Forthcoming changes to National Rail Conditions of Travel

[redreni]

That sounds like a pretty stupid rule that serves no purpose. So long as you buy the ticket before its origin, it shouldn't matter where you purchase it.

The person who came up with such claptrap should be redeployed.

Either I expressed this poorly, or it's being taken out of the context of the post I was replying to, possibly both.

To be clear, I wasn't trying to say either that you are or that you will be in breach of anything if you buy a ticket to extend your journey when you are already on the train. Certainly not if the train is yet to make an open call at a station where your existing ticket is valid without the new one. (Non-stop splits are a grey area - if I take a fast GWR train from Paddington to Slough and I hold a Z1-6 Travelcard, for example, I would think I might be pushing my luck if I waited until after we'd departed Paddington before buying a ticket to cover the portion from West Drayton to Slough, even if I buy it before the train passes West Drayton).

What I was trying to say is you could be starting short, so you could buy a ticket after the train has departed the origin on your ticket and then board the train at a subsequent stop, which is not against the rules either currently or, as far as we know, as proposed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What I was trying to say is you could be starting short, so you could buy a ticket after the train has departed the origin on your ticket and then board the train at a subsequent stop, which is not against the rules either currently or, as far as we know, as proposed.

This is indeed somewhat of a risk - if doing it it is really best to purchase it for collection or just from the TVM/booking office which is pretty good evidence of where you actually boarded. Buying it and joining a train along the way but buying after it has departed from the station on the ticket is a heck of a risk. The only other workaround is if there's a gateline at the station you're actually joining at so you can record a scan on it which is again evidence of where you actually boarded.

There's no rule on this as things stand, but one has to consider how it looks and act to avoid unnecessary hassle.

 

[Belperpete]

As regards the Lizzie Line break of journey, I don't understand why they are writing this into the NCoT. Why not just give the relevant tickets a restriction code that prohibits BoJ? Many (most?) tickets for travel along the N.Wales Coast, for example, have a 2A restriction banning BoJ, why not just do something similar for tickets via the Lizzie Line?

As regards ticket excessing, what would happen if you didn't excess your ticket, and your revised route took you through a penalty fare zone? Surely if you hadn't already excessed your fare, and so didn't have a ticket valid for the journey you are now making, you would be liable to a penalty fare? Doesn't this rule change just put every case into this situation of needing to excess beforehand?

It is possible at least in theory to overdistance excess to the full ticket needed when you get to a booking office. Though if you did it on arrival in London it'd probably be argued your ticket had ended so wasn't excessable.

That is exactly what happened to me, as I didn't have an opportunity to excess my ticket en-route without missing my connection.

The guard insisted that I had to buy a ticket. It might not be a ticket for the destination I was going to (as he was unable to sell that), but I had to buy A ticket valid for the part of the journey I was currently making, or I would be liable to a penalty fare. He claimed that I would be able to excess it at Euston, but the clerk at Euston refused. I had to buy a separate ticket for my onward travel from Euston, so I ended up paying more than I would have paid for a through ticket. TfW repaid the excess when I complained.

I can see a similar argument being used when this rule change about excesses comes in. You might not be able to buy an excess from a TVM, but you should be able to buy A ticket valid for the journey. If you don't, then you will be treated as someone travelling without a valid ticket, and who failed to buy a ticket when the opportunity was available.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As regards the Lizzie Line break of journey, I don't understand why they are writing this into the NCoT. Why not just give the relevant tickets a restriction code that prohibits BoJ? Many (most?) tickets for travel along the N.Wales Coast, for example, have a 2A restriction banning BoJ, why not just do something similar for tickets via the Lizzie Line?

There are many issues with this, but the most notable one is that Anytime tickets do not carry a restriction code with which to do this.

 

[Belperpete]

This is indeed somewhat of a risk - if doing it it is really best to purchase it for collection or just from the TVM/booking office which is pretty good evidence of where you actually boarded. Buying it and joining a train along the way but buying after it has departed from the station on the ticket is a heck of a risk. The only other workaround is if there's a gateline at the station you're actually joining at so you can record a scan on it which is again evidence of where you actually boarded.

