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

35B · 14 Sep 2026

MrJeeves said:
This shouldn't be the passenger's problem to care about!

And I'm glad you've highlighted the viable and sensible solution.

My issue isn't particularly with the OAOs being excluded, but more the local concession operators like Elizabeth Line, Overground, Merseyrail, and also the devolved public operators ScotRail and TfW. I think it's appalling that they are not part of the scheme.

This is certainly a big step in the right direction, but there's still progress to be made in my view.

My issue is that DfT are announcing this as if it's general (except for EMR), rather than acknowledging the existence of operators they don't manage. That language will mislead people and cause them to take alternatives that aren't part of the scheme, and hence give rise to conflict where it isn't necessary.

Operationally, this also risks leading to confusion where people re-route themselves, and a downstream leg of the journey relies on this (e.g. XC disruption in the Midlands, so someone travelling NE/SW goes via London using LNER and GWR).

RailUK Forums

JohnofWessex · 14 Sep 2026

My SWR service from Frome to Waterloo was cancelled a few weeks ago

The Guard on the following GWR service was happy to accept my SWR advance ticket so I went to Paddington instead.

6PAN · 14 Sep 2026

Another issue could arise with Groupsave tickets which are not valid on every operator. For example four people buy a Groupsave from Reading to Oxford intending to travel with GWR. If the GWR train is cancelled would CrossCountry accept the Groupsave, despite it not being valid on their services?

Bletchleyite · 14 Sep 2026

6PAN said:
Another issue could arise with Groupsave tickets which are not valid on every operator. For example four people buy a Groupsave from Reading to Oxford intending to travel with GWR. If the GWR train is cancelled would CrossCountry accept the Groupsave, despite it not being valid on their services?

They certainly should, given that they would accept an Avanti Only Advance which also definitely isn't valid on their services!

This isn't an issue for interavailable walk up tickets (except at the edges of the peak) - it's specifically about tickets not otherwise valid.

Russel · 14 Sep 2026

Good news in general and a step in the right direction.

However, as others have already alluded to, there are still plenty of questions hanging over this, which combined with the small minority of staff that don't know the rules or make them up as they go along, I do have concerns and at this stage, wouldn't have the confidence in using this scheme for anything more complex that, for example, using an LNWR service between Euston and Birmingham because the Avanti is cancelled...

Bletchleyite · 14 Sep 2026

Russel said:
However, as others have already alluded to, there are still plenty of questions hanging over this, which combined with the small minority of staff that don't know the rules or make them up as they go along, I do have concerns and at this stage, wouldn't have the confidence in using this scheme for anything more complex that, for example, using an LNWR service between Euston and Birmingham because the Avanti is cancelled...

And I can still see the odd Avanti guard refusing a WMT ticket in that case as we're the big posh intercity train, innit

lowe1409 · 14 Sep 2026

Bletchleyite said:
And I can still see the odd Avanti guard refusing a WMT ticket in that case as we're the big posh intercity train, innit

Definitely could see it happening. Especially as I know certain guards in the existing scheme which ain't always happy taking tickets from another TOC on the same route. I can definitely see this being worse with tickets from vastly different routes/regions being valid

edwin_m · 14 Sep 2026

I can understand EMR Intercity being excluded - even before the latest problems it was pretty much unuseable when there were closures out of Kings Cross. And there's an arguable case to exclude Connect for the same reason and because cancelling a fully-loaded Thameslink would immediately crowd out the next EMR. But EMR Regional provides an alternative on the frequent occasions the XC Nottingham services fall over, as well as over much of the Liverpool-Norwich route, and there's no real reason to exclude it other than London-centric thinking.

Adam Williams · 14 Sep 2026

35B said:
My issue is that DfT are announcing this as if it's general (except for EMR), rather than acknowledging the existence of operators they don't manage. That language will mislead people and cause them to take alternatives that aren't part of the scheme, and hence give rise to conflict where it isn't necessary.

Fully agree, the narrative being used to describe the change is misleading:

From this weekend, if your train is cancelled, you can get on another operator’s service and carry on your journey without paying again. This simple, common sense change puts passengers first.

