a touts rail ticket at a higher price than that printed on the ticket. I can't say I've ever seen people hating around rail stations selling tickets.

On the wider issue, why is transferring tickets such a problem? A ticket has been bought and paid for, someone turns up with it and gets on the train. It doesn't really matter whether that is the person who originally bought the ticket or someone else. The TOC has been paid.

The problem with touting is market distortion, which in turn undermines customer confidence, and explains why it is banned virtually everywhere.

No one is going to bat an eyelid if you bought a ticket for yourself, but then passed it onto your brother. Of course with Print@Home there are implications for IDs specified on the ticket but with an ordinary ticket, I doubt anyone cares.

 

[Hellfire]

The problem with touting is market distortion, which in turn undermines customer confidence, and explains why it is banned virtually everywhere.

As the law stands at the moment, the only tickets it is illegal under the law to resell are football tickets. Anything else could be construed as unlicensed trading under local authority by laws. However, I have attended rugby matches at Twickenham on many occasions where touts are selling tickets within earshot of police officers and nothing is done.

The Railway Bye Laws 21 (4) do prohibit the buying and selling of tickets but it is not clear in the bye laws whether that just applies on railway property.

I still come back to my original thought, namely that in all my years of travelling the railway, I have never seen touts offering tickets. The only exception was in London where they were trying to sell travel cards and that seems to have largely disappeared since Oyster. Thus, I don't understand the fear that Advance tickets could be at the mercy of touts and therefore the controls that apply to them are so rigid that one cannot be excessed.

 

[bb21]

I still come back to my original thought, namely that in all my years of travelling the railway, I have never seen touts offering tickets. The only exception was in London where they were trying to sell travel cards and that seems to have largely disappeared since Oyster. Thus, I don't understand the fear that Advance tickets could be at the mercy of touts and therefore the controls that apply to them are so rigid that one cannot be excessed.

I am not convinced that the lack of official provision for an excess fare procedure changing a Railcard discounted fare into a full fare is that closely linked to ticket touting. I know some people may believe this theory but I don't see a strong connection between the two. If that were the case, the non-transferability of the ticket should suffice.

I think it is likely a historical legacy. It was never thought of therefore nothing was ever done about it because getting all the TOCs to agree on something is a pretty damn hard job. It was probably never seen as a big issue because I suspect that the number of people who require such an excess is not going to be huge, the matter therefore left to the discretion of each individual TOC.

Allowing touting would have the potential of leaving open a loophole, but as things stand, I suspect that there are more profitable tickets to do that with than train tickets, as there is an effective ceiling in what can be charged. I think it is right that the legal framework is there, whatever size the potential losses should it not be there. I don't believe it is a sufficient reason for the excess not being permitted.

I personally have no problem with such restrictions being placed on Advance tickets (as they are heavily discounted, or should be), although I believe that such an excess fare should be officially permitted on walk-on fares. Then again I am completely against Advance fares that are priced barely less than the cheapest walk-on fare, but that is for another thread.

 

[swt_passenger]

I may have missed this in the various discussions on excessing railcard discounted tickets, (there was a different one last week for instance), but are people definitely getting excess coupons, i.e. valid only with accompanying original ticket, or are they getting a refund of the original ticket and issue of a new one, but with the admin charge waived?

In other words, they ask for an excess, and pay something that seems like an 'excess' but actually get a new ticket?

 

[Starmill]

An obvious problem with that theory is that the railway industry have a largely captive market. We talk about competition with other modes but I remain unconvinced how much competition there really is, especially in respect of the clientele that provide the vast majority of the income.

I'm not sure how this is relevant, but that wasn't a theory, it was a criticism. Lack of competition isn't an excuse for poor service. It might be why they offer less good service, and the fault of that likely lies with regulatory failure, but hey nobody is forcing a private company to squeeze consumer rights to increase profits. Can they be blamed? Maybe, probably not. They simply shouldn't be permitted.

 

[bb21]

I'm not sure how this is relevant, but that wasn't a theory, it was a criticism. Lack of competition isn't an excuse for poor service. It might be why they offer less good service, and the fault of that likely lies with regulatory failure, but hey nobody is forcing a private company to squeeze consumer rights to increase profits. Can they be blamed? Maybe, probably not. They simply shouldn't be permitted.