The gateline might well reject your ticket. In which case, would the scan be recorded?

I get the impression that, along with the East Coast "trial", they are trying to make rail travel ever less flexible. As someone who breaks journey, and/or stops or starts short on virtually every journey I make, and very rarely uses the reservations that I am forced into having, I find this incredibly disappointing. I almost never use advance tickets (except when I am given them for free!). Being forced into travelling at a set time means that you have to make sure that you are there in plenty of time to catch your train, which means that you waste a lot of time, whereas with a flexible ticket, it is generally no big problem if you miss a train, you just catch the next.

The ability to travel flexibly, and change your mind on a whim, the vagaries of the weather, etc. is one of the big plus points of train travel.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The gateline might well reject your ticket. In which case, would the scan be recorded?

A rejected scan is recorded, yes. I know this because I've scanned the wrong ticket at a gateline by accident, not been let in until I scanned the correct one, then been unable to refund it later as a result.

 

[AdamWW]

A rejected scan is recorded, yes. I know this because I've scanned the wrong ticket at a gateline by accident, not been let in until I scanned the correct one, then been unable to refund it later as a result.

The railway does like its concept of used-but-not-used, doesn't it?

Like keeping the money for a ticket that's invalid because it went with an expired railcard and demanding the full cost of a new ticket.

 

[Adam Williams]

then been unable to refund it later as a result.

The retailer should be applying common sense when determining if a ticket has actually been used or not, not simply going off the presence of a scan record.

Scanned does not mean used. I have had to remind colleagues of this on occasion.

It may mean asking the customer for a bit more information about what actually happened, but you can't just act like a robot when evaluating these things.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The railway does like its concept of used-but-not-used, doesn't it?

Like keeping the money for a ticket that's invalid because it went with an expired railcard and demanding the full cost of a new ticket.

As I've just said in the other thread about fare evasion, coming down on minor infractions like a ton of bricks isn't going to do the industry any favours.

Someone in that situation, who has an expired railcard but has bought a ticket with it, is likely to be worse off financially than someone who doesn't buy a ticket at all and simply smashes through a barrier.

It's the same when you think about buying on board. Someone in a rush buys their entirely correct ticket but they do it a few minutes after the train doors have closed. Under the new rules that ticket would be invalid but also non-refundable. So they get a Penalty Fare, which would be £50/£100 plus the cost of the ticket, even though they've already bought the ticket once. Or, as increasingly happens, they'd get referred for prosecution and then rinsed by the TOC for £200+.

The real danger with these rules is that people end up thinking that if they're going to be rinsed for a minor infraction they may as well do a major infraction and get the same penalty.

 

[AdamWW]

Someone in that situation, who has an expired railcard but has bought a ticket with it, is likely to be worse off financially than someone who doesn't buy a ticket at all and simply smashes through a barrier.

Yes - and likely much worse off because they can't go trawling through purchase records to find the other times they've crashed through a barrier.

 

[redreni]

As regards the Lizzie Line break of journey, I don't understand why they are writing this into the NCoT. Why not just give the relevant tickets a restriction code that prohibits BoJ? Many (most?) tickets for travel along the N.Wales Coast, for example, have a 2A restriction banning BoJ, why not just do something similar for tickets via the Lizzie Line?

As regards ticket excessing, what would happen if you didn't excess your ticket, and your revised route took you through a penalty fare zone? Surely if you hadn't already excessed your fare, and so didn't have a ticket valid for the journey you are now making, you would be liable to a penalty fare? Doesn't this rule change just put every case into this situation of needing to excess beforehand?


That is exactly what happened to me, as I didn't have an opportunity to excess my ticket en-route without missing my connection.

The guard insisted that I had to buy a ticket. It might not be a ticket for the destination I was going to (as he was unable to sell that), but I had to buy A ticket valid for the part of the journey I was currently making, or I would be liable to a penalty fare. He claimed that I would be able to excess it at Euston, but the clerk at Euston refused. I had to buy a separate ticket for my onward travel from Euston, so I ended up paying more than I would have paid for a through ticket. TfW repaid the excess when I complained.

