Cross London itinerary without Maltese cross

[dd1]

I'm looking to buy an anytime return ticket between a pair of stations where the Yellow Pages of the Routeing Guide specify that one of the permitted routes is "LONDON". There's an anytime return fare on brfares.com, and this ticket would be without a Maltese cross. (There's also a direct route, but I'd only take that for the outward portion, not for the return one.) Unfortunately, I'm finding it impossible to get any journey planner to issue such a ticket with an itinerary. I have searched through the forum, and it looks like the following could be the cause. The route would involve a cross-London transfer (between two London terminals) -- but without a Maltese cross the journey planners would only issue such a fare if Tube is not running. I don't know how to achieve such a journey plan though. I've tried playing with "via" and "avoid" points but without success. Is there any particular kind of trick I could be overlooking? Many thanks in advance.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Are we meant to guess what your journey is?

 

[dd1]

Coventry to Oxford and (via London) back.

 

[jfollows]

http://www.brfares.com/!expert?orig=COV&dest=OXF only anytime return is "via Banbury". Am I missing something?

 

[dd1]

Going to London Paddington via Reading and then taking a Chiltern service from Marylebone as far as Leamington Spa would seem to satisfy the route restriction.

 

[jfollows]

Coventry to Oxford and (via London) back.

Do you mean - just to be clear

• Coventry to Oxford
• Oxford to London
• London to Coventry?

Same day or different days?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jul 2022 ==

If there is an "any permitted" fare (valid via London as you say) and I'm just not seeing it then see also #3 : (from the detailed instructions, as a specific example, substitute "Banbury" or whatever for "Manchester" in your case.

If the ticket is unrouted or has the route “Any Permitted”, any of these routes [using the route codes in the yellow pages] may be used. There is also a routed fare via Manchester. … If the “Any Permitted” fare is less than the “Manchester” routed fare, the ticketholder may not go via Manchester. If the “Any Permitted” fare is more than the “Manchester” routed fare it may be used via Manchester.

 

[dd1]

Yes, these are the three segments I had in mind. I was thinking different days.

I've been assuming that the "via Banbury" fare could be used for this route but maybe I'm mistaken! Here's a quote from section 3.1.2 of the RailUK Fares & Ticketing Guide:

Where the route is VIA a station(s) your journey must pass through this station although the train doesn't need to stop there.

So... any Chiltern service from Marylebone to Leamington Spa passes via Banbury.

 

[jfollows]

I was very confused by what you are trying to do, but I now think you mean that you want to return Oxford-London, followed by London-Coventry via Banbury.
There is no "any permitted" fare at all, for starters, which I think you would need to have if you wanted to travel Oxford-London-Coventry on the return, in which case you wouldn't even have to travel via Banbury on the way back.
I don't see how Oxford-Coventry "via Banbury" could be used via London as well, but I can't quote you chapter and verse on why not, it just seems wrong, and we all know that this isn't a reason for it to be invalid.
From http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/nrg_instructions.pdf:

You may only use all the permitted routes if the fare is unrouted or the route is described as "any permitted". An "any permitted" ticket cannot be used for travel on a route not listed in the Routeing Guide for which a higher priced route specific fare exists. It can be used on any route not listed in the Routeing Guide for which a lower priced route specific fare exists.

Where the fare specifies a particular route, there will be restrictions in the fare routes data that will affect the routes listed in the Guide which pass through the station shown in the route description. The National Routeing Guide may be used to find out how to reach the station shown in the route description. Where there are other permitted routes, these may also be used for the same journey provided the same or a lower fare applies.

What I think this means, but someone else may be able to say it better, is that given that your anytime fare is routed "via Banbury" then although you don't need to stop at Banbury you can only use valid routes Oxford-Banbury followed by Banbury-Coventry, and these don't include via London. See attached map, covering Oxford-Banbury, only possible direct.


I think you just have to get an anytime Coventry-London ticket which would be valid for what you propose, and more, but of course will be more expensive than you were trying to get the ticket for.

 

[alistairlees]

Coventry to Oxford and (via London) back.

A Coventry to London route any permitted Anytime Return (which is valid for 5 days on the outward portion) will most likely satisfy your requirements, depending on the dates of your trip. This costs £170. There might be some cheaper split ticketing options.

