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

[Roylang]

If I gave the paddington gateline credit I would assume they would have checked the code for UT, and determined it wasn't valid on the train the OP was trying to catch and apologised.


traintimes.org (and I assume NRE) gives this as a valid itinerary for the ticket:


£42.50 for an Off-Peak Day Single

However code UT
http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=LUA&dest=WIN&ldn=1&tkt=CDS

Shows



The fact that NRE shows it as valid means that the barrier staff should have allowed the person through, despite the ticket not actually being valid.

My post on WNXX - gateline, information desk and ticket office staff were all unhelpful and in one case, rude. I was lied to, they tried to deceive me and not one apologised.

GWR online ticket sales shows my journey as valid also.

Roy

 

[bnm]

My post on WNXX - gateline, information desk and ticket office staff were all unhelpful and in one case, rude. I was lied to, they tried to deceive me and not one apologised.

GWR online ticket sales shows my journey as valid also.

Roy

I see there's been no culture change at Paddington. Still staffed by Kermit and friends. At least you didn't have Network Rail security wade in, threatening to eject you, as happened to me when I was travelling on a valid itinerary.

I despair at the incompetence at Paddington.

Escalate your complaint. If you want a Manager's email address (one who is well aware of PAD gateline issues) then PM me.

 

[87electric]

Is it worth all these gateline problems being brought to the attention of Barry Doe at Rail Magazine? He likes to delve into ticketing practices.

 

[bnm]

Is it worth all these gateline problems being brought to the attention of Barry Doe at Rail Magazine? He likes to delve into ticketing practices.

Already done so. And BBC and ITV. Latter two not interested, Barry never got back to me after initial follow up.

 

[jon0844]

A lot of people won't be interested because they know the general public will probably be less sympathetic. GWR passengers may even rally against those who can travel in the evening peak when they can't!

We already have people who feel that people splitting tickets are somehow dodgy.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Roylang]

A lot of people won't be interested because they know the general public will probably be less sympathetic.

And the sad fact is that it will be that same general public that will get caught up in such a farce at some point.

Roy

 

[jon0844]

And the sad fact is that it will be that same general public that will get caught up in such a farce at some point.

Roy

But won't necessarily know, and will accept what they're told - or be sent on to a nice slow stopper if they don't agree to wait.

 

[najaB]

And the sad fact is that it will be that same general public that will get caught up in such a farce at some point.

Thing is, it isn't something that's easily explained and doesn't affect large numbers of people. As such, it doesn't make 'good' TV or print.

 

[Roylang]

Got a reply from GWR today asking for a copy of my ticket which I have provided. I will keep you posted.

Roy

 

[Greenback]

Thing is, it isn't something that's easily explained and doesn't affect large numbers of people. As such, it doesn't make 'good' TV or print.

I dare say that most people in TV would have difficult in understanding the issue at all.

 

[talldave]

I dare say that most people in TV would have difficult in understanding the issue at all.

Very true, considering that the people who are paid to understand it don't.

 

[Roylang]

Well I got a reply which to my mind has not addressed my compliant at all and, worse, seems to be suggesting that Paddington-Reading is not valid at all.

If that is what they are saying, the routeing guide shows the routeing points for Winchester as Eastleigh and Basingstoke and for Luton Airport Parkway as Bedford and West Hampstead. Basingstoke to West Hampstead shows the permitted route as via London Group. Winchester to London has always been permitted via Paddington and I don't believe that has changed.

This is their reply:

"Thank you for your email and providing me with more information.

I have looked into this and as you purchased a ticket from Luton Airport to Winchester you ticket wouldn’t have been valid for travel from London Paddington or Reading. I also note that the ticket you bought has a restriction code, this code is UT. This restriction code means that you aren’t allowed to travel from London Paddington before 19:00. I have included a link below should you wish to view more information about the restrictions on tickets.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types.aspx

thanks again for taking the time to contact me and I hope this helps."

They ignored that fact that SWT, NR and GWR will all give an itinerary that shows this valid.

Any advice on what I should say in my reply?

Roy

 

[Mojo]

I'm away from home so can't check the Routeing Guide easily at the moment, but you have certainly got to mention that the link they provided says "When you book your journey online, any ticket offered in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner will be accepted as a permitted route."

