Cross-operator ticket acceptance announced (excluding East Midlands Railway, OAOs) when services are cancelled

[positron]

If London Paddington is entirely closed, it seems unreasonable that the test is does a journey planner suggest the journey. Because no journey planner is going to tell you to go to Waterloo when you have a from Paddington search. But going via Waterloo is obviously a reasonable route to the south west for any common sense understanding of the word.

 

[noddingdonkey]

It feels like Merseyrail shouldn't be too big a problem to bring on board politically, with Burnham regularly talking about his good mate Steve Rotherham the Merseyside Mayor

 

[Watershed]

If London Paddington is entirely closed, it seems unreasonable that the test is does a journey planner suggest the journey. Because no journey planner is going to tell you to go to Waterloo when you have a from Paddington search. But going via Waterloo is obviously a reasonable route to the south west for any common sense understanding of the word.

Plenty of journey planners will do just that as the Tube links between major terminals are in the data feeds. The same as how if you searched from Marylebone to Manchester for example, it'd suggest taking the Tube to Euston as the first leg.

 

[modernrail]

We know there's more detail to the policy than is in this press release because additional details have been been briefed internally. Hence we know how staff have been told to assess if an alternative route is reasonable. (Presumably for the purposes of this test, no via or avoid points may be specified when searching, though this isn't stated.)

This creates a position where a passenger may think an alternative route is reasonable and take it on the strength of this announcement, having been provided with no way to check if the railway agrees an alternative route is reasonable, but may then be dealt with by staff for being off route because they can't prove that, at the time they decided to divert, journey planners were offering the route (with or without fares).

I don't think the journey planner+based test of reasonableness is bad, necessarily, but it's bad that it's supposed to be a secret.

I am sure some will feel the muscle memory of wanting to assess to death the reasonableness of a passengers alternative route, but there is absolutely no need to do so.

If the passenger has taken any sort of reasonable route to try and work around something that has been delivered to it by the train company that will be reasonable.

If they have taken a mad, circuitous route due to any combination of poor online or on station or non-existent information or their own knowledge, having been thrown off by the cancellation, I am sure the guard involved will do exactly what they should do and help the passenger understand there was a better route that could have got them around the cancellation more quickly, and to their destination closer to the time they were hoping to be there - so they are less inconvenienced if faced with the same situation again.

 

[Gareth1990]

Why is this voluntary, why aren’t companies being forced to accept tickets?

 

[redreni]

Why would you disallow avoid points? If you know that the disruption is caused by a signal failure in a particular area it seems eminently reasonable to add an avoid condition for that area.

Because the whole point of using a journey planner is to establish if it is necessary to avoid the usual route, I suppose. If you search for immediate travel and everything is cancelled or severely delayed on what is usually the quickest route, it will look for alternatives to see if any of them are faster, and if they are it will turn them up.

As I say, nothing is specified with respect to via or avoid points. If via points were allowed it would lead to absurdity (e.g. London to Reading via Glasgow). Judicious use of avoid points could also lead to some pretty interesting routeing, particularly if you use a journey planner that allows multiple avoid points.

 

[RailExplorer]

Isn't Germany's DB policy something similar? If any one of your booked trains becomes cancelled and you had an advance purchased ticket, your ticket becomes available to use at any point on that day to get you from A to B? So pretty much a standard single. That's what I understood anyway, not that I've ever had to use it.

As for guards policing this. That's simple. All the customer has to say is which train was cancelled, and the guard can verify that on any real time train system whether that was the case. If shown as cancelled, the ticket is available for any sensible routing between A and B with all restrictions lifted (shame it excludes a few TOCs though as that's just added confusion).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't Germany's DB policy something similar? If your booked trains are cancelled and you had an advance purchased ticket, your ticket becomes available to use at any point on that day to get you from A to B? So pretty much a standard single. That's what I understood anyway, not that I've ever had to use it.

It is yes. DB's policy is better in a few ways - first of all it's any time that day, not just a 4 hour window. Secondly it also applies in the event of a missed connection and also a posted delay above a certain amount (I think an hour).

