Is it immoral to split ticket or exploit loopholes in booking engines or easements?

[drspa44]

Moderator note: split from Delay Repay - Intentionally Catching Late Trains

I always think questions like this fail to understand the difference between legality and morality.

Much of this forum is dedicated to paying less for train travel by making use of the train fare system in creative or unexpected ways.

Is it immoral to split ticket or exploit loopholes in booking engines or easements?

 

[yorkie]

Is it immoral to split ticket or exploit loopholes in booking engines or easements?

How do you define "exploit"?

What is the definition of a "loophole" and do you have examples of what you consider to be "loopholes" and what you consider to not be "loopholes"

And can you define what distinction you mean between "booking engines" or "easements" with examples of each?

As worded I do not know the scope of the question so it cannot be answered in practical terms.

 

[yorkie]

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/exploit

1 Make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)
2 Make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand.

The above meanings of "exploit" in the dictionary are quite different, so lots of scope for different interpretations there.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/loophole

1 An ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules.

As for "loophole", some might say that it is a "loophole" to buy a York to Sheffield ticket if you actually wish to travel from York to Doncaster. There is no "ambiguity" but there is an "inadequacy" if you take the "inadequacy" to mean LNER's inability to understand that they should not raise the price of the fares they set to be greater than the price of longer distance fares set by other operators.

But if that's true, a "loophole" is created when a train company increases the price of something to a level that is beyond the limit they should morally be setting it. It is therefore unquestionably moral to use such a ticket. Furthermore, there is also the issue of ethics of ticket office staff; I have known many of the ticket office staff at York put their own morals ahead of the official rules when it comes to selling passengers a ticket that is more appropriate for their needs than the fare their employer instructs them to sell. Not a position I would want to be in, nor would I want to be someone who puts others in.

It's a minefield but a totally undefined one that can never be definitive and will always be highly subjective. You will get a range of answers, some well informed, and some not.

 

[drspa44]

I guess my comment was that claiming compensation for a service that was not as promised is not controversial, but rather enshrined in law.

Whereas, I reckon a lot of ordinary people would feel uneasy buying an unconventional ticket known only to fare experts in order to save money.

When I say exploit, I just mean use. An example of a loophole would be tricking a booking engine into giving you a generous iternary and journeying on a portion of that.

 

[yorkie]

Whereas, I reckon a lot of ordinary people would feel uneasy buying an unconventional ticket known only to fare experts in order to save money.

So once a fare falls into widespread usage, it is no longer a loophole?

When I say exploit, I just mean use. An example of a loophole would be tricking a booking engine into giving you a generous iternary and journeying on a portion of that.

How do you "trick" a booking engine and how do you define "generous"?

Do you mean an itinerary that is not deemed valid under your interpretation of the electronic routeing rules, but is erroneously treated as valid by the booking engine concerned? (there are loads on, say, the Atos/Worldline WebTIS sites for example)

If you simply mean a valid itinerary then the booking engine is acting correctly!

 

[drspa44]

I cannot remember the exact example you showed me before but I think I recall it involved a journey from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City and specifying a Via point. This might be a better example: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wymondham-to-lowestoft-via-ipswich.175877/

There is nothing I have seen on this forum so far that I would consider immoral, aside from protesting increases by blatantly dodging fares. I felt my delay repay scenario fell into the same category of using TOCs' unreliable and complex systems against them to save money.

 

[cjp]

More like shrewd. I will,for example, drive passed a garage to another a few miles away if I have the time and enough remaining fuel and pay 4-10 p a litre less. Was the first garage immoral in trying to get me to pay so much more.
And consider prices in captive market's like motorway service stations. Or cross-country trains?

 

[big all]

it cannot be immoral to use a system correctly as designed
immorality comes when you use instruments to deflect the path like tax evasion where you have one thing and make it something its not by other means

 

[Segedunum]

Is it immoral to split tickets?!

More like, is it immoral for XC to have absolutely daft through fares?

 

[cjmillsnun]

In no way is it immoral to play the system to your advantage. The RDG and TOCs hope you don't because they get more £££.

 

[gazthomas]

Absolutely not.

What is immoral is the stupid fares that pervade. Try going Reading to Leamington Spa first class. About 4 times cheaper if you split at Banbury.

Immoral would not paying for the ticket in the first place.

 

[yorkie]

Is it immoral to split tickets?!

If anyone thinks this (I know you don't, but as it's here I will answer) I'd ask them to explain why some train companies encourage/instruct people to do this!

More like, is it immoral for XC to have absolutely daft through fares?

Potentially, yes.

I cannot remember the exact example you showed me before but I think I recall it involved a journey from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City and specifying a Via point.

Not quite. I am happy to continue the discussion at a future event in person but I might be less candid on here for various reasons.