Andyh82 · 14 Sep 2026

So you are at Manchester Victoria with a ticket to Leeds route Hebden Bridge. The Northern service is cancelled, can you therefore immediately jump on a TPE service to Leeds, despite it usually being more expensive, taking a different route, and the fact that there is a Northern service on the original route that is running normally in about 15 minutes?

Adam Williams · 14 Sep 2026

Andyh82 said:
The Northern service is cancelled, can you therefore immediately jump on a TPE service to Leeds

Yes.

Tester · 14 Sep 2026

Adam Williams said:
Yes.

If they aren't careful, people may be encouraged to travel by train

positron · 14 Sep 2026

This is a great step in the right direction, obviously we now need ScotRail and TfW to get onboard officially and get it fully reciprocated on the public list.

Ultimately there will still be issues but the government actively announcing this as common sense does mean that when you inevitably get a jobsworth staff member (they seem far more frequent on some operators than others) you can have an 'animated conversation' (as someone else worded it) with them and go about your day. Obviously that absolutely shouldn't be necessary and these sorts of staff should be weeded out of the industry over time.

Open access operators are tricky ideally they'd be included too. It's not super clear to me if the list provided is those that will automatically accept you, (but you could planned on e.g. a lumo train). or if it's a list for both sides of the coin.

JonathanH · 14 Sep 2026

Bletchleyite said:
And I can still see the odd Avanti guard refusing a WMT ticket in that case as we're the big posh intercity train, innit

Well yes, someone with a Liverpool to London ticket on LNR whose Liverpool to Crewe connection is cancelled but which still makes the Crewe to Euston connection by using an Avanti service to Crewe doesn't necessarily get an entitlement to go all the way to Euston with Avanti?

Russel · 14 Sep 2026

Bletchleyite said:
And I can still see the odd Avanti guard refusing a WMT ticket in that case as we're the big posh intercity train, innit

So can I, I wish this was a joke, but it's not a totally unbelievable scenario...

lowe1409 said:
Definitely could see it happening. Especially as I know certain guards in the existing scheme which ain't always happy taking tickets from another TOC on the same route. I can definitely see this being worse with tickets from vastly different routes/regions being valid

Agreed, but this attitude has never made any sense to me, at no point does allowing someone to travel on a different service to the one stated on their ticket, adversely effect said guard, if the difference in cost came out of their pay then I'd fully understand them having an issue with it, but it doesn't...

Watershed · 14 Sep 2026

TUC said:
That isn't how the announcement frames it. It says 'Customers holding a valid ticket will be able to travel on another participating operator’s train, departing within 2 hours before or after their original cancelled service, using a direct or reasonable alternative route.'

The announcement does not include the full details of the actual policy. I am confident what I have stated is correct, I am sure other people will back that up if you are in any doubt!

TUC said:
In any event, whilst we all know that in reality it can be unpredictable what routes journey planners suggest, isn't the underlying expectation that they should only offer permitted routes?

Not at all. Journey planners generally return the quickest journeys or those with the fewest changes. Those don't always follow permitted routes. Some journey planners don't support split tickets so they'll simply return no fares, but most retailers will generally still show the journey even if they can't offer any fares.

JonathanH said:
Well yes, someone with a Liverpool to London ticket on LNR whose Liverpool to Crewe connection is cancelled but which still makes the Crewe to Euston connection by using an Avanti service to Crewe doesn't necessarily get an entitlement to go all the way to Euston with Avanti?

That's not what the policy says. You can use any alternative train from any operator participating in the scheme. If there is any doubt about the route then provided it is returned by a journey planner (with or without fares) that is deemed sufficient.

Whilst this does mean that some people will get a quicker journey than they were expecting, that's the way the cards fall sometimes. Making exceptions for circumstances like that wouldn't make any sense and would simply make the rules too complex.

speedy1 · 14 Sep 2026

Adam Williams said:
Fully agree, the narrative being used to describe the change is misleading:

It's basically how I expect ministers to behave now, unfortunately. They did the same thing with the rail fare freeze (heavily implying it was all fares, on posters, TV, radio etc). It's unacceptable

LowLevel · 14 Sep 2026

edwin_m said:
I can understand EMR Intercity being excluded - even before the latest problems it was pretty much unuseable when there were closures out of Kings Cross. And there's an arguable case to exclude Connect for the same reason and because cancelling a fully-loaded Thameslink would immediately crowd out the next EMR. But EMR Regional provides an alternative on the frequent occasions the XC Nottingham services fall over, as well as over much of the Liverpool-Norwich route, and there's no real reason to exclude it other than London-centric thinking.

