Do I need to give up my seat?

[Deerfold]

This is what-iffery and rather unlikely... but the answer in any case is yes, those without reservations should be more inconvenienced than those with.

As I said earlier in the thread I saw someone being asked to move seat twice last time I was on a service where some reservations had not been put out.

I was in a better position than him, by pure luck of not sitting in a seat that someone had reserved. I'm sure he'd have been quite happy to sit in the seat he ended up in if he could have detected that was a "safe" one to start with. I was also anxious that I could be asked to move at any time as I couldn't know if someone had reserved my seat later down the line so was not as relaxed as much as normal.

 

[yorkie]

Sorry, but I'm getting a little irritated now.

So am I.

So let me try one last time. WHY is it reasonable that someone with a valid reservation can't use it (in favour of someone whose only "rights" are related to that they got there first) simply because there isn't a notice?

It is reasonable to say that the Train Company will try to honour reservations but it cannot be guaranteed.

It is unreasonable to expect a passenger to have to move from what appears to be an unreserved seat at every station stop, with no way for the passenger to know which seats will result in eviction!

Let's say someone with a back injury sat in an unreserved seat from the origin, the train then filled up, and you then asked that person to move. Would you consider your request "reasonable"? Would you insist they moved? What if that person was pregnant? Would you insist then? And if not, you would then be in the position where someone may ask you to move at every station stop. You wouldn't like that would you?

It's pretty clear to me that the majority, including experienced Guards, agree that you either have visible reservations or the train is treated as non-reserved. Most trains in this country are non-reserved anyway so it's hardly a problem for a train to be unreserved. Inconvenient for some, sure, but better than playing "musical chairs" at every station stop!

Out of interest, if you worked for a TOC like FCC, and I asked you if a group of people asked you to reserve seats from Finsbury Park to Stevenage on a peak service, would you issue them with some authority to turf people out who had sat down in those invisibly-reserved seats at Kings Cross? And what do you think the outcome of that would be?

 

[ValleyLines142]

The premise that all people who have reservations have made extra effort over those who haven't is false.

Why so? They've used common sense and know trains are busy.

Furthermore, under the current system, those with reservations who are inconvenienced are compensated for that.

Without sounding rude, I'd expect this. There could be a possibilty of me having to stand on a long-distance journey, especially with CrossCountry and their 220s!

Let's say someone with a back injury sat in an unreserved seat from the origin, the train then filled up, and you then asked that person to move. Would you consider your request "reasonable"? Would you insist they moved? What if that person was pregnant? Would you insist then? And if not, you would then be in the position where someone may ask you to move at every station stop. You wouldn't like that would you?

Obviously, that's a different scenario. Hopefully such circumstances won't happen.

 

[Goatboy]

Because people such as myself have gone out of the way and physically made the effort to make a reservation. As the saying goes, you can only get what you put in.

It's not really like this for most people with reservations. Most passengers holding a seat reservation have not gone out of the way and physically made the effort to obtain one. They have been forced to take one in order to restrict flexibility because they have gone out of their way to purchase a cheaper ticket.

People without reservations are, generally, holding more expensive tickets. This doesn't mean they have more 'rights' than those with Advance tickets, infact they don't, but it's rather silly to suggest those with reservations have 'taken the trouble' when only in a minority of cases is this true.

 

[cuccir]

Why so? They've used common sense and know trains are busy.

Read posts 177 and 92. Essentially because:

• Booking a seat is not an extra effort/hassle in many cases
• Many people are not in a position to book a seat; it is not a choice to book or not book, as you seem to present it

By the way, most times on a journey of over an hour I will have booked myself!

I have not made the "effort" claim.

No, but you have made the claim that in a situation where the choice is either to inconvenience passengers with reservations or passengers without reservations, that passengers without reservations should be inconvenienced more. I've not seen good grounds offered for that claim.

I concede your point about compensation claims to a certain extent, though the solution here is to make it easier/quicker/simpler to claim this money back, rather than to move to a different solution.

