An excess where there's no difference in fare

[northwichcat]

If, for instance, you have a ticket like Altrincham to Manchester off peak return but then after buying your ticket want to return to Hale (the stop after Altrincham) which has the same Manchester fares, would you be able to get a Altrincham-Hale excess at no additional charge?

 

[Jordy]

Yes, its called a zero excess

 

[Solent&Wessex]

If, for instance, you have a ticket like Altrincham to Manchester off peak return but then after buying your ticket want to return to Hale (the stop after Altrincham) which has the same Manchester fares, would you be able to get a Altrincham-Hale excess at no additional charge?

Yes I did one the other day. They had a ticket from somewhere to Huddersfield, but wanted to carry on to Dewsbury. The fare was the same so I just did them a zero fare over distance XS.

You may well get some staff querying this though as a zero fare issued on our Avantix machines generates a sort of "alert" which is flagged up when cashing up and downloaded. They have to be explained and there is a space on our cashing up sheets for such things to be written down.

 

[mumrar]

Yes, zero fare excesses are reasonably common. One reason is down to booking office staff either being sneaky or lazy. If somebody in say Sheffield is asked to sell a return to University, quite often they sell it to New Street. This deprives London Midland of their portion of the fare paid. Would it, in the harsh legal ways of the world, it also means if you injure yourself alighting at that station, you'll get small recourse as you didn't have a valid contract for a journey to there?? This last bit is suppositon from myself.

Just as an aside, I have never been asked to explain a zero fare excess issued with Avantix, and I don't have to fill a shift sheet in anyway

 

[clagmonster]

Just as an aside, I recently had an over-distance excess issued wrongly, which somehow involved both the origin and destination station being incorrect. Also, rather than saying 'valid only with ticket no abcde' at the top, it said 'valid only with ref'. Have I accidentally been given the ticket which would be given when a ticket is withdrawn. I don't want to go into specifics so as not to get the guard into trouble.

 

[CarterUSM]

Why do you not have to fill in a shift sheet mumrar? Pm if necessary. I will not put a zero excess through if the passenger will not encounter another member of railway staff, total waste of time and explanation.

 

[Sleepy]

Just as an aside, I recently had an over-distance excess issued wrongly, which somehow involved both the origin and destination station being incorrect. Also, rather than saying 'valid only with ticket no abcde' at the top, it said 'valid only with ref'. Have I accidentally been given the ticket which would be given when a ticket is withdrawn. I don't want to go into specifics so as not to get the guard into trouble.

AVB upgrade - our machines now print this instead for all types of excess issued including STD to 1st class !

 

[northwichcat]

Surpringsly on a Northern service I was on last night a conductor had a right go at a girl who said to the conductor that she had a Hale ticket but an Altrincham one costs the same. At the time of the train the ticket office would have been closed so she wouldn't have been able to get an excess prior to boarding. The conductor didn't sell her a Hale-Altrincham single (or give her an excess ticket) but made it sound like he was doing her a massive favour by not making her buy another ticket. The conductor in question has appeared reguarly on the line over the past few years so it wasn't a case of a new conductor hadn't been made aware of the correct process.

 

[mumrar]

Why do you not have to fill in a shift sheet mumrar? Pm if necessary. I will not put a zero excess through if the passenger will not encounter another member of railway staff, total waste of time and explanation.

Only just noticed your question. Because Avantix takes longer to come off shift. Our book off time is a total of 7 minutes, and that's including 5 min for platform transfer. As they wouldn't give us more time, they more than doubled the lobby staff to cash up and do paper work. Makes it interesting when they ask us about a loss, cos we know nothing about it!

 

[EltonRoad]

Surpringsly on a Northern service I was on last night a conductor had a right go at a girl who said to the conductor that she had a Hale ticket but an Altrincham one costs the same. At the time of the train the ticket office would have been closed so she wouldn't have been able to get an excess prior to boarding. The conductor didn't sell her an Altrincham-Hale single (or give her an excess ticket) but made it sound like he was doing her a massive favour by not making her buy another ticket. The conductor in question has appeared reguarly on the line over the past few years so it wasn't a case of a new conductor hadn't been made aware of the correct process.