 

[Haywain]

To make the journey you wish, Coventry to Reading has tickets routed both Not via London and +via London so you could buy the cheaper one and obtain a change of route excess for the ‘return’ journey. I would also query whether you actually require an Anytime Return.

 

[arb]

The way I interpret the routeing guide is:

1) Coventry-Oxford is valid on either map "SM" or via "LONDON".
2) For the sake of this thread, ignore SM, and use LONDON. To determine valid routes via "LONDON" you look up routes from Coventry to London, then from London to Oxford.
3) Coventry to London is valid on GC, or SM+RG, or TV. The routes from London to Oxford are irrelevant for this discussion.
4) All three of the above map sets would be valid to use if there was a Coventry to Oxford "any permitted" ticket.
5) The first of those two map sets (GC, or SM+RG) trace routes from Coventry, through Banbury, to London. TV does not. Therefore the first two map sets can be used to trace a valid route for a Coventry to Oxford via Banbury ticket, that also goes through London.

If I put Coventry to Oxford via South Ruislip into a Mixing Deck journey planner (e.g. tickets.gwr.com) then it offers a small number of journeys with changes at Leamington Spa and London Marylebone on the "via Banury" ticket. But it won't let me use the tube to get from Marylebone to Paddington for a "fast" leg between London and Oxford, which I think is to be expected because the ticket doesn't have the cross-London Maltese cross.

 

[Cantab26]

3) Coventry to London is valid on GC, or SM+RG, or TV. The routes from London to Oxford are irrelevant for this discussion.

The routes from London to Oxford must be included before attempting to trace a route on the maps. The Routeing Guide is very clear on this.

5) The first of those two map sets (GC, or SM+RG) trace routes from Coventry, through Banbury, to London. TV does not. Therefore the first two map sets can be used to trace a valid route for a Coventry to Oxford via Banbury ticket, that also goes through London.

The full route codes would be:

1. SM+RG+GC
2. SM+RG+LH
3. SM+RG+WX+RB
4. GC+GC
5. GC+LH
6. GC+WX+RB
7. TV+GC
8. TV+LH
9. TV+WX+RB

7, 8 and 9 are excluded because none of these routes pass through Banbury.

4 is excluded because of the repeated map.

2 and 3 are excluded because of doubling back (between Oxford and Reading for both) and 1 doubles back through Oxford itself.

Accordingly, subject to any easements, the permitted routes for the outward journey would be:

• Coventry to Banbury to Oxford (SM)
• Coventry to Banbury to Marylebone to Paddington to Oxford (GC+LH)
• Coventry to Banbury to Marylebone to Waterloo to Reading to Oxford (GC+WX+RB)

And the reverse for the return journey.

In other words, a Via Banbury Anytime Return should be valid to travel from Coventry to Oxford on day 1 using the outward portion, from Oxford to London on day 2 (using the return portion), break of journey in London then on day 3 from Marylebone to Coventry (with the return portion).

However, unless travel is required prior to 9.30am then an Offpeak Return should also enable this journey to be made.

A final note: my layman’s understanding is that with a routed fare most journey planners will search for each ‘half’ individually i.e. Coventry to Banbury then Banbury to Oxford. This would not generate routes via London. They would not normally look at the Coventry to Oxford routes and then sift these to exclude non-Banbury routes.

However, the human readable Guide does allow for this (or, at least, it does not exclude or prohibit it).

 

[jfollows]

What about the fact that there is no "any permitted" or unrouted fare, and as per my quote in post #8, which implies that the routeing guide and its derived routes can not be used on a "via Banbury" fare? That's what I thought I understood from this, at least, happy to hear why it can!

 

[arb]

Accordingly, subject to any easements, the permitted routes for the outward journey would be:

• Coventry to Banbury to Oxford (SM)
• Coventry to Banbury to Marylebone to Paddington to Oxford (GC+LH)
• Coventry to Banbury to Marylebone to Waterloo to Reading to Oxford (GC+WX+RB)

The last two might be valid routes, but I don't think they're allowed on the "via Banbury" ticket because it doesn't have the Maltese cross. (Unless you're allowed to walk across London instead of using the tube? Or pay for the tube journey separately? I don't know about that!)

When I said "the routes from London to Oxford are irrelevant for this discussion" I forgot that they are relevant for checking for repeated maps. But I'm not sure that doubling back when going into/out of London is prohibited. If the route is "LONDON" then are you trace valid routes from the origin to London (which will imply no doubling back when travelling between the origin and London), and then you trace valid routes from London to the destination (which will imply no doubling back when travelling between London and the destination). But if the double-back happens across those two sections, is it allowed or not? I don't see anything to forbid that. As I said above, Mixing Deck journey planners seem to allow it, because they offer the route from Leamington Spa to Marylebone, and then Marylebone to Oxford.

The routeing guide says:

If there is a route “LONDON” as one of the permitted routes in the Routeing Guide,
the range of permitted routes via London is discovered by the following method:
1. Look up the permitted routes from the origin routeing point to London.
2. Look up the permitted routes from London to the destination routeing point.
3. Work out the range of permitted routes for the whole journey by combining any
route found in (1) with any route found in (2). All possible combinations are
permitted routes for the journey except those with a repeated map.

Regardless of how you interpret the rules, I would certainly be travelling with an itinerary printed out from Mixing Deck if I tried to use this ticket on this route!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jul 2022 ==

WHat about the fact that there is no "any permitted" or unrouted fare, and as per my quote in post #8, which implies that the routeing guide and its derived routes can not be used on a "via Banbury" fare? That's what I thought I understood from this, at least, happy to hear why it can!

An "any permitted" ticket allows all routes that can be derived from the routeing guide. A "via X" ticket does not: it prohibits the subset of routes that do not go through "X". In this case that prohibits the routes that use map TV. It doesn't prohibit routes that go through anywhere else, including London, if they've also gone through Banbury. The lack of any "any permitted" fare is irrelevant to working out the valid routes "via Banbury".

Or at least that's how I understand it, I'm also happy to be told why I'm wrong

 

[alistairlees]

You need to treat Coventry to Banbury and Banbury to Oxford as separate entities, then combine these, when trying to work out valid routes from Coventry to Oxford using a "via Banbury" fare.

So
- look up all the valid routes from Coventry to Banbury (there is just the obvious one)
- look up all the valid routes from Banbury to Oxford (there is just one)
- stick them together and you have your valid routes (just one, in this case; and not via London)

 

[jfollows]

You need to treat Coventry to Banbury and Banbury to Oxford as separate entities, then combine these, when trying to work out valid routes from Coventry to Oxford using a "via Banbury" fare.

So
- look up all the valid routes from Coventry to Banbury (there is just the obvious one)
- look up all the valid routes from Banbury to Oxford (there is just one)
- stick them together and you have your valid routes (just one, in this case; and not via London)

That was also my conclusion, per post #8, but I'm happy to be proved wrong also, end result is that my understanding will be improved even if I personally won't want to use this ticket.

 

[arb]

You need to treat Coventry to Banbury and Banbury to Oxford as separate entities, then combine these, when trying to work out valid routes from Coventry to Oxford using a "via Banbury" fare.

I thought you only broke it down into two sections like that if the "via" point was not on any possible route that is allowed in the routeing guide for the longer journey? That said, I now can't see where this is written in the routeing guide.

The forum's own ticketing guide doesn't agree with either of us, it says that permitted routes from the routeing guide via X are allowed *as well* as combining routes to the via point with routes from the via point! https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...g-guide-section-3-routeing.70716/post-1192129

In addition to the permitted routes which involve travel via this location, permitted routes also include all permitted routes from the origin to the via point, and from via point to the destination. This was confirmed by ATOC when a customer enquired about a Sheffield to Blackburn ticket routed via Burnley.

 

[jfollows]

I thought you only broke it down into two sections like that if the "via" point was not on any possible route that is allowed in the routeing guide for the longer journey? That said, I now can't see where this is written in the routeing guide.

Yes, that's what I was struggling with also - the routeing guide has so many words that it's easy to overlook vital sections for any particular case, and it's so convoluted that it's almost impossible to find something like this also. It's an interesting case to consider and work through!

 

[Cantab26]

The last two might be valid routes, but I don't think they're allowed on the "via Banbury" ticket because it doesn't have the Maltese cross. (Unless you're allowed to walk across London instead of using the tube? Or pay for the tube journey separately? I don't know about that!)

