MG11 for journey with itinerary

[Starmill]

I still have not recieved any contact from this solicitor

Well, it is the weekend currently.

 

[walkingsophie]

Damn not even acknowledging that my ticket was valid. At least I managed to get to a human in the end and they did cancel the report for prosecution.

 

[bakerstreet]

it’s disappointing that you can be warned in this way for completely complying with the conditions of travel. Great they have dropped the (non) case.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is probably as good an outcome as is possible.

Has the anomaly been "fixed" yet? It would be fairly easy to stick a negative easement in the Routeing Guide to prevent it coming up as an itinerary (routeing the tickets Not London would take longer).

 

[MotCO]

They've completely missed the point! The OP had a valid ticket due to SWR's anomolous ticketing, and had a valid ticket before boarding. Threatening to not be so 'lenient' next time despite having a valid ticket is ridiculous.

How can the OP continue to use this ticket without being hassled? Can she get a formal letter from SWR confirming the ticket and itinerary is valid to show to any gateline officer?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How can the OP continue to use this ticket without being hassled? Can she get a formal letter from SWR confirming the ticket and itinerary is valid to show to any gateline officer?

As the ticket is not supposed to be valid for that (but is) I would suggest that there is not a method by which that is possible, and it's likely if it hasn't been "fixed" already it will be at some point soon. It is valid, but only on a technicality, it is not intended to be valid.

How much is the saving compared to the cheapest way of doing it "properly" (including e.g. contactless)?

 

[walkingsophie]

They've completely missed the point! The OP had a valid ticket due to SWR's anomolous ticketing, and had a valid ticket before boarding. Threatening to not be so 'lenient' next time despite having a valid ticket is ridiculous.

How can the OP continue to use this ticket without being hassled? Can she get a formal letter from SWR confirming the ticket and itinerary is valid to show to any gateline officer?

This is also what I am thinking about, I want assurance that SWR RPOs are aware of NRCoT 13.1.2

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Apr 2026 ==

How much is the saving compared to the cheapest way of doing it "properly" (including e.g. contactless)?

£3.85 per return

 

[z444z]

Damn not even acknowledging that my ticket was valid. At least I managed to get to a human in the end and they did cancel the report for prosecution.

Hilarious.

 

[Swedenorer]

This is probably as good an outcome as is possible.

Has the anomaly been "fixed" yet? It would be fairly easy to stick a negative easement in the Routeing Guide to prevent it coming up as an itinerary (routeing the tickets Not London would take longer).

No. It is still available from the Forum site but only via and changing at Teddington as far as I can see. But if the OP continues to use this fare I fear they will have to accept that any RPI at Waterloo is going to look at it askance - unless they have been advised/instructed not to.

 

[Bletchleyite]

£3.85 per return

It's completely up to you of course but I'm not sure I would see this as worth the stress even if you are fully within your rights to use it until the loophole is closed. One does need to choose one's battles.

 

[walkingsophie]

unless they have been advised/instructed not to.

I would love to get to a point where the RPIs just acknowledge booked itineraries, but that simple task seems like too much to ask of SWR

 

[Tetchytyke]

They've completely missed the point! The OP had a valid ticket due to SWR's anomolous ticketing, and had a valid ticket before boarding. Threatening to not be so 'lenient' next time despite having a valid ticket is ridiculous.

That's just standard face-saving, "we didn't make a mistake we're just being kind on this occasion." Take it as a win and move on. The badly-paid and barely-literate admin staff firing out the emails won't have a scooby about the technicalities of any of it.

If I were feeling mischievous I'd put in a DSAR (data subject access request) to see what SWR staff were saying in the background.

It's completely up to you of course but I'm not sure I would see this as worth the stress

It's a big percentage saving. But yes, when using good value tickets you can (regrettably) expect a certain amount of friction.

 

[AlterEgo]

Damn not even acknowledging that my ticket was valid. At least I managed to get to a human in the end and they did cancel the report for prosecution.

Warned after using a valid ticket. They really are dreadful, this is so arrogant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Warned after using a valid ticket. They really are dreadful, this is so arrogant.

Incompetent would be more my view. Most prosecutions departments (including external ones like Transport Investigations Ltd) appear to be grossly incompetent. Long gone are the days when this MG11 would have got there, been reviewed for 5 minutes and thrown in the bin (or forwarded to the pricing team to get the anomaly fixed ASAP).

 

[SuspectUsual]

Interesting phrasing in that letter, whether by accident or design: "in breach of guidelines" but asked to comply with "rules and guidelines". Its as if they know deep down the OP is in the right (for now)

 

[Ailsa_Craig]

Interesting phrasing in that letter, whether by accident or design: "in breach of guidelines" but asked to comply with "rules and guidelines". Its as if they know deep down the OP is in the right (for now)

It looks like a realisation that they were on shaky ground and backing off without admitting that they were making up the rules as they were going along. A victory, personally for the sake of £3.85 I would just get "normal" tickets from now on, but your call of course.

 

[z444z]

If I were feeling mischievous I'd put in a DSAR (data subject access request) to see what SWR staff were saying in the background.

Would be very interested to see this!

 

[walkingsophie]

With the DSAR, which of these does the information I want fall under?