This is exactly the kind of bu****** that is so prevalent on the railways and needs to be stamped out. (See other thread on ridiculous railway rules.)

What is that guy's problem? We're talking about one stop on a local line, and there's clearly no revenue implications. The only explanation I can come up with is that some people love positions of power and just like throwing their weight around.

 

[northwichcat]

What I should also add to my previous post is that on the same train two boys boarded and showed out-of-date tickets to which the conductor's response was just that they need to buy new tickets.

Also that there are 3 stations very close together, so the conductor deciding to have a go at the girl and not just move on to the next passenger would likely have resulted in one person doing a short journey travelling ticketless.

 

[mumrar]

on the same train two boys boarded and showed out-of-date tickets to which the conductor's response was just that they need to buy new tickets.

As opposed to what? Guards are not penalty fares inspectors, so what else could they have done.

Also that there are 3 stations very close together, so the conductor deciding to have a go at the girl and not just move on to the next passenger would likely have resulted in one person doing a short journey travelling ticketless.

You have to deal with every situation as you come accross it. If I was approaching my final stop with a lot of tickets still to sell, I wouldn't shout 'could anyone wishing to buy really expensive tickets please make their way to me, everybody else can pay at the barrier/ticket office'. I have just spent nearly ten minutes sorting out a brand new ticket for a person without a YP. The card needed phone authorisation too, but I also had to explain that the ticket she had was totally invalid without a railcard. Should I have just walked on then?

 

[yorkie]

Surpringsly on a Northern service I was on last night a conductor had a right go at a girl who said to the conductor that she had a Hale ticket but an Altrincham one costs the same. At the time of the train the ticket office would have been closed so she wouldn't have been able to get an excess prior to boarding. The conductor didn't sell her a Hale-Altrincham single (or give her an excess ticket) but made it sound like he was doing her a massive favour by not making her buy another ticket. The conductor in question has appeared reguarly on the line over the past few years so it wasn't a case of a new conductor hadn't been made aware of the correct process.

He should look up the price, see which is cheaper (excess or new ticket to the start of the existing ticket), see the exess is 0.00 and, officially, he should inform her that her ticket needs to be excess and that this will be free of charge for this particular journey. Alternatively he could say that the excess would be zero however to save everyone time he will not be issuing it on this occasion. I do not understand how he can 'have a go' at someone in such circumstances; it's absurd.

 

[mumrar]

I do not understand how he can 'have a go' at someone in such circumstances; it's absurd.

Well, a ticket is a contract for a journey between two points. The passenger is trying to travel between two different points than those laid out in the contract she has. So irrespective of the price similarity, her ticket is not valid for the journey she wants to make. I book a builder for work on a loft conversion, let him get all the materials and plans sorted, then say 'actually, an extension costs the same, so I'll have that'. I'm not saying I agree with the guard having a go, but there is a totally legitimate reason for why he did it. If the ticket was left without an excess, then the passenger tripped and fell at the new destination, tough luck. So long as the fall was not a result of negligence, the company has no duty of care to that person.

 

[northwichcat]

As opposed to what? Guards are not penalty fares inspectors, so what else could they have done.

But then why have a go at the girl for boarding the train at Altrincham with a ticket saying from Hale when the ticket office at Altrincham was closed?

No guards are not penalty fares inspectors but Northern don't issue penalty fares, yet they put posters up at stations saying that fare evasion is breaking the law and you'll end up with a criminal conviction if you get caught doing it (and Northern have put fare evaders in court before.) They don't, however, put up posters at stations saying what will happen if you board when the ticket office is closed and only have a ticket for part of your journey.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, a ticket is a contract for a journey between two points. The passenger is trying to travel between two different points than those laid out in the contract she has. So irrespective of the price similarity, her ticket is not valid for the journey she wants to make. I book a builder for work on a loft conversion, let him get all the materials and plans sorted, then say 'actually, an extension costs the same, so I'll have that'. I'm not saying I agree with the guard having a go, but there is a totally legitimate reason for why he did it. If the ticket was left without an excess, then the passenger tripped and fell at the new destination, tough luck. So long as the fall was not a result of negligence, the company has no duty of care to that person.

