Norwich-Chester via London

[LNW-GW Joint]

Does anybody know why there are NO FARES via London for this journey, even though it is a good bit quicker than the route via Peterborough-Nuneaton?

If you try and book a ticket NRW-CTR you only get offered the cross-country route (fare set by EMT) usually involving 3 changes (Ely, Nuneaton, Crewe) taking over 5 hours.
Meanwhile via Liverpool St and Euston you can do the journey quicker and in better trains - but there's no fare.
NRES doesn't even offer a route via London (because there are no fares?)

VWC fares via Euston go as far out of Liverpool St as Stowmarket or Cambridge, but not to Norwich or Ely or beyond.
Chester and Norwich are major railway nodes, so why no through VWC fares?
I've been reduced to buying split tickets via Ipswich or even Manningtree (where code 9I kicks in so less restricted into LST).

Going the other way, CTR-NRW, you get the crazy situation where the cross-country route involves reaching Nuneaton on a VT service and changing to XC, while staying on the VT train and going via London would get you to NRW earlier.
And worse, as a railcard holder, the XC SVR fare is barred before 0930 while you can travel any time via London with the VT railcard
concession.

Very mysterious. I have checked all this on Avantix 9 by the way.

 

[First class]

Get yourself a Liverpool to Norwich route +LONDON ticket.

£70.95 valid effectively any time you like on a Virgin Train,

as for NXEA:

DEPART:LONDON LIVERPOOL STREET
Between 0931 & 1628 (inc.) and
at or after 1835. (see note
below)

ARRIVE: LONDON LIVERPOOL
STREET
At or after 1000.

I imagine the cheapest walk up tickets via London are (slow journey time though):

Chester-Crewe SVR (valid anytime) £8.50
Crewe-London OPR LM Only (can't arrive into London before 1pm M-F) £14.85
London-Norwich SVR £29.70
Total: £53.05 albeit for a longer and more restricted journey

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Brilliant, and even valid via Chester!

The immediate problem was getting a ticket coming the other way for a relative to get to a family event for the day, and in this case because of NXEA restrictions (code 1A) it's still cheaper in the peak (£71.95) to split at Manningtree (SDR £16.35) and then get a MNG-CTR SVR (£57.50) valid on the 0625 ex Norwich to reach Chester at 1109.

The XC fare (the only one bookable direct to CTR) at this time would be £91.40, and require leaving NRW at 0552.

But is does show how devious you have to be to beat the system.

Still doesn't answer why the "fastest route" doesn't have a fare...

 

[asylumxl]

Still doesn't answer why the "fastest route" doesn't have a fare...

Because the rail industry isn't known for it's logical nature.

 

[yorkie]

Our government allows ATOC to effectively act as a regulator. ATOC claim that ticketing is simple and that most passengers wish to go via direct trains (true, but there are none in this case) or via the SHORTEST route. ATOC refuse to accept that passengers actually want the quickest route. If you believe this is wrong, you could try asking your MP some questions such as:-

1) Why is there no formal recognition that passengers wish to take the fastest route?
2) Why is ATOC allowed to act as a regulator?
3) Why is ATOC allowed to claim ticketing is simple?
4) Why do ATOC post survey results making fanciful claims that passengers are happy with rail ticketing when this is actually not the case for most people?

Unless the Department for Transport act, ATOC will continue to act as a regulator and against the interests of passengers (it is their role to act in the interests of the rail companies, and clearly that can conflict with the interests of passengers).

What I would not call for is simplification because if we get that, the cheaper prices will go up and the least restrictive conditions will become more restrictive. I'd only accept simplification as an option if there were certain guarantees in place.

 

[exile]

A simpler system would be to divide Britain into zones and base ticket prices on number of zones traversed. Restrictions would be easier to specify - ie "no travel via London zones" or whatever. When in Germany I noted that Baden-Wurtemburg, a largish area, had such a zonal system.

 

[Mike395]

A simpler system would be to divide Britain into zones and base ticket prices on number of zones traversed. Restrictions would be easier to specify - ie "no travel via London zones" or whatever. When in Germany I noted that Baden-Wurtemburg, a largish area, had such a zonal system.

That was discussed on here a month or so back (I'll see if I can dig up the thread) - and I think the conclusion was that there were a lot of holes in the zonal concept being rolled out on a national basis
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Here it is: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=702800#post702800