Walking across Bicester: ticket validity

[Stargull]

I need to travel from Oxford to Leamington Spa early on Sunday, arriving before 9.45. (I can also start and return from Oxford Parkway)

No direct service runs that early, but I think I could go to Bicester Village, then walk to Bicester North and get a train from there. Do I need two separate tickets? And if I am returning home later that day, direct, what should I buy? I have a network railcard.

All help gratefully received!

 

[jfollows]

Oxford-Leamington is valid acording to map SM at https://rgpp.iblocks.co.uk/maps - only direct. I am not aware of an easement in the routeing guide which would allow the route you want.
There is

700913

Circuitous Route

Customers travelling to Kings Sutton or Banbury from or via Oxford may not travel via Haddenham & Thame Parkway. This circuitous route easement applies in both directions.

which is a “negative easement”.

 

[CyrusWuff]

An Oxford - Leamington Spa ticket is only valid on the direct route via Banbury, also Network Railcards aren't valid between Banbury and Leamington Spa.

Also be aware that there is no fixed link defined in timetable data for Bicester North - Bicester Village, so journey planners won't produce an itinerary via that route.

You'd probably need to buy something like: Oxford - Bicester Village, Bicester North - Banbury and Banbury - Oxford Singles with the Network Railcard discount, plus an undiscounted Banbury - Leamington Spa Return.

Someone may be able to come up with a better option that I've missed, however.

 

[MikeWh]

According to National Rail, the Off-peak return is valid both direct and via Haddenham & Thame Parkway. Break of journey is permitted, so walking between the Bicester stations should be fine.

 

[JB_B]

According to National Rail, the Off-peak return is valid both direct and via Haddenham & Thame Parkway. Break of journey is permitted, so walking between the Bicester stations should be fine.

That's right. The link on map SM between Oxford and Banbury Group covers the direct route and also via Haddenham ( as that doesn't pass through any other routeing point.)

Easement 700913 doesn't apply for Oxford-Leamington Journeys as the destination isn't Banbury or Kings Sutton. ( This would of course be a problem if the OP wanted to use their network card for part of the journey and so would be splitting at Banbury.)

 

[Stargull]

Thanks all. So a normal, non railcard Oxford - Leam ticket will work, even if I couldn’t have actually gone via H&T parkway that early? Advice much appreciated

 

[JB_B]

Thanks all. So a normal, non railcard Oxford - Leam ticket will work, even if I couldn’t have actually gone via H&T parkway that early? Advice much appreciated

I think it should be. I would recommend buying your ticket with an itinerary from the forum site ( turning off splits, specifying via Haddenham for the outward leg and buying a ticket that allows break of journey - e.g. https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=OXF&dest=LMS&rte=267&tkt=SVR .)

That will provide evidence that it is indeed a permitted route and you should be able to get support from the retailer if you're challenged.

 

[CyrusWuff]

Having done a bit more digging, this appears to be yet another SilverRail issue rather than something more widespread.

Trainline (among other retailers) won't offer a through ticket for the journey and Trainsplit offers a split at Banbury, ignoring easement 700913:

Customers travelling to Kings Sutton or Banbury from or via Oxford may not travel via Haddenham & Thame Parkway. This circuitous route easement applies in both directions.

 

[Adam Williams]

Trainline (among other retailers) won't offer a through ticket for the journey and Trainsplit offers a split at Banbury, ignoring easement 700913:

Interesting.. we've asked for this to be looked at.

 

[JB_B]

Having done a bit more digging, this appears to be yet another SilverRail issue rather than something more widespread.

Trainline (among other retailers) won't offer a through ticket for the journey and Trainsplit offers a split at Banbury, ignoring easement 700913:

Trainsplit and Silverrail (I tried Chiltern) will both offer an Oxford-Leamington off peak single via Haddenham. ( For Trainsplit, that's with splits turned off - offering the split at Banbury definitely looks iffy - as noted in above .)

Is there a reason why you think it isn't valid via Haddenham?

 

[CyrusWuff]

Trainsplit and Silverrail (I tried Chiltern) will both offer an Oxford-Leamington off peak single via Haddenham. ( For Trainsplit, that's with splits turned off - offering the split at Banbury definitely looks iffy - as noted in above .)

Is there a reason why you think it isn't valid via Haddenham?

It fails all three routeing guide tests:

• It's not the shortest route, or within three miles of the shortest route. Oxford - Banbury - Leamington Spa is 40.75 miles, whereas Oxford - Haddenham & Thame Parkway - Leamington Spa is 65.75 miles.
• It's not a direct train.
• It's not a mapped route. The relevant map is SM, which doesn't include the link between Oxford and Princes Risborough.

And there's no relevant easement that permits travel via Haddenham & Thame Parkway.

Fujitsu Journey Planner, as expected, shows a through ticket as being off route at Oxford Parkway.

 

[JB_B]

It fails all three routeing guide tests:

• It's not the shortest route, or within three miles of the shortest route. Oxford - Banbury - Leamington Spa is 40.75 miles, whereas Oxford - Haddenham & Thame Parkway - Leamington Spa is 65.75 miles.
• It's not a direct train.
• It's not a mapped route. The relevant map is SM, which doesn't include the link between Oxford and Princes Risborough.

And there's no relevant easement that permits travel via Haddenham & Thame Parkway.

Fujitsu Journey Planner, as expected, shows a through ticket as being off route at Oxford Parkway.

Perhaps I'm missing something. Agreed that it's not the shortest route nor a direct train.

However, as far as I can see it is a mapped route on SM.

The journey via Haddenham doesn't pass through Princes Risborough so the absence of a map link between the two is irrelevant.