The ticket was a return to Hale from somewhere like Northwich or Chester and the incident happened when she boarded the train at Altrincham instead of Hale for the return journey meaning that a few minutes after she boarded the train her ticket would have been valid until her final destination. If her final destination was Chester and ATW were operating the ticket barrier her ticket would have been accepted without any problems. The service she boarded at Altrincham was after 20:20 when the ticket office shuts meaning she could not have sorted out an excess before she boarded.

Of course the best course of action would have if the girl wasn't sure which station she'd board at later and knew the fares were the same then she should have asked for Altrincham then there would have been no problems. However, we don't know why she boarded at a different station and it isn't any of anyone else's business why she did.

 

[Greenback]

But then why have a go at the girl for boarding the train at Altrincham with a ticket saying from Hale when the ticket office at Altrincham was closed?

No guards are not penalty fares inspectors but Northern don't issue penalty fares, yet they put posters up at stations saying that fare evasion is breaking the law and you'll end up with a criminal conviction if you get caught doing it (and Northern have put fare evaders in court before.) They don't, however, put up posters at stations saying what will happen if you board when the ticket office is closed and only have a ticket for part of your journey.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The ticket was a return to Hale from somewhere like Northwich or Chester and the incident happened when she boarded the train at Altrincham instead of Hale for the return journey meaning that a few minutes after she boarded the train her ticket would have been valid until her final destination. If her final destination was Chester and ATW were operating the ticket barrier her ticket would have been accepted without any problems. The service she boarded at Altrincham was after 20:20 when the ticket office shuts meaning she could not have sorted out an excess before she boarded.

Of course the best course of action would have if the girl wasn't sure which station she'd board at later and knew the fares were the same then she should have asked for Altrincham then there would have been no problems. However, we don't know why she boarded at a different station and it isn't any of anyone else's business why she did.

Doesn't this put a different slant on things? I'm not sure of the geography of the area, but if the customer was travelling from a further station, regardless of the fare that ticket is not valid for an excess? As I understand it, and I could be wrong, if I buy a day return from Swansea to Llanelli (£4.30), then walk up the coast to Burry Port, it matters not a jot that the fare to Burry Port is also £4.30. If I haven;t bought to there in the first place, I am travelling without a valid ticket and would have to buy a single to Llanelli. Of course, I wouldn't that, because I would buy one to BP and get off at Llanelli!

 

[yorkie]

Doesn't this put a different slant on things? I'm not sure of the geography of the area, but if the customer was travelling from a further station, regardless of the fare that ticket is not valid for an excess? As I understand it, and I could be wrong, if I buy a day return from Swansea to Llanelli (£4.30), then walk up the coast to Burry Port, it matters not a jot that the fare to Burry Port is also £4.30. If I haven;t bought to there in the first place, I am travelling without a valid ticket and would have to buy a single to Llanelli. Of course, I wouldn't that, because I would buy one to BP and get off at Llanelli!

Your argument makes no sense. Yes the ticket isn't valid from Burry Port, so it needs to be excessed. (The guard could, at their discretion, not issue an excess on the basis that it is not worth faffing about over £0.00)

How can a ticket not be valid for an over distance excess when you are travelling over distance?

How can a customer be penalised when travelling from an unstaffed station?

Why should a customer paying the correct fare be told off for not excessing a ticket earlier, when there was no opportunity to do so?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, a ticket is a contract for a journey between two points. The passenger is trying to travel between two different points than those laid out in the contract she has. So irrespective of the price similarity, her ticket is not valid for the journey she wants to make. I book a builder for work on a loft conversion, let him get all the materials and plans sorted, then say 'actually, an extension costs the same, so I'll have that'.

