Breaking Journeys & Stamping of Tickets

[doubletrackemble]

If you're on a ticket where a break of journey is allowed and the guard stamps your ticket on your 1st section of travel, and then you resume your journey on another service and another guard sees your ticket has already been stamped, would he query it? What information is included when they stamp your ticket - is it date, time and location so they can tell exactly where you were?

If there's not that level of detail then presumably they could only call your ticket invalid if there were (say) 6 allowable individual point to point journeys on your route, and you already had 6 stamps on your ticket?

Presumably barriers at intermediate stations will never swallow your ticket, whereas those at the terminus will. Is it possible though to ask the guard if you can keep the ticket e.g. you need to claim it on expenses.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

.... Is it possible though to ask the guard if you can keep the ticket e.g. you need to claim it on expenses.

The ticket remains property of the railway, it is never yours, so the barrier staff have a right to keep it after you have finished with it (which is why barriers keep some of the tickets). If you need to claim expenses you should obtain a receipt when you buy the ticket. I haven't often seen barrier staff refuse such requests though.

 

[Bill Badger]

The ticket remains property of the railway, it is never yours, so the barrier staff have a right to keep it after you have finished with it (which is why barriers keep some of the tickets). If you need to claim expenses you should obtain a receipt when you buy the ticket. I haven't often seen barrier staff refuse such requests though.

How does it work if you wish to claim compensation for a delayed journey? The barrier staff refuse to return your ticket, but you need it is order to submit a claim to the TOC.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

How does it work if you wish to claim compensation for a delayed journey? The barrier staff refuse to return your ticket, but you need it is order to submit a claim to the TOC.

I believe barrier staff are supposed to let you retain the ticket for those purposes. Like I say, I haven't often seen a reasonable request to hold on to a ticket refused.

 

[First class]

I have denied requests to retain tickets in the past.

Problem is, if they come through a manual gate with them, keep hold of them, there is nothing to stop people coming through the automatic gate a second time.

If I did allow people to keep hold of them, I marked them/stamped to prevent further use. It isn't hard to get a receipt... passengers misusing tickets got the Open Returns restricted to one day for the outward portion.

 

[Mojo]

The problem is that some ticket machines do not produce reciepts that are acceptable for many companies whereas others do. I've not seen before a request having been refused. I often just leave my ticket in the ticket wallet when passing a barrier so they don't have a chance to take it out. It's often also possible to purchase a ticket past your destination for the same price to avoid having to hand it in (eg: University to Aston is the same price as one to New Street).

With regards to your original question, I've often seen train staff not mark tickets if they've got to change onto a second train, or if there's lots of local stops. Obviously YMMV. I've never been queried after having broken a journey, had my ticket stamped, and resumed it later.

Some stations with automatic ticket barriers will reject your ticket and others will accept it, it may also be the case that it will be accepted on your way out and not on your way back in - I've had all three at various locations. I often used to buy a ticket to a station that was past my destination, but it was actually cheaper to "break" my journey and never continue, never had a problem with the barriers.

 

[me123]

I've had the following marked on my ticket before. It was Blairhill-Edinburgh (change at Glasgow QS):

27/02/08 BAI-GLQ

I thought that this was common practice.

Also, Virgin stamp with the headcode on it, so Virgin staff should have a rough idea what previous train you were on (ie, they'll know that a 1Mxx service started in Scotland), and other companies should know that that's a Virgin stamp.

 

[Ferret]

passengers misusing tickets got the Open Returns restricted to one day for the outward portion.

Though it looks like common sense has prevailed here - I believe there has been a partial climbdown on this. I only caught glimpse of the briefing note on Thursday on my way out but will look again tomorrow for specific details...

 

[yorkie]

I'm yet to see any evidence that outward portions of SORs were misused. As they were only deemed valid if an unstamped RTN portion portion was present, then it is difficult to see how people could get away with it.

 

[doubletrackemble]

With regards to your original question, I've often seen train staff not mark tickets if they've got to change onto a second train, or if there's lots of local stops. Obviously YMMV. I've never been queried after having broken a journey, had my ticket stamped, and resumed it later.

So if staff don't mark tickets if they know there's a 2nd train needed then that seems to suggest that it isn't valid if you have a ticket that's already stamped, but then that doesn't tie in with the principle of being able to break a journey?

What does YMMV mean?

When you say you haven't been queried, does this include times when they've presumably checked the ticket? If it had multiple stamps then they might query it, but the ticket could be as valid as if it only had one stamp?

