Forthcoming changes to National Rail Conditions of Travel

[OscarH]

Possible Rovers and Rangers as well? I've had those issued with my name on them (usually in the form Mr [Initial] [Surname]) with the ticket clerk actually taking my name so it prints on the ticket. Season tickets as well? Don't they come with the name on them?

Season tickets usually have a photo card number, the corresponding photo card then has the name - I think that's intended to count as a named ticket yeah

 

[ainsworth74]

Season tickets usually have a photo card number, the corresponding photo card then has the name - I think that's intended to count as a named ticket yeah

Ah yes that rings a bell. It's been so long since I've had an old school paper season ticket (I either don't bother or have grudgingly accepted the s-ticket format when it makes sense to get a weekly season) it's hard to remember what was actually printed on it! But yes I think the intention there would be that those count as named tickets.

 

[TheSel]

Are you referring to the name printed on tickets when collected via Ticket on Departure for some ticket formats at some ticket vending machines?

My view is that this doesn't constitute a ticket being made out in a passenger's name. Indeed, it's entirely optional for ticket issuers to print the ToD customer name and should only be done "if local operational processes require it".

Yes, that's exactly the circumstances.

Thanks for your reply - and indeed to all others who have kindly commented on what seems to be a grey area.

 

[Haywain]

I don't know what tickets made out in the passenger's name they had in mind,

Season tickets are a good example.

 

[AdamWW]

Season tickets are a good example.

Ah I thought they just had the photocard number on, not also the passenger's name.

 

[Haywain]

Ah I thought they just had the photocard number on, not also the passenger's name.

The photocard will have a name which has the same effect.

 

[fandroid]

Hi, we've had a query in Disputes and Prosecutions where someone has received a PFN for a journey between Birmingham New Street and Smethwick Rolfe Street where they doubled back at Smethwick Galton Bridge.

The thing is that Trainline shows this as a valid itinerary for the same fare as a direct train.

Can you point me to the new/revised clause in NORCOT where they say an itinerary by an accredited ticket seller is a valid route.

 

[yorksrob]

I had someone at a ticket office try to tell me that I can't use my zonal metro card with a split ticket unless the train stops at the boundary station.

I now carry a copy of the conditions of travel, just in case.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Hi, we've had a query in Disputes and Prosecutions where someone has received a PFN for a journey between Birmingham New Street and Smethwick Rolfe Street where they doubled back at Smethwick Galton Bridge.

The thing is that Trainline shows this as a valid itinerary for the same fare as a direct train.

Can you point me to the new/revised clause in NORCOT where they say an itinerary by an accredited ticket seller is a valid route.

As per

A copy of the upcoming new version of the NRCoT is attached along with the comparison table.

The following clause

13. The Routes You May Use
13.1 Your Ticket may show that it is valid only on certain train services, such as those of
a particular Train Company, or on trains travelling via a certain route or routes. If no
specific route or Train Company is shown, then (subject to any time restrictions for
the type of fare you have purchased) it will be valid on:
13.1.1 any direct train service between the stations shown on your Ticket; or
13.1.2 as shown on an itinerary presented by the journey planner on
www.nationalrail.co.uk or from a Licensed Retailer in connection with the
purchase of a Ticket and/or including the relevant restrictions applying to
that Ticket.

 

[OscarH]

Hi, we've had a query in Disputes and Prosecutions where someone has received a PFN for a journey between Birmingham New Street and Smethwick Rolfe Street where they doubled back at Smethwick Galton Bridge.

The thing is that Trainline shows this as a valid itinerary for the same fare as a direct train.

Can you point me to the new/revised clause in NORCOT where they say an itinerary by an accredited ticket seller is a valid route.

13.1, 13.1.2 specifically

13.1 Your Ticket may show that it is valid only on certain train services, such as those of a particular Train Company, or on trains travelling via a certain route or routes. If no specific route or Train Company is shown, then (subject to any time restrictions for the type of fare you have purchased) it will be valid on:

13.1.1 any direct train service between the station(s) shown on your Ticket; or

13.1.2 as shown on the itinerary presented by the journey planner on www.nationalrail.co.uk or from a Licensed Retailer in connection with the purchase of a Ticket and/or including the relevant restrictions applying to that Ticket.

 

[Adam Williams]

There is, however, no evidence at this stage that the OP in that thread actually had that itinerary issued from their retailer in connection with their purchase and used that itinerary to make the decision to change at Galton Bridge. The screenshot shows a different return train selected, a direct service from Birmingham New Street.

 

[fandroid]

There is, however, no evidence at this stage that the OP in that thread actually had that itinerary issued from their retailer in connection with their purchase and used that itinerary to make the decision to change at Galton Bridge. The screenshot shows a different return train selected, a direct service from Birmingham New Street.

Indeed it does, but it must be worth a punt for the sake of £50 when the cost difference for the two stations fares is less than £1.