But on the railways we have a system of excess fares. You can argue that we should be like builders and not have that, but the fact is we do have them, whether guards like it or not.

I'm not saying I agree with the guard having a go, but there is a totally legitimate reason for why he did it.

A legitimate reason for having a go at a passenger boarding at an unstaffed station for not having the opportunity to excess their ticket? That's a new one! What legitimate reason can this guard possibly have for having a go at a customer who boarded at an unstaffed station? What can the customer do to avoid being 'told off'? It's totally unacceptable.

If the ticket was left without an excess, then the passenger tripped and fell at the new destination, tough luck. So long as the fall was not a result of negligence, the company has no duty of care to that person.

I agree (except it's the origin not the destination), that is why an excess should be issued. But there is no need for a telling off. Just a case of explaining that the original ticket is not valid, there needs to be an excess, on this occasion the excess is zero (obviously on other occasions it may require a payment) and then issue it. There is absolutely no need to "have a go". All the guard needed to do was issue what needs to be issued, and in this case the excess fare happened to be zero.

 

[Greenback]

Your argument makes no sense. Yes the ticket isn't valid from Burry Port, so it needs to be excessed. (The guard could, at their discretion, not issue an excess on the basis that it is not worth faffing about over £0.00)

How can a ticket not be valid for an over distance excess when you are travelling over distance?

How can a customer be penalised when travelling from an unstaffed station?

Why should a customer paying the correct fare be told off for not excessing a ticket earlier, when there was no opportunity to do so?

It's not an argument, I've outlined my understanding of how it works. If I am wrong, I am wrong, but I honestly don't think that if I got on a train at Burry Port, with a return half of a Swansea - Llanelli ticket, that the guard would excess it at zero fare or otherwise. I didn't think it was permitted. I would have expected to be asked to purchase a ticket to Llanelli. If it is permitted, then of course it makes no difference at all to the originaI scenario.

 

[tony_mac]

It's not an argument,

It is 'A connected series of statements or reasons intended to establish a position' (just about!).

I didn't think it was permitted.

But it is, it's an over-distance excess. Which seems perfectly reasonable to me, it's only paying the same amount that should have been paid in the first place.

If it is permitted, then of course it makes no difference at all to the originaI scenario.

I don't follow that, I think it makes a big difference if something is permitted or not.

 

[Chris-P]

It's not an argument, I've outlined my understanding of how it works. If I am wrong, I am wrong, but I honestly don't think that if I got on a train at Burry Port, with a return half of a Swansea - Llanelli ticket, that the guard would excess it at zero fare or otherwise. I didn't think it was permitted. I would have expected to be asked to purchase a ticket to Llanelli. If it is permitted, then of course it makes no difference at all to the originaI scenario.

That would be the case if the station that they boarded at was manned, but in this case it wasn't and so an excess should be issued by the guard.

 

[Greenback]

It is 'A connected series of statements or reasons intended to establish a position' (just about!).

But it is, it's an over-distance excess. Which seems perfectly reasonable to me, it's only paying the same amount that should have been paid in the first place.

I don't follow that, I think it makes a big difference if something is permitted or not.

It wasn't intended as that! It was intended as a question, which is why there are question marks! I tried to make sense of what had happened on the Northern train, as I thought that, originally, the customer was on a single ticket, or outward portion of a return, and was refused an excess. I think I may have misread an earlier thread from August 2009, which says that a ticket cannot be excessed once you have reached the destination.

http://www.railforums.org.uk/showthread.php?p=341425

Of course, it was a single ticket being discussed there! So, just to make it clear in my own mind, it's correct that over distance excesses can be bought on the return from a station that is further away, but on the same route as the original destination? So I could, therefore, buy a ticket to Edinburgh and excess my ticket to return from Inverness?