I can see a similar argument being used when this rule change about excesses comes in. You might not be able to buy an excess from a TVM, but you should be able to buy A ticket valid for the journey. If you don't, then you will be treated as someone travelling without a valid ticket, and who failed to buy a ticket when the opportunity was available.

If they bothered to consult anybody, one constructive suggestion that might emerge and that they could consider is pairing this anti-passenger provision with an explicit entitlement to be reimbursed for overcharging when you cannot buy the ticket or excess you require for a reason that isn't your fault, and you have to buy a more expensive ticket. There should probably be an admin fee of up to £5, as well, payable by the TOC to the passenger, in recognition of the time cost incurred.

 

[Haywain]

As regards the Lizzie Line break of journey, I don't understand why they are writing this into the NCoT. Why not just give the relevant tickets a restriction code that prohibits BoJ? Many (most?) tickets for travel along the N.Wales Coast, for example, have a 2A restriction banning BoJ, why not just do something similar for tickets via the Lizzie Line?

Why not do something similar? Because there doesn't appear to be an intention to bar break of journey anywhere other than on this small section.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Oct 2025 ==

If they bothered to consult anybody,

I believe that DfT are consulting the industry. I would suggest that those who don't like the proposed changes contact their MP about it because, as I understand it, those pushing the changes are not listening to those they are consulting and certainly won't listen to those they are not consulting.

 

[Adam Williams]

as I understand it, those pushing the changes are not listening to those they are consulting

I would not disagree with this characterisation.

 

[Starmill]

When I'm travelling for work my tickets are always refunded, if I don't use them, after the original departure time of my train. It's daft to expect the person whose job it is to deal with these requests prior to departure time if the ticket is returned unused at short notice. It's also not possible to wait until the day of travel and requests are ideally made at least 2 business days before. I prefer a self-service system of travel bookings, as that's what I'm used to, but I accept that in some employers, the business travel needed is such that one person doing it all for the whole organisation is more cost-effective than paying for a corporate account for every potential user.

Anyone suggesting a ticket for an early morning departure is made non-cancellable after 3pm the previous day is probably someone who's never known business travel of any kind.

 

[Belperpete]

Why not do something similar? Because there doesn't appear to be an intention to bar break of journey anywhere other than on this small section.

I was thinking of a restriction code that bars break of journey on the Lizzie Line core, rather than for the whole ticket. Putting such a route-specific restriction in the general NCoT that applies to all tickets just seems to me to be the wrong way to do it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was thinking of a restriction code that bars break of journey on the Lizzie Line core, rather than for the whole ticket. Putting such a route-specific restriction in the general NCoT that applies to all tickets just seems to me to be the wrong way to do it.

You'd have to put it on a lot of tickets which may already have a code.

 

[Belperpete]

When I'm travelling for work my tickets are always refunded, if I don't use them, after the original departure time of my train. It's daft to expect the person whose job it is to deal with these requests prior to departure time if the ticket is returned unused at short notice. It's also not possible to wait until the day of travel and requests are ideally made at least 2 business days before. I prefer a self-service system of travel bookings, as that's what I'm used to, but I accept that in some employers, the business travel needed is such that one person doing it all for the whole organisation is more cost-effective than paying for a corporate account for every potential user.

Anyone suggesting a ticket for an early morning departure is made non-cancellable after 3pm the previous day is probably someone who's never known business travel of any kind.

This restriction on being able to refund is going to deter many people from booking in advance unless they are absolutely certain they are going to travel. Just at the same time as they seem to be wanting people to book in advance. It seems perverse.

 

[blimmo]

I believe restricting people's ability to refund flexible tickets will increase the number of people purchasing (immediately) after departure. Currently it's possible to purchase the day before travel and know you can refund if you have to cancel, now there is every incentive to wait as long as possible, until you're at the station if possible and then problems purchasing can easily result in the choice being to miss your train or purchase on board.

I very much doubt that the "purchasing on board is illegal" will be as well publicised (or at least understood) as the "refunds are no longer available except in advance".

