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

[tomoufc]

Having read this whole thread, I’m still not sure what you’re supposed to do if you have split tickets - can your alternative route avoid the splitting point?

 

[Gaelan]

It's more of an issue for TfW than ScotRail, obviously, but, given Avanti's (IMO unacceptable) tendency to drop everything north of Preston if there's any problems between Glasgow and Preston, forcing passengers onto the already overcrowded TPE , I can understand if some passengers to and from Carlisle would choose to try the ScotRail service via Dumfries if they aren't pressed for time

On the Edinburgh-Aberdeen line, it's very normal to end up on ScotRail after an LNER cancellation (or after missing a connection onto LNER in Edinburgh, on an itinerary like Preston-Haymarket-Dundee where the Haymarket-Dundee happens to be LNER that hour). ScotRail guards have always been absolutely fine with it, as I expect they would be in any similar circumstance.

I have less (but by no means zero) faith that an LNER guard would be reasonable if a ScotRail cancellation were to precede an LNER service.

 

[py_megapixel]

I agree it should be more prominently stated. But that is the internal guidance.

I would argue that shouldn't even be in the internal guidance, let alone the public guidance!

Why is there an obsession with defining precisely what routes can/can't be used with this policy? Just let passengers do whatever makes sense to them to get wherever they're trying to go. If it looks like someone is taking the p***, ask them what they're doing and if they can explain, move on.

Especially when the service is disrupted, I'm sure guards have much better things to be doing than scrutinising each passenger's re-routing to decide whether or not it's technically allowed. And regardless of that, arguing with passengers who have already experienced disruption is only going to build resentment and put them off rail travel. It is to nobody's benefit.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Sep 2026 ==

Given that the vast majority of people want to get where they are going at, or as close as possible to, the time they contracted to do so, rather than get money back when they fail to do so yet again, I think we can genuinely call this a "win win". Passengers aren't as delayed and the Government pays out less Delay Repay.

I can't exactly see how someone could complain about GBR coming up with a devious scheme to pay less Delay Repay by - err - causing fewer journeys to be delayed!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Sep 2026 ==

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

This of course means, due to the DfT's subsidiary Northern and the DfT's subsidiary LNER refusing to accept the tickets, with passengers having to wait and use the DfT's subsidiary TPE, the DfT via its contractor Cross Country gives out a load of delay repay compensation that it didn't need to, and also damages the reputation of the DfT-controlled railway, affecting the DfT's future revenue.

The mind boggles. Why was all of this operator-restricted ticketing nonsense not done away with as soon as we switched from franchises to management contracts?

 

[positron]

Having read this whole thread, I’m still not sure what you’re supposed to do if you have split tickets - can your alternative route avoid the splitting point?

I'm fairly sure that splitting of tickets doesn't affect your rights under the existing conditions so I doubt this new one would be any different. In fact delay repay systems all seem to have gotten better at letting you put multiple tickets down for the same journey in such cases.

What matters is where you're ultimately trying to get to.

 

[modernrail]

Oooh err maybe! But there are websites which are practically dedicated to this.

On Time Trains

Find out how often your train journey is on time, look up recent services eligible for delay repay claims and check your station rankings.

www.ontimetrains.co.uk

View attachment 211692

(The above screenshot shows the Ontimetrains website for a commuter time journey from Rhyl to Chester and the amount of delay repay you'd likely receive if you took that particular service).

The number of people specifically selecting services in order to claim delay repay compo is probably quite low, but it's a bit more than 5, as one of them has also apparently made a website for it. When I've travelled for work under somebody else's credit card I've often done it because the delay compensation comes to me rather than my employer, and it's tax-free. There was also this case of someone who worked at a solicitors' firm who was sanctioned after filing nearly 300 fake delay compensation claims: https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/12/...el-manager-sanctioned-for-train-ticket-fraud/ - so even solicitors/legal bods get in on the act.

That’s a totally different thing though. This is not a retrospective claim for your fare, members on here are concerned people will use the mere potential of a cancellation to develop a cunning plan. I am sure every contributor to this forum can think of a cunning plan that they may one day get to use to, for instance, jump on the intercity rather than the stopper. However, the fact will remain that your stopper did not start - or stopped stopping prematurely. You did not stop it, and so take the win if it one of the rare cases where you get there a little earlier than anticipated. In the case of most cancellations you won’t win, you will be confused - end up sharing a more packed train with other confused passengers, be late, not get there at all etc.

