What's the chances of getting away with this one?

[DJ737]

G'day there
Playing around with the East Coast Trains journey planner this morning I came across this bargain.

I entered Cleethorpes-New Clee return and got this result.

Cleethorpes-Doncaster-Grimsby Town-New Clee-Grimsby Town-Doncater-Cleethorpes.

Anytime day return ₤1.50, not bad for 100 odd miles & 7.5 hrs train travel.

As it is a anytime day return i suppose you could "take advantage" of the flexibility this ticket offers.

Cheers
DJ737
A boring sunday morning in Melbourne.

 

[Failed Unit]

Looking at all the stuff on East Coast's website the only thing that I suspect would stop it be valid is the reference to the national conditions of carridge which will push you back to the routing guide.

Interesting one legally:
There is nothing in the public domain to say that it is not valid as the average man on the street has no access to the routing guide. You also have evidence to say the ticket is valid. However a reasonable person may not think it is a reasonable thing to do to travel 100+ miles for such a small journey. Nor would anyone really want to.

I wouldn't want to try taking it to court myself, but would be more than happy to try it on if it was a Sunday and I was travelling from Lincoln - Sleaford via ECML and the website stated it was a valid route at a valid price.

 

[mumrar]

However a reasonable person may not think it is a reasonable thing to do to travel 100+ miles for such a small journey. Nor would anyone really want to.

I don't know the geographical area very well, but I'd suspect the only thing to stop this being valid would be the fares check rule. As for the 'reasonable to travel so far for a short journey', as an extreme example where the fare does reflect the distance, Mallaig-Kyle of Localsh is 26miles by flying crow, but by train it is 425miles and 62chains, routed via Inverness, costs something like £160!

 

[Darandio]

Is it just a major anomaly in the system? As you can easily add a go via Newcastle and it quite happily gives you the following for £1.50

Cleethorpes>Doncaster
Doncaster>Newcastle
Newcastle>Doncaster
Doncaster>Grimsby Town
Grimsby Town>New Clee

Then return. Conceivably starting at 05:18 and returning to Cleethorpes at 20:09

 

[yorkie]

The fares check rule doesn't apply because they're both associated with the Barnetby Routeing Point (RP). In other words, they share a common RP. This means the only permitted routes (other than taking a direct train) are the shortest route on which regular passenger services operate (any route that is up to 3 miles longer than the absolute shortest counts). In other words there are no mapped routes.

As for Mallaig - Kyle, I have just looked that up... I can't see many of those tickets being sold What makes it even more insane is that a ticket from Glasgow/Edinburgh to Kyle is valid via Mallaig anyway (or certainly used to be - I can't find the list of Scottish Easements any more!) and yet costs about half the price!

 

[DJ737]

G'day there

If you reverse the trip to New Clee-Cleethorpes one way you can go via Edinburgh or London Kings Cross, cost 1.10 single.

Cheers
DJ737

 

[tony_mac]

That's funny, it also allows via Swansea, Dundee or Glasgow!

contracts can be voided when one side has made a mistake (e.g. Hartog v Colin & Shields).

The odd thing about Mallaig is that it has Inverness as a routeing point. It looks like travelling 'on foot' to Kyle would be the only way to do this without going through another routeing point on the way.

 

[mumrar]

The odd thing about Mallaig is that it has Inverness as a routeing point. It looks like travelling 'on foot' to Kyle would be the only way to do this without going through another routeing point on the way.

Well, the shortest train journey I found, involving an overnight at Aberdeen was about 19hours, the terrain's pretty tough over the highlands though, so walking would take a similar time.

 

[yorkie]

The odd thing about Mallaig is that it has Inverness as a routeing point. It looks like travelling 'on foot' to Kyle would be the only way to do this without going through another routeing point on the way.

The shortest route is valid, this would involve going via Glasgow and Aviemore.

 

[transportphoto]

I can guess this error won't be around for long, my advice is to book up and get seats reserved!

Don't forget that these journeys do involve a lot of doubling back, not strictly allowed.

Also, this ticket is valid for BOJ, so there are many places you can start short saving masses!

 

[DJ737]

G'day there

Been having another look at this, also £1.10 via Plymouth, Holyhead or Aberystwyth.

Anyone attempting this should take along a lot of supporting paperwork lest they be thrown off the train at somewhere like Dovey Jn.

Cheers
DJ737
Melbourne, Australia

 

[Scotty]

If you reserve seats and pay online, can they say no once you are on the train?

 

[yorkie]

If you obtain reservations, and sit in the same seats on the same trains, then that would be a tricky one. The guard should withdraw the ticket and file a irregularity report so the error can be looked into and issue a replacement ticket allowing travel free of charge, I believe, however perhaps a guard can confirm? The only potential issue may be if they did this on your outward, would they let you return? That may be a tricky one.

 

[b0b]

There's also a "disputed routing" section in the NRG instructions (essentially pay up and dispute), though I don't know if it applies when the guard/RPI disputes a TOC website....

 

[tony_mac]

It's obviously a mistake on the system, and I think that everybody you deal with would treat it like one, and expect you to buy a new ticket. You could probably get a refund of your £1.50 though!

As I said earlier, contracts can be voided when one side has made a mistake. Could anyone stand in front of a court and claim they genuinely thought that the fare was valid for that journey?
While there is always a grey area between what is a mistake, and what isn't, I think this one is as near to black and white as I could imagine!

 

[b0b]

Would anyone stand in front of a court and claim they genuinely thought that the fare was valid for that journey?

I'd probably walk in with the 2.40 XC ONLY MTH-EDB SDR thats good for 60 miles of travel ....

 

[Ferret]

If you obtain reservations, and sit in the same seats on the same trains, then that would be a tricky one. The guard should withdraw the ticket and file a irregularity report so the error can be looked into and issue a replacement ticket allowing travel free of charge, I believe, however perhaps a guard can confirm? The only potential issue may be if they did this on your outward, would they let you return? That may be a tricky one.

Yes, if you submit a TI report for an issue with a ticket, then you should withdraw the original tickets and issue a zero-fare excess so that the person can complete their journey.

 

[yorkie]

ferret - thought so, thanks. Actually I realise now that the 'return' wouldn't be much of an issue in this case, as the outward would take you to to virtually where you started. But more generally I am curious to know if they can confiscate the rtn portion (when travelling on the out) and get away with not issuing a zero excess for the rtn portion?

There's also a "disputed routing" section in the NRG instructions (essentially pay up and dispute), though I don't know if it applies when the guard/RPI disputes a TOC website....

I don't think that applies here

It's basically for where you believe a route should be permitted, but isn't. It would, however, be appropriate for uksweet's request regarding there being a higher price fare via Leeds for Halifax to Mirfield (but only if he/she writes a letter in a more polite tone than his/her posts on this forum! )

 

[b0b]

It's basically for where you believe a route should be permitted, but isn't.

If you are brandishing a route printout from a TOC website, you bet I believe its permitted

 

[yorkie]

If you are brandishing a route printout from a TOC website, you bet I believe its permitted

But that doesn't change the fact that this is not what the Disputed Routeing process is about. I think any attempt to claim that New Clee to Cleethorpes should be valid via London would be binned at the first opportunity.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . I realise now that the 'return' wouldn't be much of an issue in this case, as the outward would take you to to virtually where you started. But more generally I am curious to know if they can confiscate the rtn portion (when travelling on the out) and get away with not issuing a zero excess for the rtn portion?

I'd be concerned if a such a passenger (with incorrect routing due to an issuing error) and presenting a Return on their outward journey was NOT permitted to complete the Return journey at no further expense.
(They may be issued with a ticket for a shorter and more convenient or faster return journey, which would't concern me).

I offered another example from the EC web site a year ago:- Carlisle to Carstairs routed via Edinburgh. It allows the journey to take place at times of day when there is not a service on a shorter route, I would expect a passenger presenting hard copy of the EC offer of booking the journey to be permitted to continue the journey.