I'd argue that if the passenger used Trainline all the time for the same journey then they'd absorb the information that the doubling back route was acceptable. Given the dominance of Trainline in the online ticket market, and knowing that plenty of passengers regard Trainline as the definitive source of just about all train journey information (more so than any individual TOC or NRE), that clause should apply in general rather than just in particular.

 

[CyrusWuff]

Hi, we've had a query in Disputes and Prosecutions where someone has received a PFN for a journey between Birmingham New Street and Smethwick Rolfe Street where they doubled back at Smethwick Galton Bridge.

The thing is that Trainline shows this as a valid itinerary for the same fare as a direct train.

Chiltern's website also says a ticket to Rolfe Street is valid for travel via Galton Bridge.

National Rail Enquiries, on the other hand, only shows the £3.20 ticket as being valid for some journeys, but it shows others as requiring two tickets, so I have no idea what's going on there.

 

[Adam Williams]

Indeed it does, but it must be worth a punt for the sake of £50 when the cost difference for the two stations fares is less than £1.

I'd argue that if the passenger used Trainline all the time for the same journey then they'd absorb the information that the doubling back route was acceptable. Given the dominance of Trainline in the online ticket market, and knowing that plenty of passengers regard Trainline as the definitive source of just about all train journey information (more so than any individual TOC or NRE), it's unreasonable to penalise them.

You basically want to know whether they did do a search that showed that itinerary & fare combination or not - even if they didn't go on to purchase it. If the answer is yes, and you had that conclusive proof from the retailer, I think it could be a stronger case to appeal. You can bet OP wouldn't have had the foresight to screenshot it.

Unfortunately I suspect the operation at Trainline is so large that that's not a question anyone with access to customer support tickets could or would be willing to answer, because they wouldn't have access to the logs and engineering will be too far away from the customers.

 

[fandroid]

You basically want to know whether they did do a search that showed that itinerary & fare combination or not - even if they didn't go on to purchase it. If the answer is yes, and you had that conclusive proof from the retailer, I think it could be a stronger case to appeal. You can bet OP wouldn't have had the foresight to screenshot it.

Unfortunately I suspect the operation at Trainline is so large that that's not a question anyone with access to customer support tickets could or would be willing to answer, because they wouldn't have access to the logs and engineering will be too far away from the customers.

Thats the ideal, obviously, but showing that Trainline routinely show the doubling back as valid ought to be enough to invalidate the PFN.

I'm as sceptical as anyone as to whether that's enough to overturn the PFN, but in any world outside the railway, it would be a dead cert, so has to be worth an appeal on that basis.

 

[redreni]

Where does it say the passenger must check to see if the route he wishes to use is shown on an itinerary produced by a Licensed Retailer, including the relevant restrictions applying to the ticket he holds, before making the journey?

In other words, why can't a disagreement about whether the route taken is a valid route be resolved by querying a Licensed Retailer's journey planner after the fact?

The supposed requirement for said itinerary to have been issued in connection with the purchase of the Ticket you are using at the time seems to me to require a creative reading of the NRCoT. It is fairly clear the two stipulations ('issued in connection with the purchase of a Ticket' and 'including the relevant restrictions applying to that Ticket') apply to itineraries issued by a licensed retailer. It is entirely ambiguous whether they also apply to itineraries issued by NRE. But it is totally clear, in any event, that you only have to fulfil one of them.

The necessity to generate the itinerary before travel is implicit if you're relying on the former, but no such requirement can be read into this Condition if you're relying on an itinerary issued by a Licensed Retailer that wasn't issued in connection with your ticket purchase, but does show the restrictions applying to the Ticket you hold.

It is a fantastically badly worded rule.

 

[agk2126]

this is a significant reduction in the value of walk-up tickets, particularly highly expensive Anytime ones

Yes. And I would expect this to affect the price! The value of flexible tickets, especially Anytime tickets, includes the ability to cancel for any reason at any time. Hard to imagine the same demand if the refund eligibility changes so dramatically.

 

[AdamWW]

Yes. And I would expect this to affect the price! The value of flexible tickets, especially Anytime tickets, includes the ability to cancel for any reason at any time. Hard to imagine the same demand if the refund eligibility changes so dramatically.

Even if it's limited to the day before travel, the ability to cancel is still a big advantage over advances, in my view.

 

[walkingsophie]

One of the common journeys I do I use a ticket with a roundabout route that is permitted by an easement in the routeing guide that I can't quite get the national rail website to show. I haven't had any issues with using that ticket so far but given the new NRCoT maybe I should change how I do that journey. Do note that I can get the railforums tickets website to show and sell me that specific ticket using multiple via points. To be honest in general I am very unhappy with how 13.1 has been lobotomised.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do note that I can get the railforums tickets website to show and sell me that specific ticket using multiple via points.

Then buy it against that itinerary from the Forum site then it is contractually valid?

Presumably all this removes the de facto validity of a more expensive ticket via a cheaper route? I wonder are the booking offices ready for requests for zero fare excesses?

