Hayle to Paddington

[glynn80]

Like glynn80 I can "wholly understand" FGW restricting tickets to their own trains. What I'm saying though is that it's not in the interests of some customers, and this is a more restrictive regime than would have operated under BR. OK we're probably not talking about huge numbers of passengers, but the OP was about a problem caused by the routing endorsment, which wouldn't have occurred if it had been marked say route AP Reading. I certainly side with the OP's daughter, not FGW.

I'm not sure it is a more restrictive regime than we had under BR?

BR certainly did have APEX fares but I don't recall them being anywhere near to the extent we have currently with private companies running the TOCs. The Advance fare system seems to of mushroomed and even TOCs such as Southern are offering Advance fares, where once this would have seemed ludicrous.

Also worth bearing in mind that the OPs daughter chose to catch the earlier service, not because there wasn't a suitably timed service to connect with her FGW train to Paddington (she was travelling on the 1252 not the 1200), but presumably because she wanted increased security in her connection. There is subtle difference there.

 

[EltonRoad]

I'm not sure it is a more restrictive regime than we had under BR?

Yes, but what I meant was, under BR, an APEX from Hayle to Paddington would have been marked route AP Reading or similar. What I'm saying is the routing didn't used to prevent travel on certain connections.

I take the point that the OP's daughter did choose to travel by XC, an earlier connection, despite it saying Great Western Only on the ticket. At the risk of running round in circles with my own arguments, I can see the point of view of the XC guard in that instance. However, my main argument is that by endorsing the ticket Great Western Only, FGW is preventing some customers from obtaining AP tickets. Oh yes and that we are using an outdated ticketing / revenue system that was designed by BR.

 

[clagmonster]

In this case, though, the ticket is not endorsed "Great Western only", it is endorsed "+AP London Reading". If this wasn't the case it wouldn't be valid on any trains at all from London to Cambridge. If booked at a booking office, if concerned about a tight connection I would imagine the clerk would quite happily issue a reservation for the earlier service. In this case though no reservation is held, so it is my opinion that the ticket was not valid for the cross country service.
For the Hayle/Lostwithiel to London flows, there are route "AP SLough" advance fares, as well as the Great Western only ones, so it would be possible to book to travel on a connecting Cross Country service.
I do agree, however that the system is confusing for passengers in instances such as these. My advice would always be, if you are catching an earlier train to the one you had planned, try to ask the station staff or preferably the guard before you board.

 

[tivoli]

I am amazed at the number of responses to my initial question. My daughter is fully aware that she had done something wrong, but the guard, perhaps unsure of his ground wasn't able to explain the problem to her, and in her words had a hissyfit. She was left confused, but pleased at least that she could carry on with her journey. The point is, if there are rules, the public are usually willing to comply if they are explained properly. Clearly from the lack of consensus on this forum, it is perhaps understandable that the public sometimes appear to blunder their way through the railway system, simply because they cannot be sure where to go for clarification. Unfortunately, Hayle was unmanned and it is not always practical to find the guard when boarding a train with luggage, to establish if you are entitled to be on it, even if beforehand, you had no reason to doubt that you were entitled to board the next available train to your destination.
Again, Jim's reference to XC on timetable and Cross Country on the side of the train, presumes that the customer has any interest in the name of the provider of the service,to them it is just a train as I presume it would have been if BR were still around.

 

[tony_mac]

I take the point that the OP's daughter did choose to travel by XC, an earlier connection, despite it saying Great Western Only on the ticket.

no it didn't.
You can buy an advance ticket, online, from Hayle to Paddington with a seat reservation on the XC service and the rest on FGW. I don't see what the TOC has to do with it.

Even though you don't have a reservation for the non-reservable train, that is the train you agreed to travel on. To travel on another train, reservable or otherwise, is a change of travel plans.

That is not what you said earlier.

This means that she could use another service for that leg of the journey.

You can claim the customer has agreed to it, but it is not at all obvious to them that they have. The FGW wesbite doesn't say that you have to travel on a specific train, the advance ticket rules are very vague, and no instructions are provided with the ticket, when they could very easily be.

on appropriate connecting trains where shown on the ticket(s) or other valid travel itinerary.

I have seen nothing that convinces me that the rules are definitely that you can only travel on the original itinerary. It certainly is not communicated to the passenger in anything like a clear manner.