 

[northwichcat]

It wasn't intended as that! It was intended as a question, which is why there are question marks! I tried to make sense of what had happened on the Northern train, as I thought that, originally, the customer was on a single ticket, or outward portion of a return, and was refused an excess. I think I may have misread an earlier thread from August 2009, which says that a ticket cannot be excessed once you have reached the destination.

http://www.railforums.org.uk/showthread.php?p=341425

Of course, it was a single ticket being discussed there! So, just to make it clear in my own mind, it's correct that over distance excesses can be bought on the return from a station that is further away, but on the same route as the original destination? So I could, therefore, buy a ticket to Edinburgh and excess my ticket to return from Inverness?

I've just looked through the NRCC and can't find anywhere where it says or implies that you can't excess a return ticket when you've used the outward part.

The thing that would apply in your Edinburgh to Inverness case is that if for instance the return fare to Edinburgh was £50 and the return fare to Inverness was £80 then it would be a £30 excess unless a single between Edinburgh and Inverness was less than £30, in which case you should be sold a single rather than be given an excess.

 

[Greenback]

Yes, that would be correct. I must admit, when i worked in the ticket office I found excesses to be very complicated! Not just the process for issuing it, but how and when it was appropriate to issue one in the first place! I agree entirely that if something is available from the ticket office then it should be available on train from an unstaffed station, I just didn't think it was available at all!

It's almost ten years since I was a booking clerk, and my memory of the details gets fuzzier every day. But there is somehting at the back of my mind nagging at me that we did refuse someone an over distance excess in similar circumstances, and the manager ruled they had to get a single back to the original destination. I wouldn't be surprised if that was just plain wrong, or that this has been amended or clarified in some way since. One thing is sure, I can;t find anything at all in the public domain about over distance excesses!

 

[yorkie]

I've just looked through the NRCC and can't find anywhere where it says or implies that you can't excess a return ticket when you've used the outward part.

The system asks you which portion(s) to excess!

The thing that would apply in your Edinburgh to Inverness case is that if for instance the return fare to Edinburgh was £50 and the return fare to Inverness was £80 then it would be a £30 excess unless a single between Edinburgh and Inverness was less than £30, in which case you should be sold a single rather than be given an excess.

No, it would be 15 pounds in that case.

 

[northwichcat]

No, it would be 15 pounds in that case.

Oh OK I wouldn't have thought you could excess half the price of a return opposed to the price of a single.

 

[yorkie]

If you have a single, then portions don't come into it and any excess is the full amount (obviously).

If you have a return, std to 1st, and change of type (e.g. off peak to anytime) is the full excess even if you are only doing 1 portion (which is unfair really but that is the rule). Change of route or overdistance is half the difference if doing one portion. The system asks if you are excessing outward, return or both portions.

 

[button_boxer]

If you have a return, std to 1st, and change of type (e.g. off peak to anytime) is the full excess even if you are only doing 1 portion (which is unfair really but that is the rule).

I can see why this is the rule though. I travel between Derby and Sheffield, the off-peak day return is £8.80, the anytime day return is £17.20, a difference of £8.40. There are no afternoon peak restrictions, so if I could buy an off-peak day return and just excess the outward portion I'd effectively get an anytime day return ticket for £8.80 + £4.20 = £13.

This is £4 cheaper than the anytime single (£17) so even if I didn't intend to come back I could buy this combination and throw away the return half.

 

[tony_mac]

It wasn't intended as that! It was intended as a question, which is why there are question marks!

Sorry about that, I can see that now!

I must admit, it is only until reading this forum that I found out that excesses even existed. I would have always just bought another ticket too.

 

[Greenback]

No problem, this whole topic is makiing my head spin! It's much more complicated than I had thought, no wonder we didn't get any training on it and had to pick it up as we went along when I started in the bookign office. If that's still the case today, it's no wonder that there are so many inconsistencies in issuing them!

 

[455driver]

Also that there are 3 stations very close together, so the conductor deciding to have a go at the girl and not just move on to the next passenger would likely have resulted in one person doing a short journey travelling ticketless.

And your proof for this ridiculous statement is? or did you just add it for effect :roll: