Advanced tickets 23rd or 24th Dec

[cuccir]

Thanks cuccir, exactly what I was looking for. Have booked one a little earlier for £26.20. That is quite a saving on the £97.20 direct fare even with the Picc to Lancaster part.

Another thing I have never been able to work out, if you are using two trains on separate advanced tickets and the first one is late so you miss the second are you completely liable for a new ticket? It just doesn't seem right that it wouldn't be the same as for someone with one ticket for the same route.

Aargh, you've asked probably the most debated question on this forum! The short response is that we've never found a fully-agreed interpretation of the rules. In practice, I think the overall experience is that most train staff are sympathetic in this situation and will let you use a later train, but we have heard stories of railway staff taking on both interpretations (that it is valid for a later train and that it isn't!). I don't think it has ever been taken to court (I await correction on that) and ATOC - the association of train operating companies - have never issued an official guidance on this issue, so there is no fully determined precedent.

--

PS - I just booked an advance ticket for Manchester Picadilly > Gatwick Airport for 27th December. A Virgin trains advance ticket, though ticket horizons website currently suggests booking is only up to 23rd December. So they have been released, even if the page has not been updated yet!

 

[Flamingo]

Oh well, I'll have to pursue that one sometime to see what the company does and get an "official" ruling, it'll give my manager something to sort out when the complaint lands on his desk. Although I'll probably just be told to "let them travel if it's valid or not, you are causing potential bad publicity for the company" again!

 

[ajdunlop]

I should have known better to raise this question. I think I have before, opps
Another related question / point; the ATOC appear to do a good job of pushing the TOC's agendas and defiantly don't represent passengers, so who does? Am I correct in thinking the role of representing passengers is performed by Passenger Focus? Also was there not talk of increasing their say in things like franchising? Surely then CoC that confuse passengers should be an issue that Passenger Focus have the ability to change; is it the ATOC or ORR who 'own' and maintain the CoCs and have they changed lately?

Sorry that was lots of questions, hopefully none to controversial.

 

[John @ home]

Am I correct in thinking the role of representing passengers is performed by Passenger Focus?

The statutory role of representing passengers is performed jointly by Passenger Focus and London Travelwatch (whose area of operation extends rather wider than London). There are other voluntary bodies which campaign on behalf of passengers.

Also was there not talk of increasing their say in things like franchising?

The Department for Transport are currently holding a Consultation on Reforming Rail Franchising. Responses should be sent by 18 October. Responses to consultations by ATOC, PF or LT can usually be found on their web sites.

CoC that confuse passengers should be an issue that Passenger Focus have the ability to change; is it the ATOC or ORR who 'own' and maintain the CoCs

The National Rail Conditions of Carriage are copyright Copyright Rail Settlement Plan Ltd, a subsidiary of ATOC, but DfT consent is required to make changes.

have they changed lately?

Minor changes were made from 4 December 2009 following internal industry consultation in order to conform with an EU Directive. On that occasion there was no prior public consultation. I don't know whether PF and LT were included in the consultation.

 

[ajdunlop]

Thanks John.
It just feels wrong that the NRCoC, which contain things to outline the agreement between TOC and passenger should be completely owned by the ATOC rather than it being a ORR document which is a requirement for the TOCs to adhere to (as well as passengers). That might also mean that the NRCoC would be a living document which is as clear to both sides as possible and not just changed because it has to be for technical reasons.