 

[EltonRoad]

Again, Jim's reference to XC on timetable and Cross Country on the side of the train, presumes that the customer has any interest in the name of the provider of the service,to them it is just a train as I presume it would have been if BR were still around.

Is this a valid argument though? In Cambridge, where I live, there are at least three bus companies operating out of the bus station - National Express, Stagecoach and Go Whippet. I've been on many outings with a social group where we've bought tickets with one bus company and had to use another bus company on the return journey. We didn't presume we could use them interchangeably, and we weren't all that interested in buses. So is it any different with trains? OK there used to be one company operating all trains but that was 15 years ago. Indeed the National Bus Company used to operate many buses.

So sympathies with your daughter, but I think you have no choice but to notice which train company you're travelling with. That, unfortunately, is the system we're stuck with.

 

[paul1609]

Yes, but what I meant was, under BR, an APEX from Hayle to Paddington would have been marked route AP Reading or similar. What I'm saying is the routing didn't used to prevent travel on certain connections.

I take the point that the OP's daughter did choose to travel by XC, an earlier connection, despite it saying Great Western Only on the ticket. At the risk of running round in circles with my own arguments, I can see the point of view of the XC guard in that instance. However, my main argument is that by endorsing the ticket Great Western Only, FGW is preventing some customers from obtaining AP tickets. Oh yes and that we are using an outdated ticketing / revenue system that was designed by BR.

Whilst Im not certain about the route in question Apex tickets under BR were a whole lot more restrictive in availability than they are now. There was no availability in much of the Network South East area. Travelling north to away games I used to have to buy a day return to London and then a Apex ticket to say Newcastle.

Looking at the Southern website for the OPs journey there are in fact advance purchase tickets available for the train in question but at the range £43 to £116 they are much more expensive than the GW only version which start at £19. The website makes clear that all tickets for the route are chosen service only.

 

[tivoli]

Is this a valid argument though? In Cambridge, where I live, there are at least three bus companies operating out of the bus station - National Express, Stagecoach and Go Whippet. I've been on many outings with a social group where we've bought tickets with one bus company and had to use another bus company on the return journey. We didn't presume we could use them interchangeably, and we weren't all that interested in buses. So is it any different with trains? OK there used to be one company operating all trains but that was 15 years ago. Indeed the National Bus Company used to operate many buses.

So sympathies with your daughter, but I think you have no choice but to notice which train company you're travelling with. That, unfortunately, is the system we're stuck with.

Fair comment, I live in Cambridge also, at least train companies give info on other services, try obtaining info on other bus services from Stagecoach! As an aside FGW, between St Erth & St Ives were using Arriva Train Wales coaches when I was there, nobody seemed to notice despite the obvious geographical discrepancy.

 

[yorkie]

Such a tough thing to read, this FRPP thing, don't you think?

That cite is gibber because if you read it literally no AP ticket is valid on trains without a reservation! In any case, this top secret 'rule' can't overrule the rule quoted by Glynn80 that any itinery produced by the NRES system is valid!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As pointed out, it is my understanding that you MUST stick to your journey itinery, (after all its made for your use, not for the sake of it!)which when you book is displayed, just because there is no reservation, it doesn't automaticly exclude that leg of the journey from the rule. Now, in THEORY and if it was a XC guard who was a proper rule book, the person involved COULD of had the ticket withdrawn and had to buy a brand new full open single.

I don't think so, as Glynn80 posted above it appears that any itinery produced by NRES is valid for "connecting" services, and this journey is considered valid by NRES as a connection.

Also, with the greatest of respect, surley even to a once a year traveler, the "XC" in the timetable and the "Cross Country" on the side of the train should give away the company providing the service?

But the ticket was not restricted by TOC so that isn't relevant. For example they can even use NXEC between KGX and SVG if they wish! Or they could go from Liverpool Street.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even though you don't have a reservation for the non-reservable train, that is the train you agreed to travel on. To travel on another train, reservable or otherwise, is a change of travel plans. However, if the service you actually use is non-reservable, and the train you agreed to travel on is also non-reservable, no-one is any the wiser, but if the train you actually travel on is reservable, it is obvious you have changed your travel plans because you have no reservation for it.

