E-Ticket via St Pancras

[Richardr]

Earlier this week I travelled from St Albans to Sheffield via St Pancras. The ticket was an e-ticket bought on the Thameslink website. It didn't open any barriers, whether at St Albans City, St Pancras Thameslink, or St Pancras East Midlands barriers [no barriers at Sheffield]. It also didn't work on the ticket inspection [there was one on the out journey only] with the inspector saying that that route didn't come up on his machine.

Just checking the ticketsplit/railforums website for a similar return later this week it says "Sorry, we're only permitted to sell paper tickets for the journey you've selected".

Is it mistake that Thameslink sold this as an e-ticket?

 

[jfollows]

Is it mistake that Thameslink sold this as an e-ticket?

I would say so, yes, because the ticket you bought was presumably one of the ones with the "+" maltese cross, and other selling sites would probably interpret this to mean a paper ticket is required.
Also, I'd imagine the ticket would be valid via Watford Junction to London, and a paper ticket would be required for the Underground from Euston to Saint Pancras. In theory anyway, we know that in practice you'd walk or you'd go into Saint Pancras directly anyway.

 

[Howardh]

I would say so, yes, because the ticket you bought was presumably one of the ones with the "+" maltese cross, and other selling sites would probably interpret this to mean a paper ticket is required.
Also, I'd imagine the ticket would be valid via Watford Junction to London, and a paper ticket would be required for the Underground from Euston to Saint Pancras. In theory anyway, we know that in practice you'd walk or you'd go into Saint Pancras directly anyway.

So if I wanted to go Manchester - Euston - (tube to) London Bridge - Brighton all on one fare/ticket I could only do that with a paper ticket rather than an e-ticket?

 

[jfollows]

So if I wanted to go Manchester - Euston - (tube to) London Bridge - Brighton all on one fare/ticket I could only do that with a paper ticket rather than an e-ticket?

Today, yes. And you should not be sold an e-ticket. The gates for the Underground can’t read e-tickets but can read paper tickets.

 

[Haywain]

Earlier this week I travelled from St Albans to Sheffield via St Pancras. The ticket was an e-ticket bought on the Thameslink website. It didn't open any barriers, whether at St Albans City, St Pancras Thameslink, or St Pancras East Midlands barriers [no barriers at Sheffield]. It also didn't work on the ticket inspection [there was one on the out journey only] with the inspector saying that that route didn't come up on his machine.

Just checking the ticketsplit/railforums website for a similar return later this week it says "Sorry, we're only permitted to sell paper tickets for the journey you've selected".

Is it mistake that Thameslink sold this as an e-ticket?

Sounds like a question for @alistairlees

 

[Howardh]

Today, yes. And you should not be sold an e-ticket. The gates for the Underground can’t read e-tickets but can read paper tickets.

Thanks, if I recall every through ticket I've bought was paper and via London Bridge, I wonder if they don't do it via St Pancras to avoid pax mistakenly trying to get the tube to London Bridge (or Victoria) with a e-ticket?

 

[yorkie]

I've sent a message to someone at the relevant website provider.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2024 ==

Sounds like a question for @alistairlees

I don't think the website uses his company (yet?) but you could test this to see if you get the same result on Railsmartr.

 

[Richardr]

Thanks for the responses. There's no obvious Maltese Cross on the ticket [first leg attached]

 

[jfollows]

Thanks for the responses. There's no obvious Maltese Cross on the ticket [first leg attached]

That’s fine for e-ticket, there are other tickets which might seem the same but which have the “cross London” flag set. https://www.brfares.com/!expert?orig=SAC&dest=SHF&period=20240303 shows the range. “+AP LONDON” tickets cost the same but will force paper tickets anyway. So depending on which you get, you may or may not be able to have an e-ticket! Not sensible or logical is it?

EDIT I’m only guessing, but it’s that your more recent check gave you an “+AP LONDON” ticket which forced the paper ticket, whereas your original one was “AP EMR & CONNECT” which can be e-ticket.

 

[Wallsendmag]

Thanks for the responses. There's no obvious Maltese Cross on the ticket [first leg attached]

Pretty sure this isn't valid via London as there is an AP London fare as well

 

[Richardr]

Pretty sure this isn't valid via London as there is an AP London fare as well

I may have misunderstood what you mean, but the ticket is clearly via St Pancras.

 

[Haywain]

I may have misunderstood what you mean, but the ticket is clearly via St Pancras.

Try 'shouldn't be valid' instead. I wouldn't be surprised if it was not intended to be valid via St Pancras.

 

[Wallsendmag]

I may have misunderstood what you mean, but the ticket is clearly via St Pancras.

There are two AP route for this journey the one you have isn't intended to be used via STP hence the problems

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are two AP route for this journey the one you have isn't intended to be used via STP hence the problems

Is there some sort of double back easement that's causing this?

 

[yorkie]

Without looking at the details, it's not uncommon for tickets to be valid via routes which the pricing manager/team may not intend to be valid.

The fact an itinerary has been issued validates the ticket. However if attention is drawn to it, then negative easements or other rules can be introduced, which bar the use of such routes/itineraries in future. Edit: except not in this case as there is no price differential

 

[Haywain]

The fact an itinerary has been issued validates the ticket.

Absolutely agree.

However if attention is drawn to it, then negative easements or other rules can be introduced, which bar the use of such routes/itineraries in future.

As there is no price difference between the two routes, I think discussion of this case is entirely reasonable and should not disadvantage anyone.