 

[Djgr]

I don't think it's unreasonable for them to say that all TOCs receiving English subsidy money (which would include TfW but not the open access operators) must comply for any journey where at least one point is in England. Merseyrail is a bit of an awkward one, but if it receives any DfT funding it would count, and I'd include Network Rail subsidy in that.

What is done within Scotland and Wales is for them, though it's so de minimis that they might as well agree it. The vast majority of services within Scotland are ScotRail and the vast majority within Wales are TfW.

As I said it is just not workable for certain TOCs to opt out.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Sep 2026 ==

It feels like Merseyrail shouldn't be too big a problem to bring on board politically, with Burnham regularly talking about his good mate Steve Rotherham the Merseyside Mayor

Whist this is essentially true, Steve must get so fed up with his surname being mixed up with a town in Yorkshire.

 

[noddingdonkey]

Because the whole point of using a journey planner is to establish if it is necessary to avoid the usual route, I suppose. If you search for immediate travel and everything is cancelled or severely delayed on what is usually the quickest route, it will look for alternatives to see if any of them are faster, and if they are it will turn them up.

As I say, nothing is specified with respect to via or avoid points. If via points were allowed it would lead to absurdity (e.g. London to Reading via Glasgow). Judicious use of avoid points could also lead to some pretty interesting routeing, particularly if you use a journey planner that allows multiple avoid points.

Doesn't having to use a journey planner negate the whole idea of any reasonable route? If there is a route which wouldn't be allowed under the normal routing manual but recovers the passenger's journey it should be allowed under a plain English definition of reasonable. For example a double back or ignoring a negative easement.

 

[embers25]

Certainly, whilst clearly not perfect, this is a marked improvement on what most of us currently have and at least means travellers don't need to fear as much the quick fixes often employed by operators (like curtailing at Basingstoke or Birmingham or GWR's favourite of curtailing at Pompey-Cardiff at Westbury as they change crew there and its as lovely a place to be dumped off a train as Yeovil Junction is on SWR).

The key will be how those jobsworth guard and barrier staff out there who refuse travel (GWR Paddington etc) will be dealt with as there is sure to be friction and wrong penalty fares are almost guaranteed.

Annoyingly it won't cover the massive inconvenience being caused to passengers by the raft of temp timetables and I'd expect to see temp timetables being used much more in future to get around effectively open ticket acceptance. But a win is a win along the road to a common sense railway.

Which journey planner ahs to be used as the Nat Rail one often gives very different journeys to others and actually each one seems to vary.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Steve must get so fed up with his surname being mixed up with a town in Yorkshire.

Especially so as his surname's spelt 'Rotheram' (not 'Rotherham').

 

[Benjwri]

If London Paddington is entirely closed, it seems unreasonable that the test is does a journey planner suggest the journey. Because no journey planner is going to tell you to go to Waterloo when you have a from Paddington search. But going via Waterloo is obviously a reasonable route to the south west for any common sense understanding of the word.

I do think situations such as this are in at least some ways over exaggerating. The briefs are clear there will continue to be ticket acceptance advertised in disruption. If Paddington is closed there will be ticket acceptance.

 

[redreni]

Doesn't having to use a journey planner negate the whole idea of any reasonable route? If there is a route which wouldn't be allowed under the normal routing manual but recovers the passenger's journey it should be allowed under a plain English definition of reasonable. For example a double back or ignoring a negative easement.

Yes and journey planners should find it whether it's a valid route on a through ticket or not. Any route can be valid with the right combination of tickets, or the journey planner can simply return the result and say "no fares found", either of which would satisfy the test.

It's not meant to check anything to do with fares or routeuing, merely whether a route is fast enough to be suggested by a journey planner, in light of whatever disruption there may be.

 

[Djgr]

Especially so as his surname's spelt 'Rotheram' (not 'Rotherham').

And to continue in the quest for accuracy, he is Mayor of Liverpool City Region, which has different geographical boundaries to anything with "Mersey" plonked in front of it.

 

[mickey]

Logically there is a sensible way you could bring OAOs into the scheme - if they agree to accept tickets, any scanned on their service would have revenue reassigned to their account. Obviously it would work v-v too. That way they wouldn’t be left out of pocket - slight issue with paper tickets, but given how few of those are left perhaps that can safely be ignored. I doubt behind-the-scenes tech is capable of this today though.