The journey goes Oxford->Oxford Parkway->Bicester Village->Haddenham and Thame Parkway -> Bicester North->King's Sutton->Banbury.

Between Oxford and Banbury Group no other routeing point is passed through so it's covered by the Oxford-Banbury Group link on SM.

 

[MrJeeves]

Between Oxford and Banbury Group no other routeing point is passed through so it's covered by the Oxford-Banbury Group link on SM.

This is correct. It is a mapped route, but the easement mentioned prior should be preventing it as circuitous.

 

[JB_B]

This is correct. It is a mapped route, but the easement mentioned prior should be preventing it as circuitous.

But not if the destination is Leamington Spa, surely?

 

[MrJeeves]

I've changed my mind, regardless of the point regarding the easement.

I hadn't realised, but Oxford Parkway is an interchange node, which means that the map SM would need to include it with links Oxford - Oxford Parkway - Banbury for this to be a permitted route.

Only map GC contains this interchange node, which only links Oxford to Princes Risborough routeing point via this chord, meaning a mapped route can actually never be traced from Oxford to Banbury via Haddenham & Thame Parkway.



Personally, I can't see how a journey planner would permit this journey to be made, given services are timetabled through Oxford Parkway, which means that it must be considered as a node for tracing routes.

 

[JB_B]

I've changed my mind, regardless of the point regarding the easement.

I hadn't realised, but Oxford Parkway is an interchange node, which means that the map SM would need to include it with links Oxford - Oxford Parkway - Banbury for this to be a permitted route.

Only map GC contains this interchange node, which only links Oxford to Princes Risborough routeing point via this chord, meaning a mapped route can actually never be traced from Oxford to Banbury via Haddenham & Thame Parkway.

View attachment 205449

Personally, I can't see how a journey planner would permit this journey to be made, given services are timetabled through Oxford Parkway, which means that it must be considered as a node for tracing routes.

Thanks - that's an interesting point. When I last discussed this with a journey planner developer ( a long time ago!) the consensus seemed to be that only routeing points/group members passed through needed to be considered - I'll need to have a further think! If the OP follows the advice in post #7 they will at least have the assurance of a route validated by an accredited journey planner.

 

[Watershed]

I've changed my mind, regardless of the point regarding the easement.

I hadn't realised, but Oxford Parkway is an interchange node, which means that the map SM would need to include it with links Oxford - Oxford Parkway - Banbury for this to be a permitted route.

Only map GC contains this interchange node, which only links Oxford to Princes Risborough routeing point via this chord, meaning a mapped route can actually never be traced from Oxford to Banbury via Haddenham & Thame Parkway.

View attachment 205449

Personally, I can't see how a journey planner would permit this journey to be made, given services are timetabled through Oxford Parkway, which means that it must be considered as a node for tracing routes.

Interchange nodes aren’t referred to in the public facing Routeing Guide so I don’t think the absence of the Oxford Parkway node on map SM (between Oxford and Banbury) has any impact on the contractual validity of the map for travel via Haddenham to destinations beyond Banbury.

 

[Stargull]

I’m not following the technicalities here (though I am interested!). In case it’s useful, it’s perhaps worth saying the national rail planner and all (?) ticket apps I try have for many years offered a route via H&TP first thing on a Sunday - currently 8.12 from Oxford, arriving H&TP 8.42 and then leaving on the 9.16. I’ve used this when the first crosscountry is cancelled or not running. So I assume the route is considered valid….

 

[AlterEgo]

Interchange nodes aren’t referred to in the public facing Routeing Guide so I don’t think the absence of the Oxford Parkway node on map SM (between Oxford and Banbury) has any impact on the contractual validity of the map for travel via Haddenham to destinations beyond Banbury.

What contractual validity has the map now the Routeing Guide has been relegated to a non-contractual information box in the NRCoT?

 

[JB_B]

I’m not following the technicalities here (though I am interested!). In case it’s useful, it’s perhaps worth saying the national rail planner and all (?) ticket apps I try have for many years offered a route via H&TP first thing on a Sunday - currently 8.12 from Oxford, arriving H&TP 8.42 and then leaving on the 9.16. I’ve used this when the first crosscountry is cancelled or not running. So I assume the route is considered valid….

I would say yes. You can rely on the itinerary to show it’s valid via Haddenham and you can then rely on the properties of the ticket (off peak return Oxford-Leamington Spa) which:-

(a) does not require you to travel on a specific train or trains;

(b) allows you to travel any time on a Sunday; and

(c) allows you to break and restart your journey.

I would be interested to hear the views of others.

 

[MrJeeves]

When I last discussed this with a journey planner developer ( a long time ago!) the consensus seemed to be that only routeing points/group members passed through needed to be considered - I'll need to have a further think!

From RSPS5047:

6.1.3.4 Routeing points and Interchanges are collectively known as nodes.
[...]
7.3.5.2 The nodes in the Map Journey are identified as follows:
• any station in the Map Journey which is a node
[...]
7.3.5.3 The Map Journey links are identified as the links between each pair of consecutive nodes.
7.3.5.4 The Map Journey is valid if the Map Journey links follow any of the permitted routes between the ORP and the DRP.

 

[Watershed]

What contractual validity has the map now the Routeing Guide has been relegated to a non-contractual information box in the NRCoT?

They claim the information boxes are non-contractual but at the same time they are the only place that the actual implementation of the new refund rules is stated (i.e. that you can't get a refund from midnight on the day of departure, even if the ticket is only valid from say 9:30).

Many tickets would have no validity at all if not for the Routeing Guide and it is advertised as the way to determine permitted routes on the NRE website so clearly it has to be considered as part of the contract.