Actually a retailer that allowed selecting the (flexible) ticket I wanted in advance but delayed committing to the actual purchase until later would be very useful if this change goes ahead...

 

[AdamWW]

I believe restricting people's ability to refund flexible tickets will increase the number of people purchasing (immediately) after departure. Currently it's possible to purchase the day before travel and know you can refund if you have to cancel, now there is every incentive to wait as long as possible, until you're at the station if possible and then problems purchasing can easily result in the choice being to miss your train or purchase on board.

I very much doubt that the "purchasing on board is illegal" will be as well publicised (or at least understood) as the "refunds are no longer available except in advance".

Actually a retailer that allowed selecting the (flexible) ticket I wanted in advance but delayed committing to the actual purchase until later would be very useful if this change goes ahead...

In principle it would be easy enough to permit someone to purchase an e-ticket and choose when to trigger generation of the ticket itself, with refunds available up to that point. I think that might be a reasonable compromise and easier than bringing in some scheme for validating a ticket before travel.

Maybe this isn't at all easy in practice given the infrastructure that's now been built up though.

But I believe this is how it works with OeBB (Austria), with a refundable ticket becoming non refundable as soon as it's downloaded.

And CFR (Romania) have different refund policies depending on whether the ticket has been generated or not. If the ticket has been generated, you have to wait until after the validity period so they can check if it's been used or not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In principle it would be easy enough to permit someone to purchase an e-ticket and choose when to trigger generation of the ticket itself, with refunds available up to that point. I think that might be a reasonable compromise and easier than bringing in some scheme for validating a ticket before travel.

Maybe this isn't at all easy in practice given the infrastructure that's now been built up though.

But I believe this is how it works with OeBB (Austria), with a refundable ticket becoming non refundable as soon as it's downloaded.

That's kind of a bit like m-tickets, but I would agree it makes sense if there's so much fraud there's no option but to restrict it. Download it when you know you will certainly use it, similarly don't collect paper tickets until you do, then they can't be used and thus should be refundable as there is no possibility of fraud.

I don't know if it's just about fraud, though, or if the railway, like the likes of Ryanair, just wants a bit more income from people not using tickets and having to repurchase.

Other option would be to allow changes of date but not refunds once validity has started. I can't see the fraudsters bothering to keep bouncing tickets forward at a fiver a pop.

 

[AdamWW]

Other option would be to allow changes of date but not refunds once validity has started. I can't see the fraudsters bothering to keep bouncing tickets forward at a fiver a pop.

Indeed. Currently it doesn't really matter as you can just get a refund and buy a new one, and I'd have thought that any sensible evaluation of the impact of changing the rules would take this into account.

That's kind of a bit like m-tickets, but I would agree it makes sense if there's so much fraud there's no option but to restrict it. Download it when you know you will certainly use it, similarly don't collect paper tickets until you do, then they can't be used and thus should be refundable as there is no possibility of fraud.

It's not an idea that I particularly like. But perhaps it's better than what is currently being suggested.

(Though you should still be able to refund even if a ticket has been generated so long as it's before it becomes valid - this is what I think is particularly nasty about the OeBB scheme where it seems that you can't).

 

[185143]

On the change of route excess thing, perhaps it's my ignorance, but I don't know what the process is for doing this online? If it has to be done before boarding, what happens if the ticket office is closed?

What happens if - as I found when I returned from Dover to Dartford recently and wanted to excess the return portion of a 'Not HS1' cheap day return to 'Plus HS1 Not Stratford Not London', the ticket office is open but the member of staff simply isn't capable of working out how to issue the excess, tries to fob you off with a more expensive HS1 Upgrade, then takes so long trying to issue the excess that you would miss your train if you continued to wait?

I think I know the answer, but making this change without providing an easy way to do this before boarding seems extremely retrograde and rather unfair, imho.

I had a good experience doing similar recently.

Purchased a London-Ramsgate "Not High Speed" return. On the way back I ended up using HS1 as the bus I relied on didn't turn up. Don't know if the ticket office was open, didn't really have time to check. And didn't care as I knew I could excess onboard no problem. It was late at night so one of the last trains

Fell asleep on the train, so if there was a ticket check I never saw it. Approached the barrier staff at St. Pancras who opted to just let me out rather than chinging me for the excess. Needless to say I had no complaints!