Glynn80 has clearly shown that is not the case. Do you really think it is reasonable to make someone get an exact connecting train that the website they booked from on a journey from, say, Clapham Junction to York, to get the exact train? It would be absurd to suggest so.

I know this is a FOR but AP tickets were the same:-

http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/p11560959.html

It says "Suggested", that means you don't have to stick to it. AP fares said "Suggested". There's no notice that this has changed, and indeed Glynn80 quoted the FRPP as saying that any connection shown as valid in any itinery produced by the National Rail website would be considered valid.

At the end of the day we are talking about a 9 minute connection into the 'compulsory' train and if the passenger makes that connection more likely to be caught by getting an earlier connecting train then the customer is hardly to be penalised. If anyone honestly thinks the customer should be penalised then they are an example of how some rail staff give the whole industry a terrible name by making up rules that make people be put off using rail. They would not survive in ANY other service industry.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I take the point that the OP's daughter did choose to travel by XC, an earlier connection, despite it saying Great Western Only on the ticket.

No it didn't.

While I agree with the principle of what you are saying, 'FGW only' tickets are actually irrelevant to this discussion. FGW do not operate to Cambridge therefore it is impossible for a FGW only flow to exist. The ticket is valid on FGW for the main part of the journey, in this case Plymouth to London, and valid on any TOC for the connecting parts at either end.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I My daughter is fully aware that she had done something wrong,

I don't think she did.

but the guard, perhaps unsure of his ground wasn't able to explain the problem to her, and in her words had a hissyfit.

Because he doesn't understand the rules as well as some of us on this forum.

She was left confused,

a victory for all the Basil Fawlty types on the railway (a minority, but sadly a significant minority)

but pleased at least that she could carry on with her journey. The point is, if there are rules, the public are usually willing to comply if they are explained properly. Clearly from the lack of consensus on this forum, it is perhaps understandable that the public sometimes appear to blunder their way through the railway system, simply because they cannot be sure where to go for clarification.

Which is why it's important to know your rights and also (IMO - others will disagree) refuse to pay when bullied on the basis that no court is likely to rule against a customer in a confusing situation (see previous posts by John@Home on this subject).

Unfortunately, Hayle was unmanned and it is not always practical to find the guard when boarding a train with luggage, to establish if you are entitled to be on it, even if beforehand, you had no reason to doubt that you were entitled to board the next available train to your destination.

The guard won't necessarily know, so you are effectively determining if the guard considers it invalid or valid irrespective of true validity, and if deemed invalid whether or not he will show discretion. I agree it's a good idea where practical.

Again, Jim's reference to XC on timetable and Cross Country on the side of the train, presumes that the customer has any interest in the name of the provider of the service,to them it is just a train as I presume it would have been if BR were still around.

Agreed but it's irrelevant on a '... and connections" or a "AP Reading London" ticket IMO, as XC services are permitted on such tickets, it's not FGW only.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is this a valid argument though? In Cambridge, where I live, there are at least three bus companies operating out of the bus station - National Express, Stagecoach and Go Whippet. I've been on many outings with a social group where we've bought tickets with one bus company and had to use another bus company on the return journey. We didn't presume we could use them interchangeably, and we weren't all that interested in buses. So is it any different with trains? .

Well this discussion is not directly relevant to this topic as it's not a TOC specific ticket we're talking about, but to answer the question, I think it is a valid argument as we have a common ticketing system for all trains in this country. No such system exists for buses, but arguably if the Government was really pro-public transport they'd try to implement one.

It may be best to discuss the TOC-specific issues elsewhere though as it clouds the issue. There is nothing TOC-specific about the ticket that is in question for the Hayle-Cambridge journey undertaken by the OP's daughter.

 

[EltonRoad]

That cite is gibber because if you read it literally no AP ticket is valid on trains without a reservation!

Is that not correct though? When I worked at BR, we were supposed to issue a reservation for every reservable leg of the journey, on an advance purchase ticket. This often didn't happen in practice, so long as the main leg of the journey was reserved out of the correct quota. But the rule as I understood it was that if the train was reservable, a reservation was needed (out of the AP quota, although as I stated in a previous post we often overlooked that). Hayle to Plymouth is a fairly long way and I'm pretty sure we would have insisted on a reservation. Obviously if the train wasn't reservable then it didn't matter.

