Can Advance fares ignore doubling back rule?

[swt_passenger]

This happened quite a few weeks ago, but I think the train crew were wrong in their advice.

I'm travelling on the return portion of an Eastleigh to Reading off-peak day return. The train manager clips my ticket after Basingstoke and in doing so suggests I "change at Parkway". I reply, no thanks, I'll change at Winchester and avoid the possibility of an SWT Penalty Fare between Parkway and Eastleigh.

As I know from previous experience, having been warned off for this in the past by SWT, a higher fare is due if I want to do that double back, so I say I'll save my money and endure the longish connection at Winchester. NRES journey planner reflects this higher fare if Parkway used as a via point.

She replies that it'll be OK, they (XC) tell everyone to change at Parkway for Eastleigh anyway, and sell loads of Reading to Eastleigh tickets and they are definitely valid via Parkway, so she takes the trouble to check on her machine, and yes, there they are - XC Advance fares that include a change at Parkway. Presumably they'll print as 'XC and connections'?

So the question in the title arises. Does this mean an Advance 'itinerary' can ignore or override the double back rule? But even if it does, surely it cannot then be used to also infer that double back is OK on walk up fares?

 

[Deerfold]

So the question in the title arises. Does this mean an Advance 'itinerary' can ignore or override the double back rule? But even if it does, surely it cannot then be used to also infer that double back is OK on walk up fares?

Yes; No.

East Coast Advance tickets from Hitchin to Leeds often include a change at Stevenage, doubling back between Hitchin and Stevenage.

If you search for the route but then select a non-advance ticket, the options with the doubleback are greyed out as this is no longer generally allowed.

 

[Romilly]

Does this mean an Advance 'itinerary' can ignore or override the double back rule?

For a simple Advance ticket, i.e. where there are reservations for the whole of the journey, you are buying a ride on the specified train(s). So I cannot see that anything related to determining permitted routes is relevant.

For an "& connections" Advance ticket where there are reservations for part, but not the whole, of the journey, I can though see that rules about permitted routes may be relevant for determing what is covered by the unreserved "connections" part of the journey.

But even if it does, surely it cannot then be used to also infer that double back is OK on walk up fares?

This must be right.

 

[Hadders]

East Coast Advance tickets from Hitchin to Leeds often include a change at Stevenage, doubling back between Hitchin and Stevenage.

If you search for the route but then select a non-advance ticket, the options with the doubleback are greyed out as this is no longer generally allowed.

There are a number of easements allowing the Hitchin-Stevenage doubleback.

 

[Deerfold]

There are a number of easements allowing the Hitchin-Stevenage doubleback.

Not starting at Hitchin there aren't. As I suggested, there used to be.

 

[furlong]

For a simple Advance ticket, i.e. where there are reservations for the whole of the journey, you are buying a ride on the specified train(s). So I cannot see that anything related to determining permitted routes is relevant.

The National Routeing Guide applies to Advance tickets the same as it does to other types of tickets: you should only be sold Advance tickets for journeys that follow permitted routes.

If on-board staff give you permission to travel via Parkway on a specific occasion and you don't think this is a permitted route for your journey, you'd be well-advised to ask them how you are to prove they have given you permission if challenged later on your journey. They might endorse the ticket, or if you have a phone or laptop that can record you could use that.

 

[Hadders]

Not starting at Hitchin there aren't. As I suggested, there used to be.

From the current easements file - I don't know when they were put back in.

http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/easement_text.pdf

700378 Customers travelling from Hitchin to Peterborough in possession of tickets routed "Not via London" may double back via Stevenage. This easement applies in both directions.

700379 Customers travelling from Hitchin via Peterborough in possession of tickets routed either "Not via London" or "Peterborough & EC" may double back via Stevenage. This easement applies in both directions.

 

[Deerfold]

Is this not the current easements file?

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/files/easements.pdf

That could be confusing as that's what google finds...

I'm glad they're back; but now I'm wondering why those journeys get greyed out when selecting a non-advance ticket on Webtis...

 

[bakerstreet]

This happens with some tickets to Merseyside from London. Only this week I was looking for fares and routes. Advances let me travel via Manchester, walk ups didn't show the option.(I know this doesn't involve doubling back but is a route seemingly only officially available on advances).

I've also booked Advances to Derby from Luton. Advances offered via London. Walk ups again didn't show the option.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Add Content

 

[philjo]

In the past I have used an East coast advance for Stevenage-Alnmouth which involved changing & doubling back from Berwick on Tweed (so seeing the Northumberland coast section twice !). At the time this was by far the quickest journey at the 07:19 glasgow train stopped at Stevenage & Berwick with a 20 min wait for a train back to Alnmouth (& both were EC services so had reservations on both - the alternative involved using XC from Newcastle so no ec-only advances available). In the current EC timetable, I get the 07:28 york train & change at Peterborough onto an Edinburgh service which calls at alnmouth.

