"Break of Journey"

[Greenback]

I've stayed out of this debate so far, but I've read all the replies with interest!

Technically, I see nothing wrong with buying an advance ticket from Swansea to London, plus a flexible ticket London to Reading and alighting from the train at Reading without travelling to and from Paddington. I have a combination of tickets that is valid for the journey Swansea - Reading. How can anyone possibly know that I haven't travelled all the way to London and back?

The railway hasn't lost any money as a result of this, so I would not feel morally guilty, and I cannot see any difference in actually staying on the train and getting off. I think that most people find it amazing that there is even a possibility that, under these circumstances, anyone could be penalised!

In the case of the Southampton/Eastleigh thread, I thought it was a sensible view that the couple in question could not have been penalised had they bought a Southampton to Eastleigh ticket as well as their Megatrain ones.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Then why does the TOC not come after people who do not use the ticket at all? After all, not only has the station buffet at origin and destination lost a potential customer but the on-board trolley has as well!

How can they come after the passenger for non-use? No-one forces the passenger to use a ticket, but when they do, it's not unreasonable of the TOC to expect them to follow it's conditions of use is it.

 

[ainsworth74]

I understand that - I'm mocking the railway somewhat by saying that's probably what they'd tell you

Apologies, I was quite tired when I replied and obviously missed the sarcasm

 

[MCR247]

I've stayed out of this debate so far, but I've read all the replies with interest!

Technically, I see nothing wrong with buying an advance ticket from Swansea to London, plus a flexible ticket London to Reading and alighting from the train at Reading without travelling to and from Paddington. I have a combination of tickets that is valid for the journey Swansea - Reading. How can anyone possibly know that I haven't travelled all the way to London and back?

The railway hasn't lost any money as a result of this, so I would not feel morally guilty, and I cannot see any difference in actually staying on the train and getting off. I think that most people find it amazing that there is even a possibility that, under these circumstances, anyone could be penalised!

In the case of the Southampton/Eastleigh thread, I thought it was a sensible view that the couple in question could not have been penalised had they bought a Southampton to Eastleigh ticket as well as their Megatrain ones.

But you are still not abiding the T&Cs that you accepted

 

[yorkie]

Aren't you? Perhaps, but some reasonable attempts have been made to justify why it is either potentially valid or why it would, in law, not be enforceable to do anything about it even if it isn't valid. These statements cannot so easily be dismissed simply by saying "but you are not abiding by the T&Cs" in my opinion.

I don't think finishing short by itself is valid (but will often be acceptable to many guards or be undetectable anyway) but finishing short when having tickets valid for doubling back cannot so easily be dismissed, I refer you to DaveNewcastle's post and if anyone disagrees, please quote which part you disagree on and give your reasons - that's what this forum is for after all - and we'll resume the discussion from there, as it is his post, not anyone else's (with respect to Greenback, and I include myself in that) that sets the benchmark in this topic, IMO,

 

[Greenback]

But you are still not abiding the T&Cs that you accepted

I think I would be, given the question is whether someone in possession of two tickets should have to stay on the train and physically complete both sections of the journey. I am still finishing my journey at the end of the second ticket, whether or not I have actually been to the other station at all, left the premises or broken my journey.

Yorkie, Dave has indeed set the standard for this topic! I'd very much like to see his question answered!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

(Well, thank you both for these encouraging words)

If it helps us to reach any clarity of thought on this matter, I'm equally happy to present the strongest counter-claims I can produce to my belief that penaltyfines's (the OP) combination of tickets are valid for travel A > B. (Its not as if I'm obliged to represent the one-sided question of the OP in an adversarial hearing!).

There are three good points of counter-attack and one change in the evidence by me (as "the claimant") on which a good challenge could be mounted. These are not hhf's and RJ's claim that the T&C's of the Advance are being breached. Sorry.

1. At the moment the train arrives at the passenger's destination, station 'B', I have challenged the TOC to provide evidence which compells a passenger to travel (having reached their destination). Perhaps such evidence could be produced. (That evidence would also be an argument against "stopping short" - which is not the point of interest here)

2. Its often been assumed that there is a cost-comparison assumption; and therefore an attempt to avoid payment (an assumption which I hope I haven't fuelled).
Its perfectly possible, and helpful, to test the arguments with an example of this journey which would actually be cheaper for the passenger just to buy a ticket for A > B. The comparative costs has never entered into this question!
To be clear, I am asking if it is valid to use a combination of 2 tickets for A > B > C then C > B but only travelling A > B whether the A > B ticket is more or less expensive than the combination. (eg. I buy Advance London to Inverness and Anytime Inverness to Peterborough and want to travel London to Peterborough but the guard insists that I must stay on board and do the 2 day return trip through the Highlands or buy another ticket if I alight at P'bro).

