Critique my interpretation of the Routeing Guide

[b0b]

http://sites.google.com/site/capexed/train-info/the-routeing-guide

This is totally my own interpretation, subject to errors, misunderstandings etc. I hope we can work this into something thats close to the real RG, but is possibly more understandable, and has a group consensus on some of the more unclear points. To that end, I've tried to reference the ATOC documents.

If you see errors and/or omissions, let me know - also if you have any suggestions on how to clarify the wording please suggest. Looking for any ideas here.

I'm trying to figure out how to get Google to open this up to general editing / commenting as well.

Obviously my interpretation is the basis of the code I'm writing for "bob's routeing engine"

 

[John @ home]

Thanks for writing this, b0b.

The Routeing Guide

General Principals:

Principals should be Principles.

The valid routes between an origin and destination on a rail ticket are defined as:

I think you use the word valid correctly in this line.

Valid Route Rule [NRCOC 13 (a) (iii)]

I think you use the word valid differently here, and it would be better to use permitted or mapped.

My first draft of a definition of a valid route is:

Valid routes between the origin and the destination printed on a railway ticket for travel on National Rail in Great Britain are:

• the shortest route over which a regular passenger service operates, or a route not more than three miles longer than this shortest route; or
• the route taken by a through train which is advertised to operate between the origin and the destination printed on the ticket; or
• a mapped route shown in the National Routeing Guide; or
• EDIT - additional category added where origin and destination have a Routeing Point in common, a through train from the origin to the common Routeing Point followed by a through train from the common Routeing Point to the destination, even if this involves doubling back, that is passing through the same station more than once; or
• a route permitted by an Easement

unless the route is:

• a route prohibited by an Easement

subject to any route restriction shown on the ticket.

I'm not wholly satisfied with this definition because it does not take account of routes which would not be permitted except that a set of fares exist, e.g. East Midlands Parkway - Pontefract Stations route Peterborough.

EDIT - additional Open Question
Where origin and destination have a Routeing Point in common, does the common Routeing Point need to be an appropriate Routeing Point for the journey?

I have not yet had time to check your references. More on the other pages later.

 

[wibble]

Who is the target for your site? If it's the general public, I would change the FACETS ticket codes to their full 'Fares Simplification' names (i.e. SOS to Anytime Single etc) as the FACETS code is only visable to retail staff.

 

[John @ home]

Comments on Direct Service Rule page.

The Direct Service "through train" rule applies when:

I don't think it's helpful to introduce the word "Direct" in this context. "Direct" is a word which appears to have more than one meaning in the railway industry, there does not appear to be a common definition of it, and we have seen on the forum that some people hold very strong views that their meaning is the only one which can possibly be correct. I think it would be helpful to use the words "through train" instead.

(a) The train calls at the origin for picking up passengers and calls at the destination for setting down passengers [instructions pg. 1];
(b) The entire trip between the origin and destination can be made without changing trains [NRCOC 13 (f)];
(c) The train is shown as a direct train from the origin and destination in the National Rail Timetable [instructions page. 1]

You need to make clear whether you intend conditions (a), (b) and (c) to be joined by or or and.

(a) The train calls at the origin for picking up passengers and calls at the destination for setting down passengers [instructions pg. 1];

This is not an accurate quotation from page 1 of Instructions.

A through train is advertised in the passenger railway timetable as a direct service which offers travel between a customer’s origin station and final destination, as printed on the ticket for the journey being made.

Introducing picking up and setting down restrictions into the definition of a through train may restrict rights which passengers hold to combine tickets in accordance with Condition 19. It would be better to use the words in page 1 of Instructions and, if necessary, to deal with picking up and setting down restrictions by an additional open question.

Restrictions
(a) On trains that take a circular route, you may not pass though either the origin or destination when travelling between the origin and destination.

This is normally the case, but do we need to include the words unless an Easement permits it?

Restrictions
(b) Break of journey, if permitted by the ticket, is not valid at any intermediate station unless travel to that station is permitted by the Shortest Route rule, or the Valid Route rule.

This has been asserted on the forum. I think it has also been claimed by one TOC, SWT. But I am not aware of any rule from which the restriction can be traced directly, so it may be best to include it as an Open Question. My comments above on an Easement would also apply here.

Open Question
(b) On circular routes, is it only valid to travel in the direction which is the shortest from origin to destination?