 

[yorkie]

One of the common journeys I do I use a ticket with a roundabout route that is permitted by an easement in the routeing guide that I can't quite get the national rail website to show. I haven't had any issues with using that ticket so far but given the new NRCoT maybe I should change how I do that journey. Do note that I can get the railforums tickets website to show and sell me that specific ticket using multiple via points. To be honest in general I am very unhappy with how 13.1 has been lobotomised.

If it's very "roundabout", I would simply book it and not draw any attention to it, as it could be withdrawn.

... I wonder are the booking offices ready for requests for zero fare excesses?

Good luck getting ticket office staff to issue any sort of excess, let alone a zero-fare one. However, if they refuse to issue it, then you are arguably entitled to it on board.

 

[Starmill]

The photocard will have a name which has the same effect.

Sometimes seasons on credit card sized tickets did print with the name on them anyway as well.

 

[TUC]

I had someone at a ticket office try to tell me that I can't use my zonal metro card with a split ticket unless the train stops at the boundary station.

I now carry a copy of the conditions of travel, just in case.

I think the problem may come with West Yorkshire Metro's Cross-boundary Guide (and yes, I recognise that 'guide' gives it no legal status, but still may be the first reference point for staff) https://www.wymetro.com/media/2280/1910-cross-boundary-leaflet-22318-final.pdf

It states: 'Please note fares may be combined only to and from a station at which your train makes a scheduled stop.

If you have two or more zonal tickets in combination or one is a rail season ticket and one is not, the train does not need to stop at the station where they change from one ticket to another.'

That does not include using a zonal ticket with a non-season/other zonal ticket.

However, Metro's guide is dated 2018, and does not appear to have been updated since then to reflect changes in the NRCoT. Its wording appears to reflect NRCoT provisions from that era.

 

[yorksrob]

I think the problem may come with West Yorkshire Metro's Cross-boundary Guide (and yes, I recognise that 'guide' gives it no legal status, but still may be the first reference point for staff) https://www.wymetro.com/media/2280/1910-cross-boundary-leaflet-22318-final.pdf

It states: 'Please note fares may be combined only to and from a station at which your train makes a scheduled stop.

If you have two or more zonal tickets in combination or one is a rail season ticket and one is not, the train does not need to stop at the station where they change from one ticket to another.'

That does not include using a zonal ticket with a non-season/other zonal ticket.

However, Metro's guide is dated 2018, and does not appear to have been updated since then to reflect changes in the NRCoT. It's wording appears to reflect NRCoT provisions from that era.

That is interesting. Perhaps a short email to Metro's required.

But as you say, staff perhaps need to be reminded that the conditions of travel outrank company and local publications anyway.

 

[TUC]

That is interesting. Perhaps a short email to Metro's required.

But as you say, staff perhaps need to be reminded that the conditions of travel outrank company and local publications anyway.

I emailed Metro about this several years ago. Still not updated.

 

[MikeWM]

Sometimes seasons on credit card sized tickets did print with the name on them anyway as well.

Still do - my Gold Card (on CCST) has an 'Issued To:' field at the top in the format 'Mr X Surname'.

 

[Wolfie]

That is interesting. Perhaps a short email to Metro's required.

But as you say, staff perhaps need to be reminded that the conditions of travel outrank company and local publications anyway.

Ah, the perennial TfL issue strikes elsewhere...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ah, the perennial TfL issue strikes elsewhere...

Is it Metro that used to have the explicit condition on their tickets that *explicitly* excluded their use in non stop splits? One of the PTEs did, I think it was that one.

 

[yorksrob]

Is it Metro that used to have the explicit condition on their tickets that *explicitly* excluded their use in non stop splits? One of the PTEs did, I think it was that one.

I'm not sure about that, but I know it wasn't permitted until quite recently.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Is it Metro that used to have the explicit condition on their tickets that *explicitly* excluded their use in non stop splits? One of the PTEs did, I think it was that one.

It was, and they still do...

Condition 4.6 of the M-Card Terms state: "4.6. If your train journey destination is outside of West Yorkshire, You need to buy a ticket for the onward journey to your destination from the last station in West Yorkshire where your train stops. Failure to buy a ticket before boarding may result in a penalty fare from the train operator." (https://www.m-card.co.uk/terms-of-use/) These terms were last updated May 2025, so would not necessarily be considered 'out of date'.

NRCOT says "14.1 Some Tickets specifically exclude their use in conjunction with other Tickets. This will be made clear in the terms and conditions when buying such Tickets."

And also says "14.3 Unless Condition 14.1 applies,.....then the train does not need to Call at that station for your combination to be valid." in relation to splits.

I'm not sure about that, but I know it wasn't permitted until quite recently.

So, it could possibly argued that the ticket office is correct, and an MCard is excluded on non-stop splits as it is specifically excluded in 4.6 of the M Card Terms, and NRCOT 14.1 allows it to be excluded from 14.3 by virtue of the terms and conditions of that ticket.