In fact I'm sure you find that much of the time it is moot and people sort it out without fuss.

Agreed. I'd stop responding on this frankly ludicrous thread if people were willing to acknowledge that this a choice between two tough options, and that which you pick is based on a series of claims and presumptions, rather than some sort of absolute and correct truth!

 

[ValleyLines142]

Read posts 177 and 92. Essentially because:

• Booking a seat is not an extra effort/hassle in many cases
• Many people are not in a position to book a seat; it is not a choice to book or not book, as you seem to present it

By the way, most times on a journey of over an hour I will have booked myself!

Well, as I think we've discovered, this is all open to debate. There's pros and cons, of course.

 

[island]

So he said that you won't get charged for a seat reservation if you're not buying a ticket. In other words, he's basically saying that it's free to make a seat reservation if you already own a ticket; which is true and has been the case with me several times before.

FGW's policy is to charge £5 per seat reservation not made at the same time as purchasing the ticket. I don't know if that's applied in practice.

 

[gazzak]

It's pretty clear to me that the majority, including experienced Guards, agree that you either have visible reservations or the train is treated as non-reserved.

The greater issue here is being missed by both sides. Rail staff and very regular passengers know how this works, (and so do I now I've read this thread), but the average once or twice a year rail passenger who reserves their table seat expects to sit where their ticket says they will sit. How on earth is the one time rail user supposed to know that it's an unreserved train now?

They don't, and I'm just surprised there aren't more arguments on trains.

How about some common sense and the guard announcing at every stop that the train is unreserved because of .....?

 

[SWTCommuter]

The greater issue here is being missed by both sides. Rail staff and very regular passengers know how this works, (and so do I now I've read this thread), but the average once or twice a year rail passenger who reserves their table seat expects to sit where their ticket says they will sit. How on earth is the one time rail user supposed to know that it's an unreserved train now?

They don't, and I'm just surprised there aren't more arguments on trains.

How about some common sense and the guard announcing at every stop that the train is unreserved because of .....?

Some guards do that already, the problems arise when they don't. Why not just state on the reservation coupon: 'Only valid if corresponding reservation notice is displayed on or adjacent to seat'.

Then everyone would know where they stand (no pun intended).

 

[trainophile]

It's hardly likely that someone would have to stand for an entire journey, as most people vacate their seat when approaching their destination station well before passengers boarding at that point are in a position to take a newly-vacated seat.

Most people don't care too much which seat they occupy, so any vacated one will do. I appreciate that if you wish to work then a table seat is preferable, but in a busy train situation having a seat at all is the objective.

I know there are longish stretches on some routes where there are no station stops, but it would be unusual rather than commonplace for someone to have to stand all the way from e.g. Crewe to Euston.

Some of us travel with Advance tickets on operators who deliberately do not issue seat reservations with this type of ticket, even on request, so I guess we are just doomed to play musical seats on every otherwise reservable journey. Despite this, in over four years of frequent travel, I have only ever had to stand once, for one stop, between Crewe and Nantwich.

How often is the situation under discussion actually likely to be a real problem?

 

[ValleyLines142]

People without reservations are, generally, holding more expensive tickets. This doesn't mean they have more 'rights' than those with Advance tickets, infact they don't, but it's rather silly to suggest those with reservations have 'taken the trouble' when only in a minority of cases is this true.

That's not always the case. I fork out the maximum priced fare between Cardiff and Bristol. Does this mean I'm not entitled to a reservation?

FGW's policy is to charge £5 per seat reservation not made at the same time as purchasing the ticket. I don't know if that's applied in practice.

It's not; well, as far as I can see. I've always gone and made seat reservations and I've never been charged once, and so I shouldn't, quite frankly.

It's hardly likely that someone would have to stand for an entire journey, as most people vacate their seat when approaching their destination station well before passengers boarding at that point are in a position to take a newly-vacated seat.

Try the 1654 Bristol Temple Meads to Cardiff service. Beyond a joke! This is why I reserve a seat, especially on this service, as it's very crowded. I would be far from happy if the reservation system failed too.