 

[lowe1409]

Because the whole point of using a journey planner is to establish if it is necessary to avoid the usual route, I suppose. If you search for immediate travel and everything is cancelled or severely delayed on what is usually the quickest route, it will look for alternatives to see if any of them are faster, and if they are it will turn them up.

As I say, nothing is specified with respect to via or avoid points. If via points were allowed it would lead to absurdity (e.g. London to Reading via Glasgow). Judicious use of avoid points could also lead to some pretty interesting routeing, particularly if you use a journey planner that allows multiple avoid points.

What journey planners do you use? I know a lot usually show a whole journey as canceled, even if it's just a single connection. I.e Manchester airport to Sheffield. Passenger wishes to travel on the xx.17 to connect at Piccadilly to the xx.43 EMR service. However the xx.17 gets canceled. No planner I know of recommends instead traveling via the xx.04 or xx.07 to Piccadilly instead to make the connection, and instead will just put you on the next booked connection which is xx.48

The other issue is where staff are unsure when a service will be starting up again. A particular station might have services supposedly resuming in an hour, but if a staff member has advised you that train is also likely to be canceled, then would it not be advisable to use an avoid point to avoid the selected area? I know I use avoids all the time to find passengers alternate routes during disruption or unconventional routes with a couple extra changes that has the same arrival time. For example, direct Manchester to York service is cancelled, however putting an 'avoid Huddersfield' shows a change at Sheffield/Doncaster which is quicker than waiting for the next direct service.

Final point, via/avoid points can also generate longer itensries, but during major disruption, if you can avoid major over crowding, that's a win on safety grounds. If a passenger wants to take a longer but more comfortable route, the railway should let them. It prevents crushloading by allowing more services to bare the load.

 

[A S Leib]

Secondly it also applies in the event of a missed connection and also a posted delay above a certain amount (I think an hour).

I've had tickets changed from Sparpreis (advance) to Flexpreis (anytime) once the delay got to 20 minutes. I wonder how the split between m- / in-app, e- (PDF) and physical tickets compares to the UK, as it's clearest to show that it's valid on any service that day in the first case.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I've had tickets changed from Sparpreis to Flexpreis once the delay got to 20 minutes.

What does that actually mean?

 

[A S Leib]

What does that actually mean?

Advance to anytime, effectively.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Advance to anytime, effectively.

Yep. In certain circumstances a DB "Advance" fare automatically becomes an "Anytime". "Flexpreis" is basically an Anytime Single. DB doesn't have off peak walk up fares and only sort of has had, though the Anytime equivalent varies by day of the week.

In this case it does as well, but only in a 4 hour (+/-2 hour) departure window from the point of encountering a cancellation.

 

[styles]

Logically there is a sensible way you could bring OAOs into the scheme - if they agree to accept tickets, any scanned on their service would have revenue reassigned to their account. Obviously it would work v-v too. That way they wouldn’t be left out of pocket - slight issue with paper tickets, but given how few of those are left perhaps that can safely be ignored. I doubt behind-the-scenes tech is capable of this today though.

Just on the open access operators point, they are currently:

• Eurostar
• Grand Central
• Heathrow Express
• Hull Trains
• Lumo

It's a long time since I've taken Heathrow Express but certainly for the other operators I find they are very strict about checking tickets. Each paper ticket has a unique ticket number on it, and even many of the new 'credit card style tickets' have QR codes on them so tracking this stuff isn't that hard really, especially the open access operators who don't really do short-leg journeys where it was be insanely difficult to get a ticket inspector down the train between station stops. At a push, something like Lumo's Newcastle (barriers) to Morpeth (no barriers) is 13-14 minutes and catching every person boarding to check their ticket may be an issue but that's about it really.

 

[Tester]

Yep. In certain circumstances a DB "Advance" fare automatically becomes an "Anytime". "Flexpreis" is basically an Anytime Single. DB doesn't have off peak walk up fares and only sort of has had, though the Anytime equivalent varies by day of the week.