Because all these nice things you want happening isn't going to happen given the context, without some divine (or government) intervention. Good luck with the government we have now and for the next five, and possibly ten, years.

Also if staff are just following instructions from higher up then I don't think that is an attitude issue. I wouldn't expect staff to do something they have been told not to even if the instruction itself is wrong. If something is not policy, I don't think staff can be blamed for refusing to do it. If it is felt that the policy is wrong and needs changing, then that needs to be taken up with the company.

 

[Hellfire]

Also if staff are just following instructions from higher up then I don't think that is an attitude issue. I wouldn't expect staff to do something they have been told not to even if the instruction itself is wrong. If something is not policy, I don't think staff can be blamed for refusing to do it. If it is felt that the policy is wrong and needs changing, then that needs to be taken up with the company.

I do agree with this and no blame is attached to staff at all

 

[bb21]

I probably sound a bit abrupt every time people mention the railway industry needing to be more customer focused and all that, not because I don't agree with it, but probably more out of frustration than anything. I don't really see much point talking about it seeing that the current practice is unlikely to change, and there is no mechanism to force the industry to wind their neck in given the lack of any competent watchdog. There is very little effective lobbying of the government, and very little passengers can do to fight all the unfavourable changes that have been implemented especially in the last few years. It almost does my head in every time I see the same things being trotted out and nothing being achieved, so a few days later the same things get repeated. It is not a criticism at anyone, just my general observation, and it gets incredibly boring over time.

The only way forward in the current setting I can see is playing the train companies at their own games and do it better. Unfortunately only a very small proportion of people can ever do that due to the requirement for intelligence, flexibility and intuition required. A fairly extensive knowledge of fares also helps.

Meanwhile the vast majority of passengers continue to be ripped off in all sorts of ways by private companies with their short-term visions thanks to our ludicrous franchising system, and I doubt it will ever change.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

AIUI the general consensus amongst those higher up in the industry is that if it is not explicitly forbidden, it can be done, but obviously having these messages filtered down the levels consistently across all TOCs can be a problem....

Okay, so on the basis that if it isn't specifically forbidden, and the only lists are for what can be 'excessed', then nothing is forbidden, is it? So why have a list of what can be done when we can do anything we want? That makes no sense to me.

If a ticket restriction was worded "Valid after 0930", would you consider the ticket to be valid before 0930? After all, it isn't specifically stated that it is not allowed?

A unique brand of perverse logic which you share with very few people I'm afraid....

On a forum full of loop hole seeking people (no offence intended)? What a surprise!

....There's no sense in the industry (or you) saying something isn't allowed to customer disbenefit without corresponding benefit elsewhere. The above attitude inspires this "deadweight loss" of inefficiency which is one of many reasons why the industry is so stuck in the past.....

Erm.... Stuck in the past? Or not pandering to people who want the best of both worlds? If the passenger has to buy a new ticket or Railcard, are you honestly saying you can see no benefit anywhere?

....If a company sets a condition that a majority of passengers ignore or fail to understand, and the company will have great difficulty in enforcing, and if it's successful is likely to lead to bery bad press, is it sensible to offer passengers a way to buy their way out of said condition if they're willing to do so?....

Passengers ignoring conditions is not the fault of the railway, so why should the railway bend over backwards for them? For good media coverage? Give someone an inch and they'll take a mile, let them take a mile and you might as well let them do what they want!

....Imagine someone arrives at your window with a £10 CDS with a railcard. They tell you they have forgotten their railcard, and would like to catch a train in 10 minutes. You could charge them the £5 excess. Do you explain that this is not permitted (even though it isn't against any rules as you correctly state) and refuse?....

I don't offer an excess, but I don't flat out refuse either, I politely give them three options.

1) Buy a new railcard.
2) Get a replacement railcard
3) Buy a new ticket (with a refund on the unused one if possible)

It is then their choice what they do.

....If you do, what are they going to do? Almost certainly, just get on the train.....

They might, but I think you might be surprised what they do when given a choice.