Section A of the Guide deals with this:

If the routeing code is "LONDON", journeys include the cost of cross-London transfer either by London Underground or Thameslink services.

Note: this refers to the routeing code LONDON in the yellow pages, not the route on the ticket i.e. the fact that the ticket is routed Via Banbury is not in itself determinative.

The Guide also confirms that the Maltese cross is not necessary to confer cross-London validity.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jul 2022 ==

When I said "the routes from London to Oxford are irrelevant for this discussion" I forgot that they are relevant for checking for repeated maps. But I'm not sure that doubling back when going into/out of London is prohibited. If the route is "LONDON" then are you trace valid routes from the origin to London (which will imply no doubling back when travelling between the origin and London), and then you trace valid routes from London to the destination (which will imply no doubling back when travelling between London and the destination). But if the double-back happens across those two sections, is it allowed or not? I don't see anything to forbid that.

It depends on what you mean by “the route is “LONDON””.

If you are referring to the routeing code LONDON in the yellow pages then doubling back is not permitted when tracing on the (combined) sequence of maps.

However, if the fare is routed ‘via London’ then the Guide provides that you may split the journey into two i.e. origin to via point then via point to destination. In those circumstances, doubling back would be permitted provided that it occurs on ‘either side’ of the via point because it is treated as two separate journeys for routeing purposes.

Crucially, this ‘split route’ approach for routed fares is permissive, not mandatory. This means that you can split the route up, but if the normal route tracing procedure generates a valid route from origin to destination (compliant with any via points through which you must pass) then there is nothing in the Guide that prohibits travelling by that route.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jul 2022 ==

An "any permitted" ticket allows all routes that can be derived from the routeing guide.

This is not always the case. For example:

Travel from A to B.

The Guide shows mapped routes via X and via Y.

There are fares from A to B:

• Any Permitted
• Via Y

If the via Y fare costs more than the Any Permitted fare then the Any Permitted fare may not be used to travel on routes via Y - only via X.

If the via Y fare is the same or lower than the Any Permitted fare then the Any Permitted fare may be used both via X and via Y.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jul 2022 ==

You need to treat Coventry to Banbury and Banbury to Oxford as separate entities, then combine these, when trying to work out valid routes from Coventry to Oxford using a "via Banbury" fare.

So
- look up all the valid routes from Coventry to Banbury (there is just the obvious one)
- look up all the valid routes from Banbury to Oxford (there is just one)
- stick them together and you have your valid routes (just one, in this case; and not via London)

As set out above, the Guide permits this approach, but does not mandate it.

However, my general understanding is that journey planners will default to it if there is a routed fare. There are circumstances where this may offer a wider or narrower selection of routes than looking at the end-to-end journey in the normal way i.e. without splitting it into two separate routes at the via point.

In practice, the implications of this for Coventry to Oxford are that you would not be able to generate a journey planner itinerary via London even though this may be valid through manual application of the Guide.

 

[arb]

If the routeing code is "LONDON", journeys include the cost of cross-London transfer either by London Underground or Thameslink services.

Thanks! (Only underground and Thameslink, but not Crossrail? ) I assume that the ticket won't work the tube barriers if it doesn't have the Maltese cross, so you'd better be prepared for a long discussion with barrier staff if you want to do this?

If you are referring to the routeing code LONDON in the yellow pages then doubling back is not permitted when tracing on the (combined) sequence of maps.

I disagree with this. Simple example: Edinburgh to Alexandra Palace. The routeing guide includes "LONDON" as a valid route in the yellow pages. The ticket is not "via London". How do you follow the "LONDON" route without doubling back through Finsbury Park? A simple search on National Rail Enquiries with no via points, show shorter routes, other weird options, etc. includes journeys from Edinburgh to King's Cross and then a doubling back through Finsbury Park.

(After a bit of thought, I suppose do Edinburgh to Peterborough, then to Cambridge, then Liverpool Street, and you'd be able to do this journey without doubling back through Finsbury Park. But my point is journey planners offer the route with doubling back, just like they do in the Coventry to Oxford example).

However, if the fare is routed ‘via London’ then the Guide provides that you may split the journey into two i.e. origin to via point then via point to destination.

Where does it actually say this? I agree that (in at least some circumstances ) it is acceptable to do this, but I can't find anything about it written down anywhere in the routeing guide!