In this case it does as well, but only in a 4 hour (+/-2 hour) departure window from the point of encountering a cancellation.

I'm pretty sure the 20 minute delay mentioned upthread is indeed the DB threshold. I have used it and it worked well.

 

[Russel]

I'm at a station where an XC service is cancelled and the station announcements are making a big deal of repeating that tickets for it are not valid on the subsequent Northern (6 mins later) or LNER (22 mins later) trains - people booked on it have to wait over 40 minutes before a train they can board, a TPE service which is accepting the tickets for some reason (I have a season ticket for the journey I'm making so can do the Northern service).

It seems particularly petty this week to make people late, to be honest - I'd be irritated if I had to wait

Absolutely petty, but not at all surprising.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Absolutely petty, but not at all surprising.

So, why are Cross Country seemingly only arranging limited (other operator) ticket acceptance when they've binned off one or more of their own services? Is the key/only determinant the likely cost?

 

[Watershed]

What journey planners do you use? I know a lot usually show a whole journey as canceled, even if it's just a single connection. I.e Manchester airport to Sheffield. Passenger wishes to travel on the xx.17 to connect at Piccadilly to the xx.43 EMR service. However the xx.17 gets canceled. No planner I know of recommends instead traveling via the xx.04 or xx.07 to Piccadilly instead to make the connection, and instead will just put you on the next booked connection which is xx.48

NRE shows a link to replan your journey using live running if there's disruption. I'd say that's a fairly widely used journey planner.

The other issue is where staff are unsure when a service will be starting up again. A particular station might have services supposedly resuming in an hour, but if a staff member has advised you that train is also likely to be canceled, then would it not be advisable to use an avoid point to avoid the selected area? I know I use avoids all the time to find passengers alternate routes during disruption or unconventional routes with a couple extra changes that has the same arrival time. For example, direct Manchester to York service is cancelled, however putting an 'avoid Huddersfield' shows a change at Sheffield/Doncaster which is quicker than waiting for the next direct service.

Final point, via/avoid points can also generate longer itensries, but during major disruption, if you can avoid major over crowding, that's a win on safety grounds. If a passenger wants to take a longer but more comfortable route, the railway should let them. It prevents crushloading by allowing more services to bare the load.

I don't think there's anything that says you can't use via or avoid points

 

[Mugby]

Clearly EMR are wanting to avoid transfers-in, which could sdd to overcrowding.

But will EMR ticket holders be allowed transfers out to other TOCs?

I can understand that as far as London services are concerned but there are instances on their regional services where transferring out would be very useful.
An obvious example would be Crewe to Derby; If an EMR service fails to operate, it should be permissible to take an LNWR train to Tamworth and XC thence to Derby (with very little time difference too)
But EMR tickets Crewe - Derby are marked 'Via Uttoxeter Only'

 

[redreni]

NRE shows a link to replan your journey using live running if there's disruption. I'd say that's a fairly widely used journey planner.


I don't think there's anything that says you can't use via or avoid points

No, there isn't, but their use would need to be within the spirit of taking a reasonable alternative route to your destination, otherwise it would mean you could go anywhere.

 

[Tester]

No, there isn't, but their use would need to be within the spirit of taking a reasonable alternative route to your destination, otherwise it would mean you could go anywhere.

So what?

We are talking about situations where the passenger's journey has been disrupted beyond their control.

The concept of 'any reasonable route' was well established before the existence of journey planners, and was only destroyed due to the dogma of privatisation.

If a non-conventional route happens to be beneficial in the circumstances, why create a difficulty, when you could actually create goodwill and leave a positive impression at zero marginal cost?

I can dream!

 

[Djgr]

So what?

We are talking about situations where the passenger's journey has been disrupted beyond their control.

The concept of 'any reasonable route' was well established before the existence of journey planners, and was only destroyed due to the dogma of privatisation.

If a non-conventional route happens to be beneficial in the circumstances, why create a difficulty, when you could actually create goodwill and leave a positive impression at zero marginal cost?

I can dream!

Alas, the railway and many who work on it struggle to grasp the notion of customer focus.