I had not heard this suggestion previously and I don't see how it can possibly be the case. The NRCoC state

13. The route you are entitled to take
(a) You may travel between the stations shown on the ticket you hold in:
(i) a through train;

and

These Conditions set out your rights and any restrictions to those rights. The Train Companies may give you more extensive rights than those set out in these Conditions and, if they do so, these may be found in each Train Company’s Passenger’s Charter or other publications. Details of where you can find this information will be available when you buy your ticket. The Train Companies may not give you less extensive rights, except in the case of some types of reduced and discounted fare tickets where the relevant condition(s) specifically allow them to do so. These Conditions set out the minimum level of rights you are entitled to expect.

so it seems to me that any such restriction would be in breach of the Conditions.

Open Question
(b) Is it necessary to consult the 'easements' section of the NRG?

My opinion is that the sentence

You only need refer to the Routeing Guide when a customer is not using an advertised through train or the shortest route.

gives the passenger the right not to read any further, but to rely on that statement. You would need to consult the whole Guide, including the Easements section, for other categories of valid routes including, in my opinion, routes valid because they are not more than three miles longer than the shortest route.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Comments on Shortest Route Rule page.

Trains taking the shortest route are valid. The shortest route is:
(a) The shortest distance is calculated by using mileage figures from the National Rail Timetable [instructions pg. 1].
(b) Routes which have a scheduled passenger service [NRCOC 13 (a) (ii)]

Routes that are not more than 3 miles longer than the shortest route identified by (a) & (b) are also valid [nrg detail pg. 10].

Which part of page F10 are you relying on here? I can't spot anything allowing a journey not more than three miles longer than a through train.

Open Questions:
(a) Train services often take different routes on weekend days from weekend days, does the shortest route reflect scheduled passenger service on that day, or is the shortest route determined from the shortest route of any day?

Good question. Note that when there is a Routeing Point in common, page F12 requires the scheduled train service to be "regular", whatever that means.

Open Questions:
(b) If the shortest route involves doubling back, is that ok?

Can you quote an example of this, please?

Open Questions:
(c) Is it necessary to consult the 'easements' section of the NRG?

I gave my view on when it is and isn't necessary to consult the Easements section in my comments on the Direct Service Rule page.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I'll be as brief as I can be, I hope you don't mind me answering the open questions....

....(a) Train services often take different routes on weekend days from weekend days, does the shortest route reflect scheduled passenger service on that day, or is the shortest route determined from the shortest route of any day?
(b) If the shortest route involves doubling back, is that ok?
(c) Is it necessary to consult the 'easements' section of the NRG?....

(a) As it is the shortest route over which a sheduled service runs, it would be logical to assume it is for the day of the week on which you travel, but there is no guidance on this

(b) If it is the shortest route it is okay, but, as we are dealing with distance, not time, few (if any) journeys will be shorter with a doubleback in them.

(c) Depends, if it is the shortest route the NCoC allows it. If it is "within three miles" of the shortest route, that is only written in the NRG and...

...A journey which follows a route permitted by the Routeing Guide may be forbidden that route by a negative easement....

....(a) If there is a single map code: any route on the specified map from the origin routeing point to the destination routeing point without doubling back or passing through any routeing point discarded by 3 (a) (ii) (5) or any routeing point discarded by 4 (a) (ii) (5)....

Please change that rule name, it adds confusion, perhaps 'mapped routes rule' as has been suggested. I have picked out this section because there is only one reference to the "avoiding the routeing point" bit in the NRG, in an example, I don't believe it is intended or enforceable. It is not in the instructions for the NRG.

....Restrictions
(a) On trains that take a circular route, you may not pass though either the origin or destination when travelling between the origin and destination.
(b) Break of journey, if permitted by the ticket, is not valid at any intermediate station unless travel to that station is permitted by the Shortest Route rule, or the Valid Route rule....

(a) you should change this to something like....

"On trains that take a circular route, you must disembark the train the first time the train calls at the destination printed on your ticket. You cannot use a train that calls at your origin station after you have boarded it".

....If it passes through, but was advertised/sheduled as calling there only on the way back, it could be said that it is still valid until it actually calls there. Some might argue Condition 18 forbids that, but I believe Condition 13 allows it.

(b) There is no rule that says you can't break your journey on a train that calls at both your origin and destination station (unless the ticket conditions prohibit it anyway), however, if it is not a valid route by other means, you can only use services that call at both the origin and destination as printed on your ticket (conditions 13 & 16). But as John notes, some dispute this.