Still a bit confused:roll:

 

[yorkie]

Staff can do what they like in terms of stamping, the tickets are valid for unlimited breaks of journey.

You can analyse to death what one member of staff does compared to another but it doesn't change validity.

 

[glynn80]

So if staff don't mark tickets if they know there's a 2nd train needed then that seems to suggest that it isn't valid if you have a ticket that's already stamped, but then that doesn't tie in with the principle of being able to break a journey?

What does YMMV mean?

When you say you haven't been queried, does this include times when they've presumably checked the ticket? If it had multiple stamps then they might query it, but the ticket could be as valid as if it only had one stamp?

Still a bit confused:roll:

YMMV means "your mileage may vary" and it basically translates to the opinion of that person may not be shared by everyone.

I think the general consensus is that you are unlikely to get questioned if you have one stamp on your ticket and have broken your journey. When you start to get multiple stamps it can get a little suspicious but as long as you can explain what time trains you caught and where you got off them etc. you aren't going to have an issue.

 

[doubletrackemble]

But if the tickets are valid for breaks of journey I can't see how they can prevent misuse without some kind of efficient stamping scheme.

Say you had an Off Peak Return from Bridgwater to Reading. On the return section you could legally travel Reading-Swindon one day, Swindon-Chippenham the next week (or whatever) and it's still then valid for Chipp-Bridg (no matter what's stamped on ticket - but then how do they know it's still valid?). But without proper stamping there would be nothing stopping you from using Swindon-Chippenham a 2nd time?

 

[glynn80]

But if the tickets are valid for breaks of journey I can't see how they can prevent misuse without some kind of efficient stamping scheme.

Say you had an Off Peak Return from Bridgwater to Reading. On the return section you could legally travel Reading-Swindon one day, Swindon-Chippenham the next week (or whatever) and it's still then valid for Chipp-Bridg (no matter what's stamped on ticket - but then how do they know it's still valid?). But without proper stamping there would be nothing stopping you from using Swindon-Chippenham a 2nd time?

Well no system is perfect but Swindon does have barriers which can tell if a ticket has been used in them before and may reject that ticket bringing up a specific code relating to the fact that ticket has already been used.

Perhaps if you have an idea for an efficient stamping system I'm sure ATOC would be happy to hear it!

 

[jopsuk]

stamping does vary massively, too- there's the coded stamps, traditional hole-punch clips, less traditional hole-punch clips (I'm sure I've had stars, dolphins etc punched out of tickets) and some just scribble.

Of course, the real solution to such problems of marking validity will be when they finally roll-out all-smartcard ticketing

 

[scrapy]

But if the tickets are valid for breaks of journey I can't see how they can prevent misuse without some kind of efficient stamping scheme.

Say you had an Off Peak Return from Bridgwater to Reading. On the return section you could legally travel Reading-Swindon one day, Swindon-Chippenham the next week (or whatever) and it's still then valid for Chipp-Bridg (no matter what's stamped on ticket - but then how do they know it's still valid?). But without proper stamping there would be nothing stopping you from using Swindon-Chippenham a 2nd time?

Once you have commenced your return journey, if the ticket allows breaks you can break your journey that day as many times as you like withot doubling back, (exceptions apply) but you have to complete your journey the same day unless you cannot reasonably do so. If you cannot reasonably complete your journey that day you must travel the next day before 12 noon and no further breaks are allowed other than to change trains. If you set off from Reading in the morning you can reasonably complete the journey that day. If your ticket has the 4th of the month stamped on it definitely wouldn't be valid for any leg of journey on the 6th.

 

[John @ home]

Once you have commenced your return journey, if the ticket allows breaks you can break your journey that day as many times as you like withot doubling back, (exceptions apply) but you have to complete your journey the same day unless you cannot reasonably do so. If you cannot reasonably complete your journey that day you must travel the next day before 12 noon and no further breaks are allowed other than to change trains. If you set off from Reading in the morning you can reasonably complete the journey that day. If your ticket has the 4th of the month stamped on it definitely wouldn't be valid for any leg of journey on the 6th.

No, that's not right.

What you have described are the restrictions and easements for tickets valid one day. But if you have a return ticket where the return part is valid one month then you can undertake the return journey on as many (or as few) stages as you choose, taking care not to duplicate any stage.

To take an extreme example, with an Anytime Return dated 1 April from Kings Cross to Northallerton, it's perfectly valid to go from Kings Cross to Northallerton on 1 April, then to return by one station each day, going from Northallerton to Thirsk on 1 April, Thirsk to York on 2 April, and so on until you finally go from Finsbury Park to Kings Cross on 30 April.

