Wayfarer Tickets

[shredder1]

If say I was using a GM area Wayfarer ticket and a Derbyshire Wayfarer ticket on the same day, would I be able to travel directly from say Manchester to Sheffield on a Transpennine service, or would I need a service that stops at the Newmills border, (start of the Derbyshire Wayfarer ticket. ?

 

[northwichcat]

I don't think that combination would be valid on a train running Stockport-Sheffield without any intermediate calls. However, there are a limited number of TPE services which call at Chinley, for which that combination would definitely be valid.

 

[shredder1]

I don't think that combination would be valid on a train running Stockport-Sheffield without any intermediate calls. However, there are a limited number of TPE services which call at Chinley, for which that combination would definitely be valid.

Thats great thank you very much.

 

[Puffing Devil]

I'd say that it would be valid under the new Terms of Carriage:

14.2 If you are using a Season Ticket, daily Zonal Ticket, or another area based Ticket such as a concessionary pass, ranger or rover in conjunction with another Ticket and the last station at which one Ticket is valid and the first station that the other Ticket is valid are the same, then the train does not need to call at that station for your combination to be valid.​

Both tickets are valid to Edale on the Hope Valley Line.

There is no mention that the second ticket excludes Zonal tickets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That, and it has been hotly debated, depends on whether the meaning of "another Ticket" simply means "any other valid railway ticket" or "any other valid railway ticket that is not <list>".

 

[Puffing Devil]

That, and it has been hotly debated, depends on whether the meaning of "another Ticket" simply means "any other valid railway ticket" or "any other valid railway ticket that is not <list>".

Indeed - is there any conclusion? In the absence of a concrete answer I'd be prepared to give it a go, the OP may not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed - is there any conclusion? In the absence of a concrete answer I'd be prepared to give it a go, the OP may not.

I've not heard of a clarification.

There's also the bit about validity starting and finishing - do the tickets overlap rather than both starting/ending at Edale? If so that might be a further controversy, as one possible reading of the NRCoT[1] says you can only have a split if there is no overlap of validity.

[1] Which may seem silly at first glance, but isn't necessarily if you take it that the intention of the rule is not to allow arbitrary combinations without a stop or season-ticket splitting, but is rather to allow a passenger to buy a single or return ticket to enter the zone of validity of a Rover or similar, or to extend a season ticket on a one-off basis using a single or return ticket, without having to pay for a section of route already paid for.

 

[Kite159]

I've not heard of a clarification.

There's also the bit about validity starting and finishing - do the tickets overlap rather than both starting/ending at Edale? If so that might be a further controversy, as one possible reading of the NRCoT[1] says you can only have a split if there is no overlap of validity.

[1] Which may seem silly at first glance, but isn't necessarily if you take it that the intention of the rule is not to allow arbitrary combinations without a stop or season-ticket splitting, but is rather to allow a passenger to buy a single or return ticket to enter the zone of validity of a Rover or similar, or to extend a season ticket on a one-off basis using a single or return ticket, without having to pay for a section of route already paid for.

IIRC there is a bit of overlap with the validity areas of the two rovers, the GM rover is valid to Grindleford heading east (probably spelt that wrong) with the Derbyshire rover valid to New Mills/Chinley heading West

 

[Puffing Devil]

IIRC there is a bit of overlap with the validity areas of the two rovers, the GM rover is valid to Grindleford heading east (probably spelt that wrong) with the Derbyshire rover valid to New Mills/Chinley heading West

Correct - I picked Edale in my reply as it's a station covered by both tickets on the Hope Valley Line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Correct - I picked Edale in my reply as it's a station covered by both tickets on the Hope Valley Line.

But one possible reading of the NRCoT does not allow an overlap - the tickets must *meet* if you read it that way. As I said it seems a silly reading - but isn't quite so silly if you consider what the easement is intended to permit, namely the use of single and return tickets to extend an existing season or zonal ticket.

 

[neilmc]

Whilst this is disputable, I'd be pretty sure you'd have grief from a TPE or East Midlands guard. Since they exist, I'd get the stopper so as to avoid unpleasantness - if I want a day out using Rovers I want to enjoy myself rather than argue about validity with rail staff, who probably have no clue about NRCoT anyway.

 

[shredder1]

I'd say that it would be valid under the new Terms of Carriage:

14.2 If you are using a Season Ticket, daily Zonal Ticket, or another area based Ticket such as a concessionary pass, ranger or rover in conjunction with another Ticket and the last station at which one Ticket is valid and the first station that the other Ticket is valid are the same, then the train does not need to call at that station for your combination to be valid.​

Both tickets are valid to Edale on the Hope Valley Line.

There is no mention that the second ticket excludes Zonal tickets.

Thats interesting, thanks very much.

 

[sheff1]

Whilst this is disputable, I'd be pretty sure you'd have grief from a TPE or East Midlands guard. Since they exist, I'd get the stopper so as to avoid unpleasantness - if I want a day out using Rovers I want to enjoy myself rather than argue about validity with rail staff, who probably have no clue about NRCoT anyway.

I am happy to argue regarding validity when I know I am correct. In this case, I read the rules in the NRCoT as meaning the combination is not valid so would not use them on a non-stop train.

 

[yorkie]

We've had threads on this before.

You can either go with Puffing Devil's interpretation, which I agree with:

I'd say that it would be valid under the new Terms of Carriage:

14.2 If you are using a Season Ticket, daily Zonal Ticket, or another area based Ticket such as a concessionary pass, ranger or rover in conjunction with another Ticket and the last station at which one Ticket is valid and the first station that the other Ticket is valid are the same, then the train does not need to call at that station for your combination to be valid.​

Both tickets are valid to Edale on the Hope Valley Line.

There is no mention that the second ticket excludes Zonal tickets.

Or you can go for the ultra-pedantic interpretation that says that, because the tickets overlap in validity, the extra validity means it's not a valid combination.

Such an interpretation would - in my opinion - be absurd, and unlikely to comply with consumer law.

 

[shredder1]

We've had threads on this before.

You can either go with Puffing Devil's interpretation, which I agree with:

Or you can go for the ultra-pedantic interpretation that says that, because the tickets overlap in validity, the extra validity means it's not a valid combination.

Such an interpretation would - in my opinion - be absurd, and unlikely to comply with consumer law.

Thank you very much Yorkie, yes I tend to agree, I`ll test it and let you know how I get on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Such an interpretation would - in my opinion - be absurd, and unlikely to comply with consumer law.

It does seem silly, but if you take it as written it basically allows the obviously intended use-case (a single/return into the area of a Rover, or a single/return to extend a season ticket) without allowing most money-saving splits, which once you think that way strikes me that it would be completely intentional.

Whether it would be legal or not is a different question, but it strikes me as one very similar to ending short on Advances.