Most people don't care too much which seat they occupy, so any vacated one will do. I appreciate that if you wish to work then a table seat is preferable, but in a busy train situation having a seat at all is the objective.

True. This is the case with me. But the location of where exactly people sit anyway is irrelavant here.

 

[6Gman]

It's hardly likely that someone would have to stand for an entire journey, as most people vacate their seat when approaching their destination station well before passengers boarding at that point are in a position to take a newly-vacated seat.

But if it turns out to be an invisible reservation then you're back where you started (potentially) - back on your feet!

 

[Goatboy]

That's not always the case. I fork out the maximum priced fare between Cardiff and Bristol. Does this mean I'm not entitled to a reservation?

Where has anyone said you are not 'entitled' to a reservation? Of course you are.

We are discussing what happens in the event of a process failure. The TOC has made a mistake and must rectify the situation for you. This rectification could involve compensation, perhaps an upgrade to First Class, but should never involve inconveniencing another passenger who had sat in a seat in good faith.

 

[Greenback]

It is true to say that most situations where there are no reservations displayed can and will be sorted out amicably with a touch of common sense.

If I am travelling alone, and there are spare single seats, I will happily move to allow a couple or a family to sit together.

Yet it has been my experience that a single traveller will expect myself and my partner to move into two single seats just so they can sit in the exact seat they have resereved. I don't consider that reasonable or based on any common sense, when there are no reservation details displayed and there are other, single, seats available.

Sadly, until everyone has the same idea of what is reasonable and what isn't, we need to have some sort of rule that prevails when agreement cannot be reached. And the only sensible and practical way to do this is the simple statement that where no reservations are displayed, there are no reservations!

 

[ValleyLines142]

Where has anyone said you are not 'entitled' to a reservation? Of course you are.

I wasn't saying that directly; sorry, I should have worded this better. I was just saying that those who have full-price range of tickets get seat reservations too.

We are discussing what happens in the event of a process failure. The TOC has made a mistake and must rectify the situation for you. This rectification could involve compensation, perhaps an upgrade to First Class, but should never involve inconveniencing another passenger who had sat in a seat in good faith.

I'd be pretty happy with that, in fairness.

If someone had sat there in good faith, I'd understand, but if it's ignorance, then I'd be less forgiving.

 

[Goatboy]

If someone had sat there in good faith, I'd understand, but if it's ignorance, then I'd be less forgiving.

How could it possibly be ignorance? The only way it would be ignorance is if the reservations are correctly displayed and they ignored them. This isn't what we are discussing, in this scenario you'd be absolutely entitled to have them turfed out.

 

[John @ home]

I fork out the maximum priced fare between Cardiff and Bristol. Does this mean I'm not entitled to a reservation?

On nearly half the trains between Cardiff Central and Bristol Temple Meads, you can't get a reservation because the train company doesn't offer them.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

How could it possibly be ignorance? The only way it would be ignorance is if the reservations are correctly displayed and they ignored them. This isn't what we are discussing, in this scenario you'd be absolutely entitled to have them turfed out.

You might have to define what you mean by 'ignorance' here. Its basic meaning is being unaware, but the colloquial usage is different. Ignorance is not the act of 'ignoring'.

 

[Goatboy]

Either definition fits fine. The act of sitting in a seat without any reservation labels or indication cannot be 'ignorance'.

 

[ainsworth74]

It's not; well, as far as I can see. I've always gone and made seat reservations and I've never been charged once, and so I shouldn't, quite frankly.

It is FGW policy. But staff on the ground don't enforce it very often. Hence why way back when I used the word 'should'.

 

[ValleyLines142]

How could it possibly be ignorance? The only way it would be ignorance is if the reservations are correctly displayed and they ignored them. This isn't what we are discussing, in this scenario you'd be absolutely entitled to have them turfed out.

Okay then. If so.

It is FGW policy. But staff on the ground don't enforce it very often. Hence why way back when I used the word 'should'.

Ah I see. Regardless I don't see why we should.