 

[Roylang]

I'm away from home so can't check the Routeing Guide easily at the moment, but you have certainly got to mention that the link they provided says "When you book your journey online, any ticket offered in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner will be accepted as a permitted route."

Sadly, although I looked up the fare and itinerary online, I did not buy my ticket online as I had to get parking as well. I just showed the ticket clerk what I wanted on my phone.

Roy

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't know about routeing, but with regard to timing, was it an HST or a stopping Turbo you were using? Time-Wise it would have been valid on the Turbo but not the HST:

Not valid on any train timed
to depart London Paddington
after 04:29 and before 09:20
or on the following departures
(or Reading in brackets):

16:00 (16:28) to Bristol
Temple Meads
16:06 (16:33) to Penzance
16:15 (16:44) to Swansea
16:30 (16:59) to Taunton
16:36 (17:04 to Exeter St
Davids (Monday to Thursdays) /
Plymouth (Fridays)
16:45 (17:13) to Swansea
16:49 (17:22) to Oxford
17:00 (17:27) to Bristol
Temple Meads
17:03 (17:30) to Penzance
17:15 (17:43) to Carmarthen
17:22 (17:51) to Hereford
17:30 (17:57) to Taunton
17:33 (18:01) to Paignton
17:45 (18:13) to Swansea
17:49 (18:23) to Worcester
Shrub Hill
18:00 (18:28) to Bristol
Temple Meads
18:03 (18:31) to Penzance
18:15 (18:43) to Swansea
18:22 (18:53) to Hereford
18:30 (18:57) to Weston-Super-
Mare
18:35 (19:03) to Exeter St
Davids (Monday to Thursdays) /
Plymouth (Fridays)
18:45 (19:13) to Swansea
18:47 (19:20) to Cheltenham
Spa
18:50 (19:24) to Oxford
19:00 (19:28) to Bristol
Temple Meads

 

[Roylang]

I don't know about routeing, but with regard to timing, was it an HST or a stopping Turbo you were using? Time-Wise it would have been valid on the Turbo but not the HST:

I was an HST, but you need to look back at the thread a couple of pages. I had an NR itinerary that said I was valid on the 18:35 HST. Apparently in the data that the online tools work from, that train is valid.

The NR website says it checks ticket validity so, in my opinion, they should have let me on. The GWR online ticket sales will also sell me a Off-peak Single for that train.

Roy

 

[bnm]

As I mentioned upthread, online journey planners and booking engines show the 1835 as valid on journeys with the UT restriction. That's because they're still using an algorithm that applies the restriction between 1833-1834. Service in question used to depart at 1833.

While this remains the case the tickets are absolutely valid. No amount of irrelevant waffle from GWR Customer Services, who patently don't understand the reason for complaint from Roylang, will change that.

Roylang, my offer of an email address of a Customer Service Manager, well versed in Paddington validity issues, still stands. PM me if you are thinking of escalating your complaint.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was an HST, but you need to look back at the thread a couple of pages. I had an NR itinerary that said I was valid on the 18:35 HST. Apparently in the data that the online tools work from, that train is valid.

Ah, I see.

Of course GWR have created a rod for their own back with this nonsense and a need to maintain it. I see no reason it should not be a blanket restriction, as the Turbos usually suffer far worse overcrowding than the HSTs.

But that being the case it should be valid (on a technicality) and GWR should set about fixing it ASAP.

 

[bnm]

Ah, I see.

Of course GWR have created a rod for their own back with this nonsense and a need to maintain it. I see no reason it should not be a blanket restriction, as the Turbos usually suffer far worse overcrowding than the HSTs.

But that being the case it should be valid (on a technicality) and GWR should set about fixing it ASAP.

I think DfT created the rod rather than FGW/GWR. It was they who combined the Thames Valley and Great Western
franchises.

Blanketing the restrictions does make life easier for the operator. But at the expense of huge increases in fares for those wishing to, or having to, use the Turbo services. Pricing people off trains isn't, IMHO, the answer.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think pricing people off *peak* trains very much *is* the answer. It is simply impossible to provide the required capacity otherwise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
To add to that my general view on cross London is that the restrictions should apply on both sides. I can see no logical argument for them not doing.