But if I'd had to get that excess before boarding, which I was of course more than willing to pay, I'd have been royally screwed given I only just made the last tube as it was.

 

[Starmill]

This restriction on being able to refund is going to deter many people from booking in advance unless they are absolutely certain they are going to travel. Just at the same time as they seem to be wanting people to book in advance. It seems perverse.

Indeed. A company vehicle, a hire car on the company account, a taxi, etc are already much more flexible than the train service is because trains are usually only hourly or half-hourly approximately. Making it even more difficult to manage business travel that is going by train through adding silly and unnecessary rules is indeed perverse. Eurostar and SNCF don't impose restrictions like that on their business fares for a good reason - you get a short period of a day or so after departure to cancel. This minimises on fraud while not inconveniencing your high-margin customer.

 

[AdamWW]

Indeed. A company vehicle, a hire car on the company account, a taxi, etc are already much more flexible than the train service is because trains are usually only hourly or half-hourly approximately. Making it even more difficult to manage business travel that is going by train through adding silly and unnecessary rules is indeed perverse. Eurostar and SNCF don't impose restrictions like that on their business fares for a good reason - you get a short period of a day or so after departure to cancel. This minimises on fraud while not inconveniencing your high-margin customer.

I could imagine this being waived for business travel - unless there's evidence that businesses are also taking advantage...

 

[Starmill]

I don't know if it's just about fraud, though, or if the railway, like the likes of Ryanair, just wants a bit more income from people not using tickets and having to repurchase.

Indeed. I generally don't book leisure tickets until late because I know there's a risk of the fee being charged if I do, or not being able to change the ticket if it's an Advance. That's why I don't book Ryanair flights until the last second either, except for the ones that are so cheap that I'm completely comfortable with the value being written off.

That's fine for a Ryanair flight worth £14.99 or whatever. Fine for a £7.50 Chiltern Advance, or whatever. But if this comes in I'll be basically forced to only purchase at the last second, as I don't think it's the first bit reasonable for the company to keep potentially a couple of hundred quid of a (undiscounted rate equivalent) ticket just because I was in their view a few minutes late submitting a refund request. The obvious alternative is to book a £5 NX or Flixbus ticket in advance and then abandon it if choosing to go by train, or alternatively to just take the hit on my lost leisure time and use the bus.

 

[RJ]

There are many issues with this, but the most notable one is that Anytime tickets do not carry a restriction code with which to do this.

I’m sure I've seen Anytime tickets that have them!

 

[Starmill]

I’m sure I've seen Anytime tickets that have them!

You have. They definitely exist. It is however stated elsewhere that breaking one's journey is always allowed with an Anytime ticket so presumably at present it wouldn't have any effect.

 

[MrJeeves]

My go-to example is SailRail via Cairnryan, which offers Anytime tickets with restriction code 1X.

 

[Ralph Ayres]

TfL's problem with BOJ on the central section of the Lizzie is that it replaces a part of the journey which was previously made on the Underground and where BOJ wasn't allowed. Anyone splitting had to pay extra for the second leg of the LU journey, or pay more for a Travelcard. Losing this revenue would for TfL be a perverse outcome of opening a new line, particularly given their ongoing financial woes. I suspect eventually common sense will prevail and while BOJ will not be fully allowed, the current (albeit not sufficiently covered in briefings to gateline staff) arrangement on cross-London tickets of allowing passengers to end short and pay only for the remaining LU leg will be formally extended to journeys via the Lizzie that are not ticketed as cross-London.

Barring BOJ at Liverpool Street is anyway unenforceable, as for many journeys passengers could legitimately be changing to/from trains serving the mainline station. BOJ at Whitechapel is perhaps similar for journeys starting or ending a leg on the ELL on which standard NR BOJ rules I assume should apply.

 

[MrJeeves]

ending a leg on the ELL on which standard NR BOJ rules I assume should apply.

Good luck with station staff when your ticket doesn't open the barrier, though.

That goes for most LO stations.