This might be a better example: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wymondham-to-lowestoft-via-ipswich.175877/

That is making use of a long standing software bug. Whether it is moral to do so or not is subjective but it's not a very common category of "loophole" (if you can call it that).

But clearly the company (SilverRail) obviously read this forum so must be aware of it, so they can't be too fussed about it, surely. (Maybe this thread will be the catalyst for someone higher up to realise? Let's see...)

 

[Tetchytyke]

Is it immoral to split ticket or exploit loopholes in booking engines or easements?

Is splitting tickets to avoid XC's ridiculous pricing policy immoral? Is XC wanting to charge you more for a through ticket immoral?

Morality doesn't come into it IMO. I want to game things to pay as little as possible. They want to game things to receive as much as possible. It's a game.

Is it moral that RDG will impose restrictions on tickets they think are too good value (e.g. ALRs) in order to increase revenue?

 

[etr221]

Thinking on this, it's a reflection on the truth behind the Two Ronnies joke 'BR are replacing their current fare system - by an unfare system'

Or the failure (by the railway) to follow the golden rule of pricing, for any thing - that the right and the best prices for that thing should be the same.

Would it be moral for the railway to sell tickets (or perhaps I should say journeys) for random prices, that they just make up?

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's the same as with "hidden city pricing" on airlines.

Is flying London-Dublin-London-New York to save money on the London-New York fare immoral, or is BA charging more for a London-New York fare immoral?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it immoral to split ticket or exploit loopholes in booking engines or easements?

In my view no, it is not. It's really no different to the fact that sometimes it's cheaper to buy two smaller packs of a give product at a supermarket than one large one. Or indeed sometimes cheaper to buy the large one than it is the small one you actually want.

I am no great fan of the way those offers happen from time to time - the former is a waste of packaging and the latter a waste of product - but happen they do and you can hardly blame people for making use of the offers to suit them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I cannot remember the exact example you showed me before but I think I recall it involved a journey from St Albans Abbey to St Albans City and specifying a Via point. This might be a better example: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/wymondham-to-lowestoft-via-ipswich.175877/

This sort of thing has been around for years - indeed I think one case (something like London Terminals to Finsbury Park being valid via Cambridge and thus providing a cheaper Cambridge season ticket) may have caused the first Routeing Guide amendment/dis-easement when it was found that it actually indeed was valid despite the TOC not liking this at all. I *half* recall it may have got to Court.

 

[cjp]

This sort of thing has been around for years - indeed I think one case (something like London Terminals to Finsbury Park being valid via Cambridge and thus providing a cheaper Cambridge season ticket) may have caused the first Routeing Guide amendment/dis-easement when it was found that it actually indeed was valid despite the TOC not liking this at all. I *half* recall it may have got to Court.

Ahh the old map WA

 

[underbank]

It's like tax avoidance (legal) not tax evasion (illegal) or wriggling out of illegally issued speeding or parking fines. If there is a legal loophole that you can use to your advantage, then hell yes, do it. Usually it's because the train co, HMRC, or police have fouled up when they drafted the rules or implemented them. If people can take advantage of those errors, then it's the train co, HMRC or police who are 100% at fault, not the Joe Public who benefits accidentally. What concerns me more are the people who are screwed for higher fares than is morally justifiable, wrongly enforced traffic fines or unfair taxes. You can bet your bottom dollar that the train co, HMRC or police wouldn't be willing to quash fines/taxes if they were legally imposed despite you having a morally good reason for not paying or being caught. It has to work both ways. It's 100% the responsibility of the train cos to come up with fair fares and they have the power/infrastructure to put systems in place to stop what they may regard as loopholes if they wanted to.

 

[cjp]

Indeed like companies such as Amazoz or Boots whose mantra is that We Have Paid All Tax That Is Legally Due.
Ignoring the fact that they have taken advantage of every wrinkle or scheme they can to avoid paying taxes. Avoided them to the extend they save millions and millions of pounds which consequently need to be raised from you and I to fund the NHS the armed forces social services.
And still we use Amazon and buy from Boots And stii our politicians take advice from the accountants on drawing up laws those same accountants help their clients to use or avoid to minimize their taxes.
The system is broken and needs better than illadvised weak and greedy people to fix it.

Gosh I feel better for thst ☺

 

[EssexGonzo]

I see it in the same ilk as looking for cheaper fuel, picking a lower emissions car to save tax, avoiding toll roads. They're all there, available, legal and "within policy" / legal - so why not?

 

[whhistle]

it cannot be immoral to use a system correctly as designed
immorality comes when you use instruments to deflect the path like tax evasion where you have one thing and make it something its not by other means

That's a contridiction though.
Tax evasion isn't morally right, but it is simply using a system correctly as designed.
It just so happens only rich people can pay accountants to use those evasive methods. But this is where the imorality perhaps comes in as people are doing something to specifically evade paying what they should.

