A few questions about easements

[LexyBoy]

I have a few questions about Routeing Guide easements and how to interpret them:

1) What exactly is meant by “Customers travelling from XXX” – does it mean specifically the station(s) XXX listed or does it mean routes which involve passing through those stations? In many cases it doesn’t appear to make much sense if interpreted as being those stations only, e.g.:

Customers travelling from Bicester North to Oxford and beyond, may travel via Banbury. This easement applies in both directions.

This allows doubling back between Kings Sutton and Banbury – so is that for any journey that involves travelling through Bicester North? It seems to be interpreted that way by the NR journey planner.

2) Why are there so many easements which appear to be completely pointless as they are allowing a route which is already allowed or indeed the only route? For example:

Customers travelling from Hanborough to Didcot Parkway and beyond may travel via Oxford. This easement applies in both directions.

Customers travelling from Maidenhead and Twyford to Newbury and beyond may travel via Reading. This easement applies in both directions.

I can only imagine that these are to correct for bugs in Journey Planner which would otherwise deem these routes invalid for some reason. Fares check rule maybe?

3) A bit of a specific one this, but why do some easements refer specifically to “Reading West” when it could just say “Reading” since doubling back between the two is allowed as they are both in Reading group? (Maybe it's the same for other group stations). A particular corker below (again) – what are those not in possession of Club 55 products supposed to do I wonder?

Customers travelling from Mortimer and Bramley via Newbury and in possession of Club 55 products, may travel via Reading West. This easement applies in both directions.

I can only imagine that this is intended to allow journeys such as Mortimer-Salisury to have a valid route which is FGW only, but wouldn’t being routed Newbury be enough?

4) What exactly does this mean?

During Wimbledon Tennis Tournament, customers in possession of tickets routed AP London Woking, AP London Honiton and London Not Underground may travel via Wimbledon.

I can only imagine that it means holders of Advance tickets can leave the train at Wimbledon, otherwise it’s a bit pointless no? But that’s not what ‘via’ means in my book…

Sorry if this is a bit long and rambly, but I’ve been scratching my head for a while – and every time you go back to have a look, you find something else!

 

[wibble]

4) What exactly does this mean?

700019
During Wimbledon Tennis Tournament, customers in possession of tickets routed AP London Woking, AP London Honiton and London Not Underground may travel via Wimbledon.

I can only imagine that it means holders of Advance tickets can leave the train at Wimbledon, otherwise it’s a bit pointless no? But that’s not what ‘via’ means in my book…

Sorry if this is a bit long and rambly, but I’ve been scratching my head for a while – and every time you go back to have a look, you find something else!

The 'AP London Woking' and 'AP London Honiton' Advance tickets require travel via Waterloo, even though many longer distance trains make additional stops at Wimbledon for the tennis. The 'via Wimbledon' is just bad wording in my opinion - as so many of those easements are! SWT will stop using geographical routeings for their Advance fares from May so some of this easement will be irrelevant.

The 'London not Underground' routed ticket gives flexibility for those journeys were the train calls additionally at Wimbledon, but people will have the opportunity to travel via London if they wanted. (e.g. Bournemouth - Wimbledon has CDR routed 'Not London' and 'London not Underground')