3. The Advance ticket is a specific agreement between the two parties which has absolute conditions of travel which both parties agree to. (This would include the very specific "Megatrain" product).
This interpretation of an Advance ticket's Conditions would put the obligation on the passenger with such a ticket to either complete their journey to 'C' or not travel at all.
This is perhaps where hhf and RJ feel the strongest weakness in my argument; but I don't find the T&C's to be persuasive.
[I'll return to this tomorrow and edit]

The change in my argument was that I began by presuming that the passenger MUST have bought the long-distance Advance and the "doubling back" Anytime in the one transaction. I later changed my argument to suggest that these might have been bought separately (as a consequence of changing circumstances - though I don't presume whether those are changes of the passenger's circumstances or the rail operator's circumstances). I believe there is a strong weakness to the OP's position in English Contract Law if they are bought separately.

I'm very interested to know if I have misinterpreted the position.
I believe I'd be correct if tested in law, but that if I'm wrong, then my error is most probably in the above (and NOT simply in a breach of the T&Cs of an Advance).

 

[flymo]

How can they come after the passenger for non-use? No-one forces the passenger to use a ticket.....

OK this is relating to air travel not rail travel but in many cases now, at least here in Asia, there is a 'no-show' fee levied on the cheaper economy tickets if you do not use the ticket. As well as not refunding the ticket the no-show fee will be levied on the credit card used to purchase the ticket. This is a fairly recent 'innovation'.

I think it would be a non-starter on the rail network as you don't 'check-in' on the railways but due to the railways seemingly never ending strides towards airline style yield management, don't be surprised if one day there will be a time when advance tickets can only be paid for by credit card and they will come after you for more fees if they find you haven't used it.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I'm going to throw a twist into the mix, just to see the answers given.

If I have a Leeds to Stevenage Advance Single (booked on a direct service) and a Stevenage to Arlesey Anytime Single, could I disembark the direct train at Peterborough, and board the local service to Arlesey, rather than doubleback via Stevenage?

Assuming I was fine to do that, if stopped by RPIs at Arlesey (the platforms are clearly visible) should they let me through without question?

If you think it is not allowed, please say why you think so.

 

[RJ]

RJ: Perhaps you haven't felt that this question was directed at you personally, but I would genuinely be interested to know whether you (as a human being) think that the scenarios described in this quote of an earlier post are fair.

RJ - With all due respect, I think you embody all that is bad and morally incomprehensible with the railways. You just can't comprehend that anything exists outside the rules.

(I apologise now, hhf, that my persistent questioning might appear to be directed at you, or at RJ for that matter. But its not.
I am, however, looking for clarity of both the technicality of how the Regulations and Conditions are read, how the Regulations and Conditions are applied, and also clarity of the ethical application of those Regs and Conds. and how they are applied)

I'm neither here to discuss my application of discretion in reality, nor participate in mothers meetings bemoaning how unfair and unethical the system is. I've said it before and I'll say it again, when people ask for advice, I'll post based upon a strict objective interpretation of the passenger/TOC contract which is available for all to read.
Not upon an idealistic view of how I think things should be, as I consider that to be useless waffle for anyone who is seeking conclusive advice. I realise that people take exception to the quintessence of pessimism in my posts but that's neither here nor there to me. I'd like to ask if these people are actually aware of the criteria that the penalty fares appeals bodies base their decisions on? Either
"You have valid tickets for your entire journey because you are not breaking the contract," or "You do not have valid tickets for your entire journey because you are breaking the contract" is
the fundamental message in any post where I offer advice. I can't comment on how much discretion will be used as I'm not psychic. This does not change the fact that the customer has a responsibility to hold valid tickets.

As it goes, I'm apathetic towards the system. My commuting and leisure costs are the price of a Zone 1-6 Travelcard. That works out at around £2.95 a day free of all time restrictions for which I have no reason to complain. TfL have been very good to me for several years now. For my occasional forays outside London I've always looked up Advance tickets and accepted the cost of the cheapest one. One has to pay something to get around and I'm quite happy to spend a few minutes looking up the cheapest *valid* combo for myself.