 

[z444z]

With the DSAR, which of these does the information I want fall under?
View attachment 202280

I would say other. Describe the information you want, which is anything they have relating to you, the incident involving you on x date at x location, or the investigation following that incident

 

[SuspectUsual]

I would say other. Describe the information you want, which is anything they have relating to you, the incident involving you on x date at x location, or the investigation following that incident

I would add all internal communication relating to the incident as they could otherwise decide certain stuff exists but doesn’t relate to an “investigation”

 

[z444z]

I would add all internal communication relating to the incident as they could otherwise decide certain stuff exists but doesn’t relate to an “investigation”

Good point. Could potentially even ask for communications regarding use of this ticket in case they tried to hide that kind of thing on the basis that it doesn’t explicitly mention the OP or their incident.

 

[flitwickbeds]

It looks like a realisation that they were on shaky ground and backing off without admitting that they were making up the rules as they were going along. A victory, personally for the sake of £3.85 I would just get "normal" tickets from now on, but your call of course.

Depends how often the OP travels.

If it's 5 days a week, that's a saving of roughly £1k a year.

 

[Swedenorer]

It's completely up to you of course but I'm not sure I would see this as worth the stress even if you are fully within your rights to use it until the loophole is closed. One does need to choose one's battles.

I agree. Maybe frontline staff get it wrong. But frankly it seems to me that when a pax arrives with a ticket , and let's be honest with a route that is on the face of it ambitious for the journey concerned, and flashes an itinerary from a reseller that an RPI may never of heard obviously the front line staff will pass it up the chain. Maybe they've even been told to. It's not their fault that after several weeks of this the loophole has not been closed.

 

[Blaine]

it seems to me that when a pax arrives with a ticket , and let's be honest with a route that is on the face of it ambitious for the journey concerned, and flashes an itinerary from a reseller that an RPI may never of heard obviously the front line staff will pass it up the chain.

Considering the number of people tailgating, travelling without railcards, on kid tickets, with unscanned short tickets etc. I'd personally be asking gateline staff to give paying customers the benefit of the doubt when turning up with a printed itinerary as well as a ticket so they could focus on the others, but if not, then the staff need to be trained appropriately and the ToC compensating and apologising when they get it wrong.

 

[AlterEgo]

I agree. Maybe frontline staff get it wrong. But frankly it seems to me that when a pax arrives with a ticket , and let's be honest with a route that is on the face of it ambitious for the journey concerned, and flashes an itinerary from a reseller that an RPI may never of heard obviously the front line staff will pass it up the chain. Maybe they've even been told to. It's not their fault that after several weeks of this the loophole has not been closed.

The RPI is entitled - and indeed probably ought to - complete the TIR. That is how loopholes get closed and that is how tickets which don't look right are identified.

But they need to issue a nil fare excess for the remainder of the journey and they are not to accuse the customer of overtravelling. That was an objectionable and unreasonable act; the customer had an itinerary from an accredited site sold against that ticket.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But frankly it seems to me that when a pax arrives with a ticket , and let's be honest with a route that is on the face of it ambitious for the journey concerned, and flashes an itinerary from a reseller that an RPI may never of heard obviously the front line staff will pass it up the chain. Maybe they've even been told to.

The RPI didn’t do anything wrong in referring the matter up the chain, although how they handled it is questionable. The real issue is what happened once it had been passed up the chain.

 

[z444z]

The RPI didn’t do anything wrong in referring the matter up the chain, although how they handled it is questionable. The real issue is what happened once it had been passed up the chain.

Issuing a report for prosecution when any competent RPI or indeed anyone who’s at all up to date on the NRCoT would know the passenger has done absolutely nothing wrong is in my view doing something wrong. Sure, with the limited knowledge they had I’m sure they did the best they could but having such limited knowledge is in itself a problem.

 

[AlterEgo]

Issuing a report for prosecution when any competent RPI or indeed anyone who’s at all up to date on the NRCoT would know the passenger has done absolutely nothing wrong is in my view doing something wrong. Sure, with the limited knowledge they had I’m sure they did the best they could but having such limited knowledge is in itself a problem.

And naturally the response from the train company *after it has investigated* is insincere and accusatory "yeah we will let you off this time, but be warned". There is not even an acknowledgement that the customer and a forum of internet anons is right, and they, the professionals, have got it wrong (many such cases).

But if you make even a small error like forgetting to renew your railcard or overcarry yourself, you need to write an obsequious missive to these people, prostrating yourself and apologising for the error of your ways, asking for mercy and maybe having to pay a large sum of money. It's vile.

Honestly these people can do one. At the very least they're bad at their jobs, at worst they're arrogant and see all passengers as dishonest or grifting.

Pathetic.

 

[flitwickbeds]

And naturally the response from the train company *after it has investigated* is insincere and accusatory "yeah we will let you off this time, but be warned". There is not even an acknowledgement that the customer and a forum of internet anons is right, and they, the professionals, have got it wrong (many such cases).

But if you make even a small error like forgetting to renew your railcard or overcarry yourself, you need to write an obsequious missive to these people, prostrating yourself and apologising for the error of your ways, asking for mercy and maybe having to pay a large sum of money. It's vile.

Honestly these people can do one. At the very least they're bad at their jobs, at worst they're arrogant and see all passengers as dishonest or grifting.

Pathetic.

Where is the 'like' button?

 

[MotCO]

Where is the 'like' button?

I'm looking for it, too