....Open Questions:
(a) On circular routes, is it only valid to travel in the direction which is the shortest from origin to destination?
(b) Is it necessary to consult the 'easements' section of the NRG?....

(a) The NCoC say they are valid on any direct trains (Condition 13), it is only in the NRG where easements can apply to restrict it further.
(b) Not in the case of direct trains, as the NCoC says direct services are always valid (Condition 13).

....My first draft of a definition of a valid route is:

Valid routes between the origin and the destination printed on a railway ticket for travel on National Rail in Great Britain are:

• the shortest route over which a regular passenger service operates, or a route not more than three miles longer than this shortest route; or
• the route taken by a through train which is advertised to operate between the origin and the destination printed on the ticket; or
• a mapped route shown in the National Routeing Guide; or
• EDIT - additional category added where origin and destination have a Routeing Point in common, a through train from the origin to the common Routeing Point followed by a through train from the common Routeing Point to the destination, even if this involves doubling back, that is passing through the same station more than once; or
• a route permitted by an Easement

unless the route is:

• a route prohibited by an Easement

subject to any route restriction shown on the ticket.

....

Where they have a common routeing point the only route is the shortest one over which a regular sheduled passenger service operates (unless there is an easement), so I'm not sure what your addition actually means???

Who is the target for your site? If it's the general public, I would change the FACETS ticket codes to their full 'Fares Simplification' names (i.e. SOS to Anytime Single etc) as the FACETS code is only visable to retail staff.

Definately agree with this.

 

[John @ home]

Comments on Valid Route Rule page.

(3) there is no doubling back for the entire route [instructions pg. 3]

I don't agree. (I think you mean step 3, rather than page 3.) On page A2, the wording of step 3 includes

No doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey) is allowed which may require customers to change trains short of the routeing point, unless an easement allows a longer alternative route.

Doubling back which does not require customers to change trains short of the routeing point is not forbidden. This point is emphasised on page F7 of the Routeing Guide in Detail.

Stratford-upon-Avon and Solihull have three routeing points in common: Birmingham, Coventry and Banbury. The shortest route is not via any of the routeing points but via Claverdon. Routes via Banbury and Coventry fail the route test for doubling back at Leamington. Changing at Tyseley is not permitted because it is over 3 miles longer than the shortest route and trains from Stratford-upon-Avon to Birmingham do not call at Tyseley. But the journey is valid on direct trains from Stratford-upon-Avon to Birmingham and from Birmingham to Solihull. Note, however, that if the same journey is made by trains which are not direct to and from Birmingham, this ceases to be a permitted route.

Although this example is no longer applicable following the creation of additional Routeing Points, the principle still applies. A current example is Kyle - Wick, which is permitted via Inverness on through trains to and from Inverness (although neither of the two main booking engine families will currently sell you a through ticket).

5 (c) If there are repeated map codes, there are no routes.

Please expand. This has been abbreviated so much that its meaning has been lost.

On route London tickets, I think you need to deal with the validity by a less expensive route avoiding London.

 

[b0b]

John, thanks for all your advice.

I'm still very concerned about the "passing through disallowed routeing points" issue.

It is correct that it is only mentioned in the NRG Detail document, however so is the "within 3 miles of shortest route rule" as far as I can tell. I don't think we can go picking and choosing which rules we like and which we don't..

I agree, that I will rename "Valid Routes" to "Mapped Routes". One thing I don't want to do is overload terms, and its dangerous to overload "valid".

The other thing about this document is I want the goal to be: what routes are valid if I'm holding a A to B "Any Permitted" ticket. I think the routeing guide is somewhat confusing due to the inclusion of ticket routeings. Then I want to create a page for ticketing to include the rules about route restricted / combinations of tickets. Hence the "set down/pick up" rule.

I accept that it might not be possible to fully seperate routed/combined tickets from route calculations, but I want to try.

Also, as you've noted, I've included rules, that either we've deduced as a group (the circular rules) or we have ATOC support of (breaking journey at stations valid only on direct routes), so of course the document will look different.

I'll definently add the names of the tickets for fares check to the document, but I think I should leave the codes. The only reasonable way a member of the public can perform a fares check is via Avantix Traveller and it helps to have an unambiguous code in that case.

Thanks for all the feedback so far.