Cheap invalid combos are still invalid and if spotted by a member of retail staff who, within their right, decides to charge the customer in line with the rules, it will end up costing more in the long run than a valid set of tickets. In the original question of this thread, I'd say no, it's not valid. Whether or not I think it's fair, I don't really feel it'd be conducive to this thread to discuss as it really doesn't add anything. Yes, I do hold my own opinions.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I'm going to throw a twist into the mix, just to see the answers given.

If I have a Leeds to Stevenage Advance Single (booked on a direct service) and a Stevenage to Arlesey Anytime Single, could I disembark the direct train at Peterborough, and board the local service to Arlesey, rather than doubleback via Stevenage? . . .

Unless there is a published Routing issue such as an easement which permits that move (and I haven't looked for one), then I would be surprised to learn that was valid.

I would not expect the part of the journey from Peterborough to Arlesey to be covered by either of the 2 tickets held. (The train is travelling in the opposite direction to the journey on the Anytime and between different stations; and its certainly not the service booked on the Advance).

Also, I wouldn't expect that alighting at Peterborough is permitted (the defence applied to the OP's example of having reached their destination does not apply).

As for whether staff permit it or not is another matter. Is there really "a twist" to the example here? It seems quite different to me.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....This is perhaps where hhf and RJ feel the strongest weakness in my argument; but I don't find the T&C's to be persuasive....

It's not what I think or argue or want or feel that is important though is it, at the end of the day it doesn't matter if I think it is fair or unfair, and maybe you don't think that the terms of a contract that you agree to are persuasive, that doesn't bother me in the slightest.

I've said before, and I'm sure Yorkie will agree, what actually happens and what is supposed to happen are two very different things, and we are surely discussing what should be done.

People here talk about morals and how they are right to 'stop short' with that combination, I would argue that if you agreed to something, by going back on it, you are morally, as well as contractually in this case, wrong.

But my opinions don't really count, just what is the case and there is no arguement here which I believe gives anyone the right (morally or contractually) to break those conditions.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

....As for whether staff permit it or not is another matter. Is there really "a twist" to the example here? It seems quite different to me.

It is still an A-B-C-B example where you intend to travel from A to B without visiting C. The difference here is that whilst the train passes through Arlesey, it does not stop there.

 

[RJ]

It's a trick question.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

It's a trick question.

but what clarification does it offer us?
Having now looked, I can see that this Arlesey question does involve a routing matter (Arlesey being in the Stevenage Group), which permits doubling back.
Can you help by explaining what distinction is being made here, please?

It's not what I think or argue or want or feel that is important though is it, at the end of the day it doesn't matter if I think it is fair or unfair, and maybe you don't think that the terms of a contract that you agree to are persuasive, that doesn't bother me in the slightest.

I've said before, and I'm sure Yorkie will agree, what actually happens and what is supposed to happen are two very different things, and we are surely discussing what should be done.

That's two questions:
- some on this thread have insisted on asking the question of "fairness", and of course, the answers to that can only be their opinions (which have little or no bearing on "what actually happens and what is supposed to happen")
- some on this thread have been grappling with the application of the Conditions and that's what I was attempting by the phrase "but I don't find the T&C's to be persuasive" - I meant persuasive when being interpreted in a particular context, such as by a lawyer having regard for all the representations, and therefore leading to a particular reasoned decision (and not just whether Joe Public finds the T&Cs to be to his liking or not! I think we're actually in agreement on this but my language wasn't clear.)

Yes, I think we are discussing "what should be done", and in a very specific and uncommon example.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The routeing guide is neither here nor there as you can't doubleback on a through ticket within a group if the origin or destination is in that group anyway (unless an easement applies), besides which, we are talking about two tickets much like the other example, so the routeing guide issue of a doubleback is irrelevant.

The only difference is that to get to the destination you have to change trains rather than it being direct to the destination. Arlesey is still passed through by the train the passenger is booked on.

 

[philjo]

I thought that Stevenage Group only contained Stevenage & Hitchin - not Arlesey.
Anyway, Stevenage group has now been abolished - stevenage & Hitchin are now separate routeing points according to the latest list


I have a slightly different example, with a York-Stevenage AP ticket.
The EC train I am using does not stop at SVG so the reservation is York to Peterborough & the booking confirmation gives us a FCC connection from Peterborough to Stevenage (FCC do not do reservations).
As I need to then catch the FCC Cambridge service I see no reason not to change at Hitchin instead as this gives more time for the connection & my season ticket covers the SVG-Hitchin section on the FCC service home .