Northern service? Relatively low chance the guard will check tickets....

Possible, but most Northern services I am on I see the guard on the train, maybe I'm just lucky?

....If they do, relatively low chance they will ask to see the railrcard....

That's not really my experience, but then maybe it's different with my pass, in fact just the other week I didn't just get asked for my priv card, they wanted to see my ID card too!

....If they do, relatively low chance that they will do anything other than say "You must remember your railcard next time"....

That might be what your local guards do, I couldn't possibly comment on that, but I can't say I've noticed that on any trains I have been on recently.

....What is the guard likely to do? Ask them to purchase a new ticket?....

It's exactly what they should do.

....Someone with a railcard isn't going to be someone flush with cash....

Those with more money tend to be those that want to spend the least in my experience. In fact I'd go so far as to say those with little money are often more willing to 'do the right thing', even if they don't actually want to.

....They will likely baulk at the insistence of a new ticket being purchased....

I guess it depends on how they are asked to pay.

They are able to get a refund on the unused ticket provided refunds are allowed with the ticket type they hold. This should be explained at the time the new ticket is sold. However, I'm sure there are people who will kick up a whole heap of **** to avoid paying a fare.

....Lots of faffing around with a card that won't authorise? Lots more faffing around with a UFN? By this point, the train has probably reached the stop that the person wanted....

Possibly.

....So if someone comes to a ticket office offering to pay a difference, it's basically always in the train company's interest to take it. It's all the more likely they'd get £0 extra of they don't!

That's your opinion. My experience doesn't really tally with that.

I have obtained these excess fares from Northern ticket offices and guards on many occasions. In fact the only time I have been refused such an excess was at a non-Northern ticket office; the guard on the Northern service I then boarded felt "that's a bit harsh - why didn't they just excess it?" (or words to that effect). So many Northern staff appear to be actively flouting company policy... or perhaps management prefers to view it as their staff taking the initiative and offering a good service?....

In a local ticket office to me, there are staff who will do the excess, staff who will only excess walk up fares and staff who will not do it because it is not allowed. I won't name names, but the calibre of the member of staff in other areas matches the responses to this query, which, in case you are not sure, means that those who you would complain about for everything else are the ones you'd go to for this excess. Read into that what you like.

....Of course internal staff-eyes only documents do not constitute the terms and conditions which rail companies and passengers agree to when buying and using railcards and ticket, so mobilizing such evidence here is irrelevant in actually telling us whether or not these excesses can or cannot be issued....

The TSA, whilst not strictly part of the T&Cs, is available for the general public to see if they want to look for it (it's not hard to find), however, the NRCoC, which, basically, is the terms and conditions, and is available for all to see, does not grant any right to an excess fare in this situation.

I don't want the railway industry to "bend over backwards" for me. I want to. If I did I'd ask to be let on to the train with my otherwise invalid ticket. Rather, I want to actively approach a ticket office and hand over an extra half of the price of my ticket to ensure it is valid for the journey I wish to make....

Ah, but you want the railway to accept this and that is not something you have a right to, in other words, you want the railway to not hold you to your agreement and allow you to alter that agreement in a way that benefits only you? Sounds like bending over backwards to me, but it should be noted that the railway would be willing to refund a refundable ticket and let you buy a new one, so all isn't lost, right?

....As to "the passenger is always right" mentality, I wouldn't go as far to say the passenger is always right. But like it or not the rail industry collectively emphasizes the importance of customer service and it is key factor in the regulation of the industry....

So where would you draw the line?

....It's why the ORR measures and monitors a range of customer satisfaction indicators and why many rail companies go out of their way to make sure the customer is content.

Wait, have we gone back to bending over backwards again?

I accept that it is not currently well defined. But there is nothing to stop the TSA being amended to make such excesses explicitly permitted (remember it is not explicit prohibited at the moment)....

Not currently well defined? There is a list of what excess fares can be done, if it's not on the list what, exactly, allows it?

The TSA is part of the franchise agreements, so the only time it is financially viable to change it is at franchise change, but the franchises don't all change at once, so unless we want consistency in ten or fifteen years time, it's going to cost someone money, and no-one wants it to be them.