 

[DJ737]

G'day there

What would be the reaction from ticket checkers en-route if using a New Clee-Cleethorpes via Aberystwyth routing?

Would they? :
a: Read you the riot act and toss you off the train into the arms of the cops at the earliest opportunity.

b: Praise you for having the balls to actually take the rail companies for a ride, instead of the other way round and wish you luck with the rest of your trip.

c: Both.

Cheers
DJ737
Melbourne, Australia

 

[yorkie]

DJ737 - How about none of those, and act correctly as mentioned above!

 

[mumrar]

You would have to withdraw both ticket portions for the TIR and issue a replacement zero-fare excess for what they had. The report means something requires further investigation, be it passengers actions, point of sale or all host of other things. In this case the TIR would be needed to resolve the obvious booking error, and also to ensure the customer then paid an appropriate fare for their journey. If you take any money on the day from a passenger then a court and/or investigation would consider that as payment towards the error or infringment and you wouldn't be able to proceed as normal if you've taken any sort of payment.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Thanks, murmar.
Could you just clarify 2 points, please?

You would have to withdraw both ticket portions for the TIR and issue a replacement zero-fare excess for what they had.

and this would be a replacement for BOTH portions if travelling on an outward leg of a return?

If you take any money on the day from a passenger . . . . you wouldn't be able to proceed as normal if you've taken any sort of payment.

not quite sure what you are saying here -presumably "proceed" in terms of recovery proceedings and not in terms of a journey, but what is 'normal' in this case? Could you re-phrase that last sentence to be absolutely clear?

 

[Ferret]

Yorkie - if it was me, I probably would issue a ZF for the return as well. I'd also want the printout from the website to include with my TI report...

I remember earlier this year finding an EC only Superbreak ticket with ressies for my train. I asked the customers what train they were booked to return on and was fully prepared to issue a ZF SOR/SVR if necessary for them to return home. As it was, they were booked on EC on the way back so I didn't have to. As it was, I withdrew the offending outward tickets, issued a ZF SOS, took name and address details and informed them that we'd be in touch to thank them very much for their assistance! I submitted my TIR and our lot went and rogered the issuing ticket office (a Northern-operated one) for incorrectly issuing the tickets. Kerching!

 

[Failed Unit]

It's obviously a mistake on the system, and I think that everybody you deal with would treat it like one, and expect you to buy a new ticket. You could probably get a refund of your £1.50 though!

As I said earlier, contracts can be voided when one side has made a mistake. Could anyone stand in front of a court and claim they genuinely thought that the fare was valid for that journey?
While there is always a grey area between what is a mistake, and what isn't, I think this one is as near to black and white as I could imagine!

That is how I would look at it as well, it is a black and white unreasonable thing to do. But travelling from Peterborough - Liverpool is a lot more difficult. Yes we have the routing guide but Joe public does not have access to it. I that case the court would probably side with the person making the journey if the reservations were valid.

 

[Ferret]

The public do have access to the routeing guide!!!! It's on ATOC's website!

 

[Failed Unit]

The public do have access to the routeing guide!!!! It's on ATOC's website!

I am glad to hear it, it always to me seemed like some mystery guide that was used to batter customers over the head with. "This is a valid route on the routing guide", "what routing guide?", "The one you should read before going anywhere!"

 

[mumrar]

this would be a replacement for BOTH portions if travelling on an outward leg of a return?

Yes, if a ticket is withdrawn on the outward portion for TIR, the whole ticket is withdrawn with a zero fare excess to an appropriate ticket type, endorsed to say it's a zero-fare for a TIR.

not quite sure what you are saying here

If someone takes money off you for an upgrade, ie a non zero-fare excess, you cannot then have any money asked of you at a later stage via TIR. If so, it would get chucked out of court, but most TOCs (I know XC for a fact) would see the procedural error and not forward the case for prosecution.