I think I have had maybe 2 guards start a conversation with me on this sort of thing in the past 10 years or so. My very clear response that I won’t be taking their concerns any further did the trick both times.

 

[Kite159]

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'

When I search Crewe to Derby, the route is 'Via Stoke on Trent' rather than 'Via Uttoxeter'

Purchase flexible walk-up fares for any British train journey

Purchase flexible single/return tickets & Travelcards – in 3 clicks, at face value with no fees. Every British rail fare shown, railcard discounts included.

www.brfares.com

 

[tomoufc]

I'm fairly sure that splitting of tickets doesn't affect your rights under the existing conditions so I doubt this new one would be any different. In fact delay repay systems all seem to have gotten better at letting you put multiple tickets down for the same journey in such cases.

What matters is where you're ultimately trying to get to.

I’m not talking about delay repay. I’m talking about where using an alternative operator means using a different route which avoids the split point.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

When I search Crewe to Derby, the route is 'Via Stoke on Trent' rather than 'Via Uttoxeter'

Purchase flexible walk-up fares for any British train journey

Purchase flexible single/return tickets & Travelcards – in 3 clicks, at face value with no fees. Every British rail fare shown, railcard discounts included.

www.brfares.com

Think you're right. Stoke-on-Trent to Derby does however have route 'via Uttoxeter' walk-up tickets. Route 'via Tamworth' as well.

 

[modernrail]

I’m not talking about delay repay. I’m talking about where using an alternative operator means using a different route which avoids the split point.

Should this not just be the same thing. If you can show both parts of the split, and you will be able to, the railway failed to get you to B and in the new world it helps you get to C, which is where you were trying to get to.

I would go further than that. If I was actually trying to get to C minus a couple of stations, so somewhere between B and C, I should also be able to go back down the B to C line in the other direction.

There are a few times where I have bought a return to somewhere but actually get off a few stops early for instance to meet friends who then drop me off at the further away station to return.

I see the routing allowance as now allowing you to get to whichever station on the original route you were validly trying to get to, via whichever alternative route reasonably gets you there.

 

[tomoufc]

I see the routing allowance as now allowing you to get to whichever station on the original route you were validly trying to get to, via whichever alternative route reasonably gets you there.

I would hope so, but I don’t think there’s anything in the wording which positively mentions that. As it stands, you are still required to travel through the split point when there is disruption, which is a major disadvantage of split tickets (although in practice many staff will turn a blind eye).

 

[walkingsophie]

How does this work with rover/ranger tickets? Like for example would you be able to use a Freedom of Severn and Solent Rover between Taunton and Axminster via Exeter if a train is cancelled? Or use a London travelcard via Epsom?

 

[35B]

How does this work with rover/ranger tickets? Like for example would you be able to use a Freedom of Severn and Solent Rover between Taunton and Axminster via Exeter if a train is cancelled? Or use a London travelcard via Epsom?

I think the precise circumstances would need to be taken into account, but these are area tickets rather than point to point. And where, like a Travelcard, tickets are not just for rail, the bus alternative would also need to be considered

 

[Adam Williams]

I would hope so, but I don’t think there’s anything in the wording which positively mentions that

The brief refers to the customer's destination, not the ticket's destination.

 

[Watershed]

I would hope so, but I don’t think there’s anything in the wording which positively mentions that. As it stands, you are still required to travel through the split point when there is disruption, which is a major disadvantage of split tickets (although in practice many staff will turn a blind eye).

My understanding from 'informed sources' is that the requirement to travel via the split point is waived as part of this rule. But I agree this is the kind of thing they need to spell out, when they publish this rule on the NRE and TOC websites (yes, one can dream...)

 

[DeverseSam]

How does this work with rover/ranger tickets? Like for example would you be able to use a Freedom of Severn and Solent Rover between Taunton and Axminster via Exeter if a train is cancelled? Or use a London travelcard via Epsom?

Or a Northern newspaper £12 ticket from Hexham to Nottingham (via York instead of Settle)

 

[tomoufc]

The brief refers to the customer's destination, not the ticket's destination.