Buying a split ticket from A to C (split at B) isn't a bad thing in my opinion as the system is broken to allow this sort of thing. The problem is that in the end, this split ticketing thing will come to an end and no doubt cause fares to be higher.#

But then it's the logic of how some stations, it's cheaper to go further.
That one I don't understand whatsoever.

 

[cjp]

Buying a split ticket from A to C (split at B) isn't a bad thing in my opinion as the system is broken to allow this sort of thing. The problem is that in the end, this split ticketing thing will come to an end and no doubt cause fares to be higher.#

No the system is broken so making such a thing possible.
Who in their right minds would charge a person more to travel a shorter distance as in starting or finishing short saves money?

 

[big all]

That's a contridiction though.
Tax evasion isn't morally right, but it is simply using a system correctly as designed.
It just so happens only rich people can pay accountants to use those evasive methods. But this is where the imorality perhaps comes in as people are doing something to specifically evade paying what they should.

Buying a split ticket from A to C (split at B) isn't a bad thing in my opinion as the system is broken to allow this sort of thing. The problem is that in the end, this split ticketing thing will come to an end and no doubt cause fares to be higher.#

But then it's the logic of how some stations, it's cheaper to go further.
That one I don't understand whatsoever.

you have a business making a decent profit in london you own the building outright
you decide you dont want to pay tax so you sell the building to another company you own and base that company in switzerland where tax is perhaps 10%
you then charge what you like to rent the building back to yourself
indeed the rent is more than your whole profit for the year so you get a rebate for the previous years tax
or do a lewis hamilton
buy a jet but to avoid purchase tax you have a wholly owned company based in the isle off man who buys it for you and because its there jet hired to hamilton there is no or greatly reduced tax to pay

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...apers-f1-champion-latest-claims-a8041061.html

 

[Bletchleyite]

No the system is broken so making such a thing possible.
Who in their right minds would charge a person more to travel a shorter distance as in starting or finishing short saves money?

It happens because short-distance journeys tend to be priced on a walk-up basis and long-distance journeys on a yield managed basis. The vast majority of cases involve stringing together sets of Off Peak Day Returns for journeys where there isn't a through one, though I do admit there are others.

The only way to really get away from that is either to make all journeys priced on a yield management basis (but getting an Advance for a very short journey would be plain silly), make all journeys priced on a walk-up basis (but people would complain about not being able to get a good value Advance any more), or separate the services entirely (but people would be hacked off at not being able to use VTWC for short journeys, such as intra-PTE ones, as they wouldn't do in Germany).

 

[yorkie]

Is it moral to travel from Whitechapel to Abbey Wood via New Cross and Lewisham deliberately with the intention of only paying the TfL fare when you know that the journey is not yet possible without using Southeastern, who set their fares much higher?

What if you actually wanted to travel to Plumstead, but you chose to travel beyond your intended destination to Abbey Wood and then walk back to Plumstead, as you know it is cheaper to travel further and you wanted to deprive Southeastern of the fare for your intended journey?

(Of course these are absurdly worded questions and there is nothing immoral at all about doing this)

 

[mikeg]

I do not consider it immoral given that the TOCs regularly exploit loopholes to the passengers' expense. At least we obey the rules, it is more than they do.

 

[bramling]

Is it immoral to split ticket or exploit loopholes in booking engines or easements?

I don’t see why it’s immoral, providing someone is working within the rules of the game. Many of these quirks exist because the railway’s system is ridiculously complicated and fragmented.

Personally I have more of a grudge against the fact that someone can pay a massive sum for a walk-up ticket, whilst someone else can pay a paltry sum for an advance - and to make this even worse get a reservation too, with many not using it so leaving dozens of seats with reservation labels leaving others to play a game of “will they or won’t they turn up?”. But that’s just a personal thing, I’m sure advances float many boats for those who benefit from them.

 

[yorkie]

Personally I have more of a grudge against the fact that someone can pay a massive sum for a walk-up ticket, whilst someone else can pay a paltry sum for an advance

That's called yield management but I do not see what it has to do with this thread. If you think some Advance fares are too low, you are welcome to write to the relevant train company and suggest they increase their prices.

- and to make this even worse get a reservation too, with many not using it so leaving dozens of seats with reservation labels leaving others to play a game of “will they or won’t they turn up?”. But that’s just a personal thing, I’m sure advances float many boats for those who benefit from them.

I don't see how no-shows on reservations are anything to do with this discussion either, though I am curious to understand how you know which ticket type the reservations in question were issued for.

 

[RichardGore]

Applying Immuanel Kant's categorical imperative to split ticketing suggests it's not an issue.

If everyone did it, all the time, would the outcome be undesirable? If everyone used split ticketing and took the cheapest valid fares, the powers that be would adjust the easements and fares where it may be problematic, just as they do for any other route. That suggests to me that a split-ticket route is no different to the direct-ticket route.