John

 

[yorkie]

What does YMMV mean?

Acronyms? JFGI!! (F stands for err.. freaking )
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But without proper stamping there would be nothing stopping you from using Swindon-Chippenham a 2nd time?

True, but how would you get back to Swindon? Get a lift?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Of course, the real solution to such problems of marking validity will be when they finally roll-out all-smartcard ticketing

That will create as many problems (if not more) than it solves. And the problems it 'solves' are actually rather limited.

"Touch out or be charged Wick-Penzance FOR" ?

 

[janb]

I'm yet to see any evidence that outward portions of SORs were misused. As they were only deemed valid if an unstamped RTN portion portion was present, then it is difficult to see how people could get away with it.

I would be certain it happened.

Under the present system there are plenty of people that buy a SOR, and then buy singles until their return portion is stamped.

And then there are those who buy a SOR in each direction, and use the return portion of each until they get stamped/expire.

 

[87015]

I would be certain it happened.

Under the present system there are plenty of people that buy a SOR, and then buy singles until their return portion is stamped.

And then there are those who buy a SOR in each direction, and use the return portion of each until they get stamped/expire.

Should be more checking of tickets then shouldn't there...

 

[yorkie]

I would be certain it happened.

But it appears to be just a theory.

Under the present system there are plenty of people that buy a SOR, and then buy singles until their return portion is stamped.

Surely there's no point, as you say here:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=281868#post281868

And yeah, for very long distance journeys the SOS is half the SOR - but how many of those journeys is someone going to get away without a ticket check all that distance? If this is a problem there's a blindingly obvious solution (as 87015 has pointed out!)

And given that most people on SORs will be on expenses it is all the more pointless and unlikely that this goes on.

 

[glynn80]

But it appears to be just a theory.

Surely there's no point, as you say here:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=281868#post281868

And yeah, for very long distance journeys the SOS is half the SOR - but how many of those journeys is someone going to get away without a ticket check all that distance? If this is a problem there's a blindingly obvious solution (as 87015 has pointed out!)

And given that most people on SORs will be on expenses it is all the more pointless and unlikely that this goes on.

I think we all know it has occured and I remember a story you told me actually.

A commuter travelling into Liverpool Street from somewhere like Stowmarket would purchase a Stowmarket to Ipswich Season Ticket a Anytime Return (SOR) between Ipswich and Stratford and a Season Ticket Stratford to London Terminals. The commuter would use the combination (nicknamed a sandwich combination by RPIs) for as long as possible depending on how many times his SOR was stamped. This could easily save the commuter large sums of money. The commuter in question was prosecuted in the end I believe but many TOCs realised the practice was common place and removed many shorter distance SORs into commuter areas as a result.

 

[yorkie]

I don't recall that at all.

I do remember reading about 'sandwiches' on uk.railway and yes a poster claiming to be an RPI did claim to have caught someone doing that although the story about following him in plain clothes is very far-fetched. Over-reliance on barriers was the cause of that, and I really can't think of any commuter routes (ie people with seasons who travel daily) where there is a total reliance on barriers and SORs exist. If such flows exist, and if there really are loads of people with sandwich seasons doing this (I highly doubt it!) then the solutions are extremely obvious.

Edit: found the story on uk.railway. I'm not totally convinced it's true, especially this bit "Out of interest I made a point of sitting next to one chap on eight
occasions using his 'sandwich' until he was nicked" hmm...

Anyway even if it's true, as I said before there are more sensible solutions...

 

[janb]

Should be more checking of tickets then shouldn't there...

Indeed there should be, hopefully this change will prompt an improvement. However it is slightly like saying, shops should have more security guards to prevent shoplifting.

Just because a Train Company may be poor at revenue protection, doesn't mean fare evaders aren't the ones committing the original sin, a la shoplifters, or those who steal anything...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But it appears to be just a theory.

Surely there's no point, as you say here:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=281868#post281868

And yeah, for very long distance journeys the SOS is half the SOR - but how many of those journeys is someone going to get away without a ticket check all that distance? If this is a problem there's a blindingly obvious solution (as 87015 has pointed out!)

And given that most people on SORs will be on expenses it is all the more pointless and unlikely that this goes on.

Preston to Manchester, not an unreasonable commute? SOR £15.70, SDS £9.50...£6 saved...hell, if the guard doesn't get down the train, and you slip past the guys at Pic you could do it for free.

It also holds true for other journeys. It does happen, believe me, I know of people that do it.

I don't know if you've ever worked on the railways Yorkie, but spend say even a month, and you will see that passengers are not all as good and innocent as you and me.

 

[metrocammel]

Preston to Manchester, not an unreasonable commute? SOR £15.70, SDS £9.50...£6 saved...hell, if the guard doesn't get down the train, and you slip past the guys at Pic you could do it for free.

You've missed the point slightly!

Yorkie is referring to a particular method of fare-dodging, highlighted (in an albeit far-fetched and unlikely manner) on uk.railway. This particular method would only be possible on DOO routes (where opens are also available, which I can't think of any), where the TOCs are reliant on barriers to avoid fare-evasion, and on-trains, RPIs only come around every now and then. Preston to Manchester is a totally different kettle of fish. Unless the train is absolutely wedged, the train guard will go down doing revenue duties (and TPE also employ RPOs). Fair enough, a commuter may well think 'oh, this train is always busy, so I can get away without buying a ticket altogether (as you've suggested- 'slipping past the barriers at Pic), but due to the presence of checking at Pic, it would be unlikely to be able to 'slip' past them everyday.

 

[doubletrackemble]

stamping does vary massively, too- there's the coded stamps, traditional hole-punch clips, less traditional hole-punch clips (I'm sure I've had stars, dolphins etc punched out of tickets) and some just scribble.

Of course, the real solution to such problems of marking validity will be when they finally roll-out all-smartcard ticketing

The different ways of checking tickets is a key point, and I would also add to that list those that just look at the ticket and don't mark it in any way. Do the TOC's not tell the guards as to what format they're supposed to use for ticket checking? Presumably it's the stamp - are stamps handed out to all guards?

But without the stamps clarifying exactly where/when a ticket was stamped (can anyone confirm what information they do show) then the scribble/hole punch is no less effective.

Re smartcards, is there a link as to what is happening. Surely in time every guard should have a combined ticket reader/stamper which could record when/where and what type of service, and this could also then be shown on the ticket for the passenger's benefit.

 

[yorkie]

I have done PRE-MAN a few times and I think I have nearly always had a ticket check. That route is TPE and NT and both of these TOCs are keen on checking on board. I really doubt a commuter could use a SOR as a season on that route.

As for the shop example, it´s more like the shop deciding that the solution to thefts would not be more security but to make the products less attractive for their customers. That´s the true analogy, and it is utterly ludicrous.

Anyway it is a fairly moot point now as ATOC have admitted they were wrong and have corrected their mistake by making the outwards valid for 5 days which is fair.

 

[glynn80]

Anyway it is a fairly moot point now as ATOC have admitted they were wrong and have corrected their mistake by making the outwards valid for 5 days which is fair.

Perhaps they realise that 5 days is a reasonable period for those passengers who are not trying to fare evade, as if they realised they were completely wrong they would revert back to the one month outward validity rather than 5 days.

 

[metrocammel]

Perhaps they realise that 5 days is a reasonable period for those passengers who are not trying to fare evade, as if they realised they were completely wrong they would revert back to the one month outward validity rather than 5 days.

True, but there is also fact that if they 'back pedaled' and made a complete U-turn on their decision to restrict the outwards validity, I'm sure it would attract bad publicity. Not many professional outfits make very large decisions (such as a making a 'fully flexible' product into, really only a 'semi-flexible' product) and then alter it within months. It is apparent ATOC didn't carry out enough / effective market research here, and as a result of the change, a considerable amount of companies with rail-ticket accounts must have complained.

At the end of the day, it is the businesses with accounts who provide a much-needed source of money for the TOCs. If a manager from Newcastle could buy an open, for one of his employees who has a meeting in Leeds on one day, and in London the next, an outward valid on more than one day would be perfect, whereas with the 'revised' restrictions, that would have been impossible- At least the new restrictions give a little bit more flexibility for the TOCs most important customers.

 

[Mojo]

Indeed there should be, hopefully this change will prompt an improvement. However it is slightly like saying, shops should have more security guards to prevent shoplifting.

Just because a Train Company may be poor at revenue protection, doesn't mean fare evaders aren't the ones committing the original sin, a la shoplifters, or those who steal anything...

Yes, but I shouldn't have to spend £150 having an alarm fitted to my house, spend an extra £100 per annum. to have car insurance cover fire & theft or go through the hassle of having locks fitted to my flat but I do because I appreciate that these things happen and it's in my interests to stop it.