....Indeed, if it provides a mechanism for ensuring people do not travel on invalid tickets (or at least reducing the temptation for them to do so) and for collecting extra revenue and ensuing customer satisfaction I fail to see how the rail industry is harmed by offering these excesses....

You seem to proceed on an assumption that the railway would be better off offering the excess, or that no-one buys a new ticket in these situations, but if a percentage of people buy a new ticket then the railway could be worse off by offering it.

We already do it for changing off-peak to anytime tickets, for changing the route one wishes to travel and for permitted over distance travel. I have yet to see any clear, reasonable and rational argument as to why the issuing of such excesses should be prohibited in all circumstances.....

I do not see how "I want it my way" is a rational or reasonable argument for allowing such an excess, but that's what I seem to be presented with.

 

[Starmill]

Because all these nice things you want happening isn't going to happen given the context, without some divine (or government) intervention. Good luck with the government we have now and for the next five, and possibly ten, years.

Just because you don't think something is likely, that doesn't make it less good or otherwise less worth agitating for. The whole point of Government is to intervene.

 

[bb21]

Just because you don't think something is likely, that doesn't make it less good or otherwise less worth agitating for. The whole point of Government is to intervene.

As I said, good luck with that.

 

[Starmill]

On a forum full of loop hole seeking people (no offence intended)? What a surprise!

What are you doing here then, if you're going to treat everyone else with such derision?

Erm.... Stuck in the past? Or not pandering to people who want the best of both worlds? If the passenger has to buy a new ticket or Railcard, are you honestly saying you can see no benefit anywhere?

Passengers shouldn't be unfairly penalised for forgetting railcards. Certainly not if they visit a ticket office and offer to pay an excess. Notice how only people who actually work in the industry consider that to be some kind of hardship on you!

Passengers ignoring conditions is not the fault of the railway, so why should the railway bend over backwards for them? For good media coverage? Give someone an inch and they'll take a mile, let them take a mile and you might as well let them do what they want!

The latter sentence is silly. Policy is currently vastly inconsistent - if it were amended to be less unfair everyone would be able to stick to it without cause for complaint.

They are able to get a refund on the unused ticket provided refunds are allowed with the ticket type they hold. This should be explained at the time the new ticket is sold. However, I'm sure there are people who will kick up a whole heap of **** to avoid paying a fare.

Although they probably aren't the people who went to the ticket office to try to pay an exces...

Ah, but you want the railway to accept this and that is not something you have a right to, in other words, you want the railway to not hold you to your agreement and allow you to alter that agreement in a way that benefits only you?

Ah! A TOC would never ever try to do anything like that to it its passengers would it?

As I said, good luck with that.

Good luck with what? I'm not proposing to do anything about it - there are bigger priorities and I don't have much time and even less money.

I'm also almost always organised enough not to have a problem carrying a railcard. However, there is always a chance that I might not be able to present it due to circumstances outside of my control (for example, if it gets stolen) and I'd prefer to know I'm not going to be treated criminally if that ever happens. Not luxury the railway affords me (but what should I expect? Not like I'm very understanding of all of the problems the industry experiences in offering me what I exchange my several thousand pounds a year for...) - and not nearly so deserving of your endless cynicism.

 

[bb21]

Good luck with what? I'm not proposing to do anything about it - there are bigger priorities and I don't have much time and even less money.

I'm also almost always organised enough not to have a problem carrying a railcard. However, there is always a chance that I might not be able to present it due to circumstances outside of my control (for example, if it gets stolen) and I'd prefer to know I'm not going to be treated criminally if that ever happens. Not luxury the railway affords me (but what should I expect? Not like I'm very understanding of all of the problems the industry experiences in offering me what I exchange my several thousand pounds a year for...) - and not nearly so deserving of your endless cynicism.

Good luck with the government intervening, as you believe should be the case. There are so many anti-passenger movements that successive governments failed to intervene on, or got spectacularly wrong, I think I am justified in having no confidence in our government.

Cynic? Moi?

I just prefer to have realistic expectations for the times we live in.

I don't find your aspirations "not good" as you put it btw. Reading back, I suspect we are talking from two different aspects.