AP tickets do sometimes book you on trains that follow certain routes that the routeing guide forbids for flexible tickets (as they are AP you have to then use these trains so no grounds for arguments!).

e.g. I am going to Alnmouth next month. Tickets are not normally valid via Berwick if travelling to Alnmouth from the south (as specifically mentioned in the "easements" list).
The EC website offered me an "EC only" AP single for Stevenage-Alnmouth, changing at Berwick upon Tweed (40 minute wait), which I have now booked so have reservations SVG-Berwick & Berwick-Alnmouth (both EC trains) & will get to see the Northumberland coast section twice!
This was a lot (£40) cheaper than using the following EC train from Stevenage & changing at Newcastle (30 minute wait) on to XC service. (it is still morning peak from SVG so Off-peak tickets are not valid on either service)

 

[yorkie]

I'm going to throw a twist into the mix, just to see the answers given.

If I have a Leeds to Stevenage Advance Single (booked on a direct service) and a Stevenage to Arlesey Anytime Single, could I disembark the direct train at Peterborough, and board the local service to Arlesey, rather than doubleback via Stevenage?

Assuming I was fine to do that, if stopped by RPIs at Arlesey (the platforms are clearly visible) should they let me through without question?

If you think it is not allowed, please say why you think so.

I think you may get away with it but I don't think it's valid; you have no valid ticket between Peterborough and Arlesey, as the ticket held is a EC Only. If it was EC & Connections booked from (say) Headingley, and then a direct train LDS-SVG, the ticket would be accepted as it would appear to be valid. Either way, you'd be fine for a barrier check at Arlesey (but perhaps not if it was obvious which train you arrived from and if a manual inspection too place)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I've said before, and I'm sure Yorkie will agree, what actually happens and what is supposed to happen are two very different things, and we are surely discussing what should be done.

Yes, I do agree although it's not just about what 'should' be done but there is also the legal matter of what would happen if a court had to rule on it. There are, I believe, several circumstances which are not valid by a strict interpretation (and I won't argue otherwise) but common sense says should be OK, and where maybe 95% of guards will say it's OK, but a small number will not. These are the sort of stories that have made the headlines, and when it comes to the potential for a court case, the TOC backs down (I have cited my sources for this statement previously in case anyone reading this without reading my previous posts on the subject is wondering!)

People here talk about morals and how they are right to 'stop short' with that combination, I would argue that if you agreed to something, by going back on it, you are morally, as well as contractually in this case, wrong.

Not necessarily as morals will largely depend on intent, and many other factors so we can't easily judge.

But my opinions don't really count, just what is the case and there is no arguement here which I believe gives anyone the right (morally or contractually) to break those conditions

Well yes but it's down to interpretations of the rules - which are not too dissimilar to opinions?

It is still an A-B-C-B example where you intend to travel from A to B without visiting C. The difference here is that whilst the train passes through Arlesey, it does not stop there.

Yes, but there's more to it than that as you are travelling on a train operated by a company (FCC) on a route (Peterborough-Arlsey) on a ticket routed EC Only that is invalid for that TOC on that route. The ticket would not be accepted in the unlikely event of meeting an RPI unless leniency was given. Change it to a FCC & Connections and the ticket will be accepted by an RPI.

 

[John @ home]

If I have a Leeds to Stevenage Advance Single (booked on a direct service) and a Stevenage to Arlesey Anytime Single, could I disembark the direct train at Peterborough, and board the local service to Arlesey, rather than doubleback via Stevenage?

you have no valid ticket between Peterborough and Arlesey, as the ticket held is a EC Only. If it was EC & Connections booked from (say) Headingley, and then a direct train LDS-SVG, the ticket would be accepted as it would appear to be valid.

Ordinary Advance tickets Leeds - Stevenage booked for a direct service are issued bearing the route PETERBORO & EC, so they would not have the difficulty that yorkie anticipates.

"Reader Offer" tickets (codes 3PF and 3PS) are route AP EC TRNS ONLY, so they could only be used on EC services, either direct or with a change.

 

[yorkie]

Interesting, I hadn't anticipated that. Normal 'Advance' tickets are indeed routed as if they assume a change at Peterborough. So the ticket would be accepted without question.

I think that for the offer tickets that are EC Only, my post still stands though, you could in no way argue you were valid. If an RPI read the route (which they probably would) you'd struggle to avoid a Penalty Fare.