EMR have an existing agreement with Northern and TPE that basically covers Nottingham to Liverpool for all 3 TOCs which isn't changing. XC acceptance between Derby and Nottingham is basically a formality.

EMR are going to review matters in early 2027 apparently and see how things are going.

Bletchleyite · 14 Sep 2026

35B said:
My issue is that DfT are announcing this as if it's general (except for EMR), rather than acknowledging the existence of operators they don't manage. That language will mislead people and cause them to take alternatives that aren't part of the scheme, and hence give rise to conflict where it isn't necessary.

Particularly as Merseyrail are VERY Penalty Fare happy, and their services are part of quite a few logical re-routes.

A S Leib · 14 Sep 2026

The Caledonian Sleeper's excluded alongside ScotRail, although as there likely wouldn't be enough capacity for one daytime train being cancelled, and they presumably already arrange ticket acceptance if their services are cancelled, that's probably the long-distance one which needed sorting the least.

positron · 14 Sep 2026

Bletchleyite said:
Particularly as Merseyrail are VERY Penalty Fare happy, and their services are part of quite a few logical re-routes.

Merseyrail definitely feels like it should be included same with Elizabeth line. But i guess it is tricky with where you draw the line. Personally I'd say include as much as possible (so Tyne and Wear Metro too).

But I can see why it might be far easier to get agreement from the existing 'franchise' system than operators beyond that.

The sleepers not being included seems fair. I wonder if including GwR does technically include Night Riviera though?

Bletchleyite · 14 Sep 2026

positron said:
The sleepers not being included seems fair. I wonder if including GwR does technically include Night Riviera though?

It doesn't just technically include it, it DOES include it, in the seats it is just a GWR train (and the most need for it is from actual GWR passengers anyway). However the Riviera is different in that it has loads of seating capacity that is normally nearly empty.

TT-ONR-NRN · 14 Sep 2026

If TfW is going to be responsible for train services on key routes in England like Manchester to Hereford, Manchester to Chester, Shrewsbury to Birmingham, they need to have this in place for these routes really.

LittleRedTrain · 14 Sep 2026

Wonder if this will also address issues around class of service entitlement on alternative operators?
See past threads about disrupted TPE First Class ticket holders being denied access to First on Avanti.

Will switching to an alternate trains without First Class provision (or where First is already full) grant an automatic right to a part refund?

Djgr · 14 Sep 2026

Adam Williams said:
Fully agree, the narrative being used to describe the change is misleading:

View attachment 211580

Think it's too late now. The genie is out of the bottle (or for those of a certain age the Berlin Wall is breached).

Any TOC not cooperating (on list or not) is not going to come out of it well.

A S Leib · 14 Sep 2026

LittleRedTrain said:
Will switching to an alternate trains without First Class provision (or where First is already full) grant an automatic right to a part refund?

I'm guessing Avanti Standard Premium is standard class as far as LNER, CrossCountry and TPE are (officially) concerned.

Bletchleyite · 14 Sep 2026

A S Leib said:
I'm guessing Avanti Standard Premium is standard class as far as LNER, CrossCountry and TPE are (officially) concerned.

SP is a problem both ways as Avanti often consider other incoming 1st passengers as SP because of their very low capacity in actual 1st.

Adam Williams · 14 Sep 2026

Bletchleyite said:
as Avanti often consider other incoming 1st passengers as SP because of their very low capacity in actual 1st.

which they have no legal basis to do, of course.

I had this fight with them before on CrossCountry 1st tix, I had to explain that yes, XC did have catering!

Bletchleyite · 14 Sep 2026

Adam Williams said:
which they have no legal basis to do, of course.

Indeed, though people might be happier with it if they said "sit in SP but we will bring you the freebies". There's more space and more tables.

Tester · 14 Sep 2026

Bletchleyite said:
Indeed, though people might be happier with it if they said "sit in SP but we will bring you the freebies". There's more space and more tables.

First class passengers in coach K might quite like that too!

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

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member