I realise things have moved on since 1994 but I thought many of the rules were still the same.

 

[paul1609]

That cite is gibber because if you read it literally no AP ticket is valid on trains without a reservation! In any case, this top secret 'rule' can't overrule the rule quoted by Glynn80 that any itinery produced by the NRES system is valid!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think so, as Glynn80 posted above it appears that any itinery produced by NRES is valid for "connecting" services, and this journey is considered valid by NRES as a connection.

But the ticket was not restricted by TOC so that isn't relevant. For example they can even use NXEC between KGX and SVG if they wish! Or they could go from Liverpool Street.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Glynn80 has clearly shown that is not the case. Do you really think it is reasonable to make someone get an exact connecting train that the website they booked from on a journey from, say, Clapham Junction to York, to get the exact train? It would be absurd to suggest so.

I know this is a FOR but AP tickets were the same:-

http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/p11560959.html

It says "Suggested", that means you don't have to stick to it. AP fares said "Suggested". There's no notice that this has changed, and indeed Glynn80 quoted the FRPP as saying that any connection shown as valid in any itinery produced by the National Rail website would be considered valid.

At the end of the day we are talking about a 9 minute connection into the 'compulsory' train and if the passenger makes that connection more likely to be caught by getting an earlier connecting train then the customer is hardly to be penalised. If anyone honestly thinks the customer should be penalised then they are an example of how some rail staff give the whole industry a terrible name by making up rules that make people be put off using rail. They would not survive in ANY other service industry.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


No it didn't.

While I agree with the principle of what you are saying, 'FGW only' tickets are actually irrelevant to this discussion. FGW do not operate to Cambridge therefore it is impossible for a FGW only flow to exist. The ticket is valid on FGW for the main part of the journey, in this case Plymouth to London, and valid on any TOC for the connecting parts at either end.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think she did.
Because he doesn't understand the rules as well as some of us on this forum.
a victory for all the Basil Fawlty types on the railway (a minority, but sadly a significant minority)
Which is why it's important to know your rights and also (IMO - others will disagree) refuse to pay when bullied on the basis that no court is likely to rule against a customer in a confusing situation (see previous posts by John@Home on this subject).

I have no idea where the Op bought his tickets but the Southern Website and i suspect the others make clear that the ticket is only valid on the specified services. Here are the terms of my ticket to our cycling trip ( I havent seen a 'suggested' train itinery for some years):

Journey: 2 Littlehampton to Derby
Ticket type: Advance single Valid only on your chosen service. Not refundable. Changeable prior to date of travel for a fee.
Route: Via East Midlands Trains & other TOC connecting services.
Outward journey: 17 Aug 2009
departs Littlehampton at 09:15 travel by Train service provider Southern Railways to station East Croydon arrives 10:40
departs East Croydon at 11:02 travel by Train service provider First Capital Connect to station London St Pancras arrives 11:33
departs London St Pancras at 11:55 travel by Train service provider East Midland Trains to station Derby arrives 13:26 ( seats reserved: Coach: C Seats: 49A , and space for 1 bicycle )

 

[tony_mac]

The T&Cs for Southwest trains says

If the 'Route' also states 'and Connections', travel is allowed on appropriate connecting trains where shown on the ticket(s) or other valid travel itinerary.

There is no definition of 'other valid travel itinerary'

Some sites say things like 'you must travel on the reserved train', with no information at all on what happens when you don't have a reservation for part of the journey.

It's easy enough to fix - if they want you to travel on a specific train then they can issue a reservation for it. They do exactly that for some journeys.

 

[tivoli]

Thank you for Yorkie's constructive summary. The saddest point in this matter, is that my daughter,like so many of the public, rightly or wrongly, expects a train to run later than advertised. She didn't believe that the time allowed on the original itinerary was sufficient to make her connection in a large unfamiliar station like Plymouth with luggage, if the train were to run even slightly late. Maybe over-cautious? Her aim was to take an earlier train and be willing to hang around at Plymouth for an hour or so to ensure a relaxed connection.
No other advantage was sought. Incidentally, she was allowed in and out of the barriers at Plymouth, to wander about and kill some time, was this strictly allowed?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....

....Even though you don't have a reservation for the non-reservable train, that is the train you agreed to travel on. To travel on another train, reservable or otherwise, is a change of travel plans.