 

[jfollows]

Where does it actually say this? I agree that (in at least some circumstances ) it is acceptable to do this, but I can't find anything about it written down anywhere in the routeing guide!

Page F9 (http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/nrg_detail.pdf):

If there is a route “LONDON” as one of the permitted routes in the Routeing Guide, the range of permitted routes via London is discovered by the following method:

1. Look up the permitted routes from the origin routeing point to London.
2. Look up the permitted routes from London to the destination routeing point.
3. Work out the range of permitted routes for the whole journey by combining any route found in (1) with any route found in (2). All possible combinations are permitted routes for the journey except those with a repeated map.

 

[swt_passenger]

In this discussion nobody seems to have asked an obvious question, why does there even need to be a fare from Coventry to Oxford via London, given it’s about 3 times the direct distance? In BR days would it even have been a reasonable route?

 

[arb]

Page F9 (http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/nrg_detail.pdf):

No, that talks about a journey on a mapped route through "LONDON" according to the yellow pages. Not about a ticket with a "via London" routing.

 

[jfollows]

No, that talks about a journey on a mapped route through "LONDON" according to the yellow pages. Not about a ticket with a "via London" routing.

Thank you for correcting me on that.

 

[Cantab26]

Where does it actually say this? I agree that (in at least some circumstances ) it is acceptable to do this, but I can't find anything about it written down anywhere in the routeing guide!

Thank you for correcting me on that.

It’s in Section A:

Where the fare specifies a particular route, there will be restrictions in the fare routes data that will affect thee routes listed in the Guide which pass through the station shown in the route description. The National Routeing Guide may be used to find out how to reach the station shown in the route description.

Note: may be used, not must.

 

[Haywain]

Edinburgh to Alexandra Palace. The routeing guide includes "LONDON" as a valid route in the yellow pages. The ticket is not "via London".

Tickets between Edinburgh and Alexandra Palace are routed Any Permitted, so your point is not relevant.

 

[jfollows]

It’s in Section A:



Note: may be used, not must.

Yes, and I'd also noted this earlier, but I came across the same problem as you - what does "may" mean here? The only conclusion I came to implied "must" which isn't the same, as you say.

 

[arb]

It’s in Section A:



Note: may be used, not must.

Wow, yes, I'd missed that. I can see how you interpret it that way. But I think that's ambiguous, even by the routeing guide's standards! I think it's quite a stretch to turn "may be used to find out how to reach the station shown in the route description" into "you may split the journey in two and apply the routeing guide twice", but I agree it can be interpreted like that.

 

[Cantab26]

I disagree with this. Simple example: Edinburgh to Alexandra Palace. The routeing guide includes "LONDON" as a valid route in the yellow pages. The ticket is not "via London". How do you follow the "LONDON" route without doubling back through Finsbury Park? A simple search on National Rail Enquiries with no via points, show shorter routes, other weird options, etc. includes journeys from Edinburgh to King's Cross and then a doubling back through Finsbury Park.

As I have mentioned previously, my understanding is that journey planners do not apply the Routeing Guide as a human would and instead default to applying the ‘split route’ method (intended for routed fares and which does not prohibit a double back when map tracing) across the board - including when dealing with LONDON routeing codes i.e. I believe they treat it as if it is a ‘via London’ fare even if it is not.

Others on the forum who deal with the ‘behind the scenes’ stuff may be able to clarify though. @yorkie Are you able to confirm how this is dealt with?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jul 2022 ==

Yes, and I'd also noted this earlier, but I came across the same problem as you - what does "may" mean here? The only conclusion I came to implied "must" which isn't the same, as you say.

Wow, yes, I'd missed that. I can see how you interpret it that way. But I think that's ambiguous, even by the routeing guide's standards! I think it's quite a stretch to turn "may be used to find out how to reach the station shown in the route description" into "you may split the journey in two and apply the routeing guide twice", but I agree it can be interpreted like that.

Since we’re dealing with a consumer situation then the interpretation most favourable to the customer will generally be preferred.

There is nothing on the face of the Guide which indicates that a more restrictive interpretation is intended.

 

[Haywain]

Since we’re dealing with a consumer situation then the interpretation most favourable to the customer will generally be preferred.

Does this extend to allowing a journey that is considerably longer than necessary?