Well spotted. It’s at least ambiguous then, which I guess goes in the passenger’s favour in a potential dispute.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My understanding from 'informed sources' is that the requirement to travel via the split point is waived as part of this rule. But I agree this is the kind of thing they need to spell out, when they publish this rule on the NRE and TOC websites (yes, one can dream...)

Ideally it will become part of the NRCoT, though admittedly a lot of that is as clear as the view from the top of Snowdon in November.

 

[Djgr]

I still consider that in practice this an "anything goes" and this is the government's direction of travel.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I still consider that in practice this an "anything goes" and this is the government's direction of travel.

In the end as long as Delay Repay exists it's in their interest to minimise delay, which once you don't have TOCs any more doesn't cost them anything. Almost nobody will purchase a new ticket to use a different TOC in the case of a delay, so that income is a bit moot.

The odd person might work out trains that are often disrupted and deliberately buy tickets to use them to get a flexible ticket for the Advance fare, but the numbers doing that will be small, if only because it's a rather risky strategy as on that day the train could be on time!

 

[Gaelan]

Almost nobody will purchase a new ticket to use a different TOC in the case of a delay, so that income is a bit moot.

I think more of this might go on than you think, especially if someone assumes their ticket won't be valid and (for whatever reason) is desperate to get to their destination on time. But I have no strong basis for this either.

(For the avoidance of doubt, this is bad; I am very much of the view that, to the maximum extent feasible, an operator who sells a ticket should be liable to get passengers there, as close as possible to the scheduled time, by any means necessary.)

 

[Ziggiesden]

And passengers need to have the courage to have "loud and animated conservations" with jobsworth staff.

I would not advise that. It is an offence under Byelaw 6 (Unacceptable Behaviour) (2) No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.

You must speak in a normal voice or it will be deemed as being abusive, with the consequence that you will be denied travel.

Ask nicely and you may receive.

 

[35B]

I would not advise that. It is an offence under Byelaw 6 (Unacceptable Behaviour) (2) No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.

You must speak in a normal voice or it will be deemed as being abusive, with the consequence that you will be denied travel.

Ask nicely and you may receive.

That raises so many questions about how staff relate to passengers - especially when those passengers are already in a stressful position.

 

[embers25]

I would not advise that. It is an offence under Byelaw 6 (Unacceptable Behaviour) (2) No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.

You must speak in a normal voice or it will be deemed as being abusive, with the consequence that you will be denied travel.

Ask nicely and you may receive.

I agree with asking politely but bottom line is that this guidance means their approval should be automatic in 99% of cases and so there needs to be some clear training given

 

[Haywain]

That raises so many questions about how staff relate to passengers - especially when those passengers are already in a stressful position.

It is entirely possible to be assertive about one's position without being "loud and animated".

 

[35B]

It is entirely possible to be assertive about one's position without being "loud and animated".

Indeed. But “loud and animated” is not automatically “disorderly, indecent or offensive”, while it’s routine customer service training to teach people to de-escalate disputes.

 

[tomoufc]

Indeed. But “loud and animated” is not automatically “disorderly, indecent or offensive”, while it’s routine customer service training to teach people to de-escalate disputes.

You don’t need to be loud and animated to get your point across or hold firm. In fact, being calm and collected is usually far more effective.

 

[35B]

You don’t need to be loud and animated to get your point across or hold firm. In fact, being calm and collected is usually far more effective.

I agree. But the point is about how some people will react under stress, and what is an appropriate response.

 

[tomoufc]

I agree. But the point is about how some people will react under stress, and what is an appropriate response.

And making the rules crystal clear helps avoid such conflict.

 

[sheff1]

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?

They already are on the InterCity route

I would pair it with a new criminal offence of not wearing headphones.

It's already a Byelaw offence!

If so, I am committing a Byelaw offence every time I travel on a train as I do not own any headphones

 

[modernrail]

They already are on the InterCity route




If so, I am committing a Byelaw offence every time I travel on a train as I do not own any headphones

If there is any noise coming out of any device not travelling through headphones or, in the case of a phone, being held to your ear like a phone it is not only a byelaw offence but also treason.

I think it is one thing somebody being upset by a jobsworth guard (actually not jobsworth because the point is they wouldn’t be doing their job properly) and raising their voice in distress and actually setting off intending to be loud etc. passengers should try and be calm and collected.