That is not what you said earlier....

Ah, but if you read on I also said in the same post....

....However, if the service you actually use is non-reservable, and the train you agreed to travel on is also non-reservable, no-one is any the wiser....

Meaning any attempt to get you to pay extra because of a change of plan would be unenforceable in that instance and therefore any reasonable non-reservable train is accepted as 'your train' provided their is no service printed on your ticket.

It is obvious to the trained eye that, if you have no reservation for a reservable train on an 'Advance' ticket, you have changed your plans and a new ticket should be given, by the rules atleast.

You can claim the customer has agreed to it, but it is not at all obvious to them that they have. The FGW wesbite doesn't say that you have to travel on a specific train, the advance ticket rules are very vague, and no instructions are provided with the ticket, when they could very easily be

I'd be very suprised if it is not there, maybe it is there, but you have not noticed it, as I have said, they must have it displayed for people buying the ticket to read. I agree that providing information with the tickets would help, but they only need provide, or make available, the information at the time of purchase.

Glynn80 has clearly shown that is not the case. Do you really think it is reasonable to make someone get an exact connecting train that the website they booked from on a journey from, say, Clapham Junction to York, to get the exact train? It would be absurd to suggest so.

Are you for real? The FRPP states that you can use a local connecting service as shown on a valid travel itinerary if the route states "+Connections". So that doesn't apply in the Hayle to Cambridge case, does it? Or perhaps you have found a way to twist the wording to suit yourself? It does however, apply to Clapham to York tickets as they are 'rte NXEC+Connectns'.

At the end of the day we are talking about a 9 minute connection into the 'compulsory' train and if the passenger makes that connection more likely to be caught by getting an earlier connecting train then the customer is hardly to be penalised. If anyone honestly thinks the customer should be penalised then they are an example of how some rail staff give the whole industry a terrible name by making up rules that make people be put off using rail. They would not survive in ANY other service industry

Erm, no, we are talking about the T&Cs of a restricted ticket, not "who thinks its fair?" or "Who thinks 9 minutes is enough time?". The suggested connection time is 5 minutes for Plymouth (on the NRE website, for those who think that is made up), so 9 minutes is plenty.

I also find the comments, and implications, about making up rules rather offensive. I am not making up rules, they are in black and white, any member of staff on the forum and elsewhere can see them and tell you they are there, if you choose to ignore them, fine, suit yourself, but don't imply, or suggest, that people are making things up just because the rule doesn't suit your arguement.

 

[yorkie]

No other advantage was sought. Incidentally, she was allowed in and out of the barriers at Plymouth, to wander about and kill some time, was this strictly allowed?

Yes you are allowed out of the barriers to use station facilities. Strictly speaking you can't leave the station premises but no spies are going to follow her to ensure this didn't happen (although I suspect some people would wish it did :roll
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Are you for real? The FRPP states that you can use a local connecting service as shown on a valid travel itinerary if the route states "+Connections". So that doesn't apply in the Hayle to Cambridge case, does it? Or perhaps you have found a way to twist the wording to suit yourself? It does however, apply to Clapham to York tickets as they are 'rte NXEC+Connectns'.

Don't be daft! It is clearly differentiating between TOC-only and TOC and connections tickets. It is obvious with non-TOC specific tickets you can also take any connecting train.

If you take your claim literally, then no connecting trains are valid, so the customer has to make their own way to Plymouth and from London to Cambridge?

At the end of the day, if no specific train is specified, you are - quite clearly to anyone - valid on any suitable connecting train for that part of the journey. I've never heard of anyone say otherwise, apart from this desperate XC guard, and even he knew that the rule he made up was unenforceable so he didn't enforce it. I think he just took pleasure in telling someone off without actually doing anything. He's a Basil Fawlty basically, and there's a few of those on the railway.

 

[Jim]

Again, if you must stick to exactly the itinerary, then why not include reservation coupons so that you know this? That would make the whole thing extremely simple.

I'm a bit stuck to how you provide a reservation (coupon) for a non reservable service!?!?!

 

[clagmonster]

I have seen examples on semi-reservable services, for example London-Brighton advance tickets. It is a normal reservation coupon, but with asterisks under the coach and seat parts of the ticket.