Whilst on this topic, if I asked for a seat reservation when I made a booking for a Day Return would I get charged? (if the £5 policy was absolutely compulsory).

On nearly half the trains between Cardiff Central and Bristol Temple Meads, you can't get a reservation because the train company doesn't offer them.

Reservations are available on the 0628, 0730, 0830 and every 30 past until 2030 from Cardiff and from Bristol on the 0754, 0854 and every 54 until 2254. So that's quite a handful, in fairness. That's thirty-one trains.

 

[island]

The FGW policy is that a reservation booked when you buy your ticket is free. One at any other time is £5. Perhaps it might be aimed at putting season ticket holders off reserving on the RDG-PAD peak fast services.

 

[Flamingo]

Try going up to BPW (approx 10minutes) then getting a HST to Cdf, plenty of empty seats on the HST.

 

[ValleyLines142]

Try going up to BPW (approx 10minutes) then getting a HST to Cdf, plenty of empty seats on the HST.

It's fine with HSTs because they're eight carriages long, plus Coach E is always unreserved, but when First Great Western think three carriages is appropriate on the 4.54 BRI - CDF, then it's a different matter!

The FGW policy is that a reservation booked when you buy your ticket is free. One at any other time is £5. Perhaps it might be aimed at putting season ticket holders off reserving on the RDG-PAD peak fast services.

Ah, fair enough. As I say before, I don't see why they think it's necessary to charge £5. That's what the bloody seats are for! #doesntmakesense

Not that happens to me, so this is techincally irrelavant, but if the £5 charge (which is supposed to be) was compulsory, I would deem that unfair. Why should people making a reservation at the time get one for free, but at other times not?

I also fail to see what they'd gain by doing that. It's not like it's a huge effort to print out a tag to put on a seat. Grr some things do annoy me sometimes! ha!

 

[Goatboy]

It's fine with HSTs because they're eight carriages long, plus Coach E is always unreserved, but when First Great Western think three carriages is appropriate on the 4.54 BRI - CDF, then it's a different matter!

They don't 'think three carriages are appropriate', they had many of their 158's taken away from them.

That's what the bloody seats are for! #doesntmakesense

Oh, a twitter hashtag. How terribly witty.

 

[ValleyLines142]

They don't 'think three carriages are appropriate', they had many of their 158's taken away from them.

Really?! Dear me. FGW's Facebook page is full of their customers telling them how overcrowded their trains are!

 

[CC 72100]

They don't 'think three carriages are appropriate', they had many of their 158's taken away from them.

Exactly, I'm sure they'd love to be in a position to further strengthen these services. Portsmouth -Cardiff is a busy run, but unfortunately, we all know that there is no stock anywhere to do this. As has been pointed out by Flamingo and other posters, toddle down to Parkway and you'll have two trains an hour with plenty of seats.

 

[yorkie]

I think we're going round in circles.

Indeed we are

Okay then. If so.

So you finally accept that if people board a train without any reservations in force, then they are not "ignorant" and they are acting in good faith by sitting anywhere, in accordance with FGW policy, and what most (not all) people on this thread believe is acceptable. Good We can move on then!

Ah I see. Regardless I don't see why we should.

So you keep saying, but the reservation charge really isn't anything to do with the matter at hand. There are plenty of ways to avoid the reservation charge anyway (book at a non-FGW station, get your reservation when you buy the ticket, etc).

Whilst on this topic, if I asked for a seat reservation when I made a booking for a Day Return would I get charged? (if the £5 policy was absolutely compulsory).

You had earlier quoted both ainsworth74 and Island informing you of this:

FGW's policy is to charge £5 per seat reservation not made at the same time as purchasing the ticket. I don't know if that's applied in practice.

It's not; well, as far as I can see. I've always gone and made seat reservations and I've never been charged once, and so I shouldn't, quite frankly.

So I'm not quite sure if repeating it again will help, but I will try, one final time:-

It is FGW policy to charge for seat reservations if you are not buying the ticket at the same time, except in certain circumstances (as mentioned by Ainsworth74 earlier).