 

[bnm]

I think pricing people off *peak* trains very much *is* the answer. It is simply impossible to provide the required capacity otherwise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
To add to that my general view on cross London is that the restrictions should apply on both sides. I can see no logical argument for them not doing.

2/3/5/6 car Turbos increasing to 4/8/12 car EMUs will provide the capacity. Long distance services to see increases in both frequency and capacity. Factor in Crossrail too.

 

[najaB]

I think pricing people off *peak* trains very much *is* the answer. It is simply impossible to provide the required capacity otherwise.

That's not a very customer-friendly approach though, is it? If we want to use price differentials to control demand then it is much better to reduce off-peak prices to encourage the price sensitive traffic onto off-peak services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's not a very customer-friendly approach though, is it? If we want to use price differentials to control demand then it is much better to reduce off-peak prices to encourage the price sensitive traffic onto off-peak services.

Increasing peak prices and reducing off-peak prices are *exactly the same thing*. You need £X income, you differentially price to obtain it.

 

[bnm]

Not forgetting of course that a sizeable proportion of the peak passengers pay the least per journey.

Capacity should be addressed by provision of services. Not by the blunt instrument of price.

 

[najaB]

Increasing peak prices and reducing off-peak prices are *exactly the same thing*. You need £X income, you differentially price to obtain it.

They achieve the same end, but the latter approach is much more customer-friendly. 'Pull' the demand out of the peaks instead of 'pushing' it. You want to make it too expensive to travel in the peak, instead they should make it too cheap to miss travelling out of peak.

If nothing else, which makes for better PR?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Capacity should be addressed by provision of services. Not by the blunt instrument of price.

Pricing doesn't have to be a blunt instrument - the airlines have yield management down to a fine atr.

 

[bb21]

They achieve the same end, but the latter approach is much more customer-friendly. 'Pull' the demand out of the peaks instead of 'pushing' it. You want to make it too expensive to travel in the peak, instead they should make it too cheap to miss travelling out of peak.

If nothing else, which makes for better PR?

Try telling the DfT that.

They are unlikely to agree to anything in the foreseeable future that results in forecasted loss of revenue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pricing doesn't have to be a blunt instrument - the airlines have yield management down to a fine atr.

It's walk-up fares that make it blunt. To make it more airline-like the only feasible way would be dynamic pricing and train specific ticketing.

 

[najaB]

Try telling the DfT that.

They are unlikely to agree to anything in the foreseeable future that results in forecasted loss of revenue.

Set correctly, lower prices stimulate demand. Source: How many people considered a European mini-break pre EasyJet and Ryanair?

So the lost peak revenue is made up for by busier off-peak services. Again, the airlines have this down to a science.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's walk-up fares that make it blunt. To make it more airline-like the only feasible way would be dynamic pricing and train specific ticketing.

I'd be interested to see what the walk-up/Advance split is on off-peak trains.

 

[bnm]

We are drifting a bit here folks. I'm just as guilty.

Meanwhile I'm off to Aylesbury for work tomorrow, via Paddington. My ticket is of course an Off Peak one, and I'll be headed home through Paddington between 4-5pm. Let's see how the gateline copes with another unrestricted ticket. This one is neither F3 or C4...

 

[miami]

Dunno about GWR, but fares are not linked to how busy the train is.

The 1840 Euston to Manchester tomorrow will be quite empty, as usual. The 1900 will be absolutely rammed. The 1920 will be standing room only.

Current prices for tomorrow are
1840: £140.00
1900: £81.40 (£82.40 for a return)

For next Wednesday
1840: £80.00
1900: £81.40 (£82.40 for a return)

The 1900 is flexible and can be used on any train from 1900 onwards. The 1840 is a "catch it or you're screwed".

The reason that the 1840 is empty and the 1900 is rammed is solely to extract the maximum amount from business customers.

That may keep off-peak fares lower, but please don't pretend it's to discourage people from travelling on busy services.

I think pricing people off *peak* trains very much *is* the answer. It is simply impossible to provide the required capacity otherwise.