 

[John @ home]

Can Advance fares ignore doubling back rule?

So the question in the title arises. Does this mean an Advance 'itinerary' can ignore or override the double back rule?

Yes and yes.

An Advance ticket is neither a protected nor a regulated fare. This means that train companies are free to offer them if and when they choose, by any service or combination of services they choose, and at any price that they choose.

It has been reported on this forum for several years that Advance tickets are sometimes available by routes which would not normally be Permitted by the National Routeing Guide.

But even if it does, surely it cannot then be used to also infer that double back is OK on walk up fares?

I agree that the availability of an Advance ticket by a particular route does not imply that a flexible ticket between the same origin and destination stations is Permitted by the same route.

 

[OwlMan]

Is this not the current easements file?

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/files/easements.pdf

That could be confusing as that's what google finds...

I'm glad they're back; but now I'm wondering why those journeys get greyed out when selecting a non-advance ticket on Webtis...

No

Always go through the ATOC NRG home page at
http://www.atoc.org/about-atoc/rail-settlement-plan/routeing-guide/

ATOC have lots of out of date files in their client files directory

 

[Hadders]

Is this not the current easements file?

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/files/easements.pdf

That could be confusing as that's what google finds...

I'm glad they're back; but now I'm wondering why those journeys get greyed out when selecting a non-advance ticket on Webtis...

It's not! The file I've linked to is dated today (in the bottom left hand corner) so it appears another update has been done!

The rather unprofessional looking link was mentioned in this thread last week on doubling back between West Hampstead and St Pancras:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=103452

 

[DaveNewcastle]

For a simple Advance ticket, i.e. where there are reservations for the whole of the journey, you are buying a ride on the specified train(s). So I cannot see that anything related to determining permitted routes is relevant. . . . . .

Yes. And we could go further in clarifying this:

An Advance ticket is a specific Contract between the passenger and the TOC(s) under which the passenger is to be conveyed by specific services. It is plausible (although not common) that the specifics of those services would not normally be available to holders of Anytime or other ticket types due to the detailled and arcane conditions and ancilliary documents which refer to routes and validity.

In fact, it would be hazardous for the holder of an Advance ticket to attempt to travel on any service other that one which is specified (whatever the route).

The National Routeing Guide applies to Advance tickets the same as it does to other types of tickets: you should only be sold Advance tickets for journeys that follow permitted routes. . . . .

Perhaps "you should only be sold Advance tickets" which are compliant, but a person may be sold a ticket which is not compliant with every detail of arcane routing guidance. The passenger's Contract is the Contract entered into, as evidenced by the ticket.

. . . . . train companies are free to offer them if and when they choose, by any service or combination of services they choose, and at any price that they choose.

. . . . . . . .

I agree that the availability of an Advance ticket by a particular route does not imply that a flexible ticket between the same origin and destination stations is Permitted by the same route.

I agree with both of these conclusions.

 

[furlong]

It has been reported on this forum for several years that Advance tickets are sometimes available by routes which would not normally be Permitted by the National Routeing Guide.

I think any such cases would constitute mistakes.

Such Fares are surely still subject to the National Rail Conditions of Carriage in their entirety, and in particular paragraph 13 "The route you are entitled to take" in addition to requirements for reservations.

And as far as I can tell from the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement, easements are required covering the Flows in question, like these examples:

700118 Customers travelling via Wembley Central to Apsley, Hemel Hempstead, Berkhamsted, Tring and Cheddington in possession of tickets routed 'AP EMT & CONNECTIONS' may travel via Watford Junction. This easement applies in both directions.

700214 Customers travelling from Alfreton or Langley Mill to or via London St Pancras, in possession of tickets routed 'Any Permitted' or 'EMT & Connections' may travel via Chesterfield. This easement applies in both directions.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

. . . . . train companies are free to offer them if and when they choose, by any service or combination of services they choose, and at any price that they choose.

. . . . . . . .

I agree that the availability of an Advance ticket by a particular route does not imply that a flexible ticket between the same origin and destination stations is Permitted by the same route..

I agree with both of these conclusions.

I agree with the second - I think the TSA is quite clear on that point.

But regarding the first, the TSA still imposes requirements on how that freedom is exercised. (In other words, they can sell these tickets, but need to add an easement to the routeing guide or squeeze the VIA station into the route printed on the ticket.)

But yes, in practical terms for the passenger

it would be hazardous for the holder of an Advance ticket to attempt to travel on any service other that one which is specified (whatever the route).