So, no charge if you are obtaining the reservation at the same time as buying the ticket.

It is not "compulsory" but it is their policy, so it will depend on the discretion of the clerk. If you go to the clerk saying things like "I don't see why I should pay for a reservation" I would suggest the clerk is less likely to show discretion and waive the charge.

On nearly half the trains between Cardiff Central and Bristol Temple Meads, you can't get a reservation because the train company doesn't offer them.

Reservations are available on the 0628, 0730, 0830 and every 30 past until 2030 from Cardiff and from Bristol on the 0754, 0854 and every 54 until 2254. So that's quite a handful, in fairness. That's thirty-one trains.

Yes, as John @ Home said!

...but when First Great Western think three carriages is appropriate on the 4.54 BRI - CDF, then it's a different matter!

FGW "think 3 coaches is appropriate on the 1654 Bristol to Cardiff"? Well, that (false) claim sounds familiar... Ah yes, you made that claim a few days ago. BestWestern explained the situation to you, and you replied saying "fair enough":-

For example, I travelled on the 1654 Bristol TM to Cardiff service around two weeks ago with a friend (I think we had reservations in Coach B, seats 79 and 80, IIRC). This is a VERY busy train, which FGW still insist three carriages is enough – the answer is it’s not, quite frankly, but that’s another topic and irrelevant to this case.

FGW don't insist anything, they use what rolling stock is made available to them, as with most other TOCs. This has been covered many times before!

Fair enough. I've heard previously that there's a national shortage of carriages but how come the 0730 from Cardiff has a 150 attached as far as Bristol and how come the 0600 Portsmouth to Cardiff has a 153 attached between Westbury and Bristol? Also, I've never heard of what's being made available to them.

Have you changed your mind since you accepted that explanation? If you wish to discuss it further, as I said before, create a new thread in an appropriate forum!

They don't 'think three carriages are appropriate', they had many of their 158's taken away from them.

Really?! Dear me. FGW's Facebook page is full of their customers telling them how overcrowded their trains are!

Yes, really! I do not think the DfT, who decide rolling stock allocation, are going to be too fussed over people complaining on FGW's Facebook page, especially given there are similar complaints by customers of other TOCs (e.g. Northern). If you wish to discuss this matter further, I suggest either locating an existing thread (there are many) or perhaps creating a new one. I think you'll find plenty of reading material on the subject already!

Can we please not go round in circles on any of these issues again?

 

[Goatboy]

Really?! Dear me. FGW's Facebook page is full of their customers telling them how overcrowded their trains are!

Yes, really. They used to have lots more 158's. Then they got a load of them taken away and given to other operators and are now forced to use 150's on many of the services which were traditionally 158's. They've already tried to increase capacity on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route by converting 2 car 158's into 3 car ones (Which further resulted in even more 150's on long distance trips).

 

[ValleyLines142]

So you finally accept that if people board a train without any reservations in force, then they are not "ignorant" and they are acting in good faith by sitting anywhere, in accordance with FGW policy, and what most (not all) people on this thread believe is acceptable. Good We can move on then!

Yes. I said that by saying okay then. Now you're repeating yourself.....

If you go to the clerk saying things like "I don't see why I should pay for a reservation" I would suggest the clerk is less likely to show discretion and waive the charge.

I'm obviously not going to say that so why suggest such a thing?

Yes, as John @ Home said!

He said only a handful; it's slightly more than that. But anyway as others have said it's not a major effort to pop to Parkway and get a HST from there, not sure whether the ticket is valid though.

FGW "think 3 coaches is appropriate on the 1654 Bristol to Cardiff"? Well, that (false) claim sounds familiar... Ah yes, you made that claim a few days ago. BestWestern explained the situation to you, and you replied saying "fair enough":-

Yes, I said fair enough as somebody told me the answer. Doesn't mean I agree with FGW's policy at the same time though.

Can we please not go round in circles on any of these issues again?

This is only general banter, not a full-blown argument.....