 

[tony_mac]

Originally Posted by National Routeing Guide - Instructions
No doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey) is allowed which may require customers to change trains short of the routeing point, unless an easement allows a longer alternative route.

I interpret this as ...

No doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey) is allowed (and this may require customers to change trains short of the routeing point), unless an easement allows a longer alternative route.

which is quite a different meaning

But the journey is valid on direct trains from Stratford-upon-Avon to Birmingham and from Birmingham to Solihull..

Yes, but in the same example

Routes via Banbury and Coventry fail the route test for doubling back at Leamington

All three are shared routeing points (in the example). How can two fail for doubling back and the other one doesn't?

I don't actually think it's possible to work out a single 'correct' meaning for this rule.

I don't think we can go picking and choosing which rules we like and which we don't..

The unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations says something like, in the event of unclear conditions, the interpretation most favourable to the consumer shall prevail.

 

[b0b]

Where they have a common routeing point the only route is the shortest one over which a regular sheduled passenger service operates (unless there is an easement), so I'm not sure what your addition actually means???.

That's not quite true, it is also permitted to take a through train from the origin to the routeing point, along with a through train from the routeing point to the destination, according to the NRG Detail document.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

All three are shared routeing points (in the example). How can two fail for doubling back and the other one doesn't?

I don't actually think it's possible to work out a single 'correct' meaning for this rule.

One passes because doubling back is irrelevant if its the shortest distance journey on through trains to/from the routeing point. Shoot, that doesnt look right

That's how I interpret it anyway.

 

[OwlMan]

FRom the NRG glossary:
Common Routeing Point Rule
When a journey is between stations that have one or more common
routeing points, the permitted journey takes the route of shortest
distance or any route no more than 3 miles longer, whether or not
they pass through the common routeing point. Also permitted are
journeys that use direct trains to and from the common routeing
point.From Section A
STEP 3
Common Routeing Points
If the origin and destination have a common routeing point, the permitted
route is direct via the shortest distance from the origin to the destination
over which a regular scheduled passenger train service operates. No doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey) is allowed which may re uire customers to change trains short of the routeing point, unless an easement allows a longer alternative route.Example (a) - Fort William to Wemyss Bay - common routeing point Glasgow
Group, but in adjacent zones with no doubling back involved.
Where there is no common routeing point, appropriate routeing points must
be selected for the origin station and for the destination station. No more
than two routeing points are used to identify any one route for a journey
(one for the originating station and one for the destination station).

AS both of these documents wsere published at the same time (they are actually dated different but first appeared on the ATOC website at the same time It is difficult to decide exactly what is allowed.

The only interperation that I think is valid is that you are allowed to take trains to & from the common routeing point but not stop short of there.

the only thing against this is that it means that a journey from Penzance to Hayle is valid via Plymouth on through trains.

Peter

 

[b0b]

colby:

the way I read that is, that there are 2 choices

(a) the shortest route from origin to destination without doubling back (a restatement of the shortest route rule?)
(b) the shortest route comprising of a through train from origin to common routeing point and a through train from the common routeing point to destination (doubling back is ok)

that interpretation seems to be supported by the NRG Detail document Stratford Upon Avon to Solihull example.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

That's not quite true, it is also permitted to take a through train from the origin to the routeing point, along with a through train from the routeing point to the destination, according to the NRG Detail document....

Ahh, interesting, I thought all the examples were the same (well, Church Stretton replaced Craven Arms in one), I must have missed that one. The old example read....

....

Example: Using the Rail Network Map, GBPRT, Fares Manual and National Routeing Guide to find a permitted route when the origin and destination stations have a routeing point in common.

If there is a common routeing point, then that means that the stations are in the same or adjacent zones then the permitted route is the shortest route.

e.g. South Ruislip to Stoke Mandeville

Both are in an imaginery zone bounded by Banbury, Oxford and London Group, so the fares shown on the fares manual are only valid by the shortest route which is via Aylesbury (you may confirm this using the mileages given in the appropriate tables of the GBPRT.these show that via Aylesbury is shorter than via London)....

No mention of going via the common routeing point. So I guess this is a rule someone has made up for some as yet unknown reason.

I also think the "Routeing Guide in Detail" title in the NRG has been wrongly used, in the original document it came under "Examples and Illustrations" as pages F1-F10, along with "Journey Examples" which still features at the back of Section F (F11-F19).