help with permitted route - please!!!

[Swirlz]

hi everyone

i've joined because i've started having problems with ticket guards on merseyrail and i'm not sure if i've calculated a route incorrectly.

i want to travel from rock ferry to bache, and get a season ticket each week, but that is £23.00.

I had a bit of a research and decided that a Bidston to Hawarden ticket at £18.70 should be valid because there is an "easement" in atoc route guide, that says, 700076 Customers travelling from either the West Kirby or New Brighton Line Stations to or via Shotton may travel via Birkenhead Hamilton Square. This easement applies in both directions.

As Bidston is on the West Kirby line, I thought this "easement" was supposed to allow travel Hamilton square, so you could go via Chester.

Hawarden is beyond Shotton. (So in theory I think Bidston to Hamilton Square to Chester to Shotton to Hawarden is permitted)...

I "start" my journey at Rock ferry and get off at Bache, which is on the Birkenhead-Chester line.

However, merseyrail say this isn't valid and I can only use direct Arriva train from Bidston.

Can anybody help me???

Thanks

 

[yorkie]

... there is an "easement" in atoc route guide, that says, 700076 Customers travelling from either the West Kirby or New Brighton Line Stations to or via Shotton may travel via Birkenhead Hamilton Square. ....

Can you confirm, with a simple yes/no:

Are you travelling from a West Kirby or New Brighton Line Station?
​

If I have got this wrong, I apologise, as I am not an expert on this area, but I have travelled on all the lines in the Merseyside area, and I am looking at a map, and trying to make sense of your post, it sounds to me like you are actually travelling between two stations on the Chester to Liverpool line! In which case, the easement does not apply, as you are not doing a journey that the easement applies to.

 

[Swirlz]

Hi

Bidston is on the West Kirby line, but I think the purpose of the "easement" is to allow travel on the Merseyrail route via Chester,(which is where I board and alight). Why else would they allow travel via Hamilton Square?

I thought you could start/end your journey on any route that is allowed?

This is the route that I think a Hawarden to Bidston ticket allows because of that easement:

Hawarden
Shotton
Chester
Bache ==Get on here==
Capenhurst
Hooton
Eastham Rake
Bromborough
Bromborough Rake
Spital
Port Sunlight
Bebington
Rock Ferry ==Get off here==
Green Lane
Birkenhead Ctl
Birkenhead H Sq
Conway Park
Birkenhead Park
Birkenhead North
Bidston

Can you not start short / end late and use the easement for a weekly season ticket?

 

[soil]

I think unless you are in fact travelling from a West Kirby or Brighton Line station, the easement is not relevant.

 

[barrykas]

From the Routeing Guide:

Rock Ferry has Hooton and Liverpool Group as routeing points
Bache has Chester and Hooton as routeing points

As Hooton is common to both, the permitted route is direct via the shortest distance from the origin to the destination over which a regular scheduled passenger service operates.

In this case, that would be the direct route from Rock Ferry to Bache via Hooton.

Doing the same check for Bidston - Hawarden gives:

Bidston has Liverpool Group and Shotton as routeing points
Hawarden has Shotton and Wrexham Group as routeing points

Once again, Shotton is a common routeing point, so the most direct route rule comes into play, and I would suggest that travel via Hooton would not be permitted on such a ticket.

In addition, entering Bidston - Hawarden via Hamilton Square into the National Rail journey planner says that two tickets would be needed for such a journey.

Cheers,

Barry

 

[bb21]

I think unless you are in fact travelling from a West Kirby or Brighton Line station, the easement is not relevant.

I agree with this interpretation.

@OP. You are not travelling from a West Kirby or Brighton Line station. You are travelling from a Chester Line station. The easement is not applicable.

Easements that apply to tickets rather than journeys will explicitly state "passengers holding tickets valid between ..." or something along similar lines.

 

[oversteer]

A ticket inspector would presumably believe your ticket is valid if you stated you had started at one of the relevant stations, were on your way to Hawarden, and were breaking your journey at Bache.

However IMO this would be tantamount to fraud and you may well find yourself the subject of an investigation should anyone notice. (eg. the ticket inspector notices you get on at Rock Ferry every day)

 

[kieron]

From the Routeing Guide:

Rock Ferry has Hooton and Liverpool Group as routeing points
Bache has Chester and Hooton as routeing points

I don't understand why you brought this up, as it does not involve travelling between the stations shown on the ticket Swirlz holds.

In addition, entering Bidston - Hawarden via Hamilton Square into the National Rail journey planner says that two tickets would be needed for such a journey.

Oddly enough, one of the alternatives involves buying one ticket from Bidston-Shotton and a second from Shotton-Hawarden. I think they may have implemented the easement incorrectly.

Northern Rail are happy enough with the route through Birkenhead Hamilton Square, so Swirlz can at least get an itinerary to show people.

Easements that apply to tickets rather than journeys will explicitly state "passengers holding tickets valid between ..." or something along similar lines.

There are no easements which use that form (not least because the routeing guide is intended to determine validity). The only references to tickets in the easement list relate to the route printed on them, Any Permitted in this case.

As the only reference to the routeing guide in the NRCoC is as a way to determine valid routes for a journey between the stations shown on the ticket you hold, using it on its own to determine the validity of a ticket used for some other journey seems unwise to me.

 

[John @ home]

At the centre of this confusion is Swirlz's statement that

Bidston is on the West Kirby line

If Bidston is a West Kirby Line Station, then Easement 700076 applies. If not, it doesn't. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the phrase West Kirby Line Station is defined anywhere.

Bidston is at the junction of the Liverpool - West Kirby line with the Bidston - Wrexham line. So if Bidston is a West Kirby Line Station then it is also a Wrexham Line Station. But Easement 700076 applies to "Customers travelling from either the West Kirby or New Brighton Line Stations", not to customers travelling from Wrexham Line Stations. I am therefore not surprised that Merseyrail take the view that Bidston is not a West Kirby Line Station for this purpose, and that the West Kirby Line Stations are the six stations which lie exclusively on that line, namely Leasowe, Moreton, Meols, Manor Road, Hoylake and West Kirby.

Unfortunately, having asked Merseyrail whether the Easement applies from Bidston, I can't see any realistic prospect of getting their decision reversed.

 

[bb21]

As the only reference to the routeing guide in the NRCoC is as a way to determine valid routes for a journey between the stations shown on the ticket you hold, using it on its own to determine the validity of a ticket used for some other journey seems unwise to me.

I confess that I didn't word that very well. My point was that the easement applied specifically to the journey being undertaken, not the ticket held.

If the OP's journey is from a Chester Line station rather than a West Kirby Line station, it is absurd to think that an otherwise invalid route but for the existence of the easement suddenly becomes a permitted route. It is definitely not permitted by any section in the Routeing Guide other than the Easement, and the Easement does not apply in this case IMO.

 

[kieron]

At the centre of this confusion is Swirlz's statement that If Bidston is a West Kirby Line Station, then Easement 700076 applies. If not, it doesn't. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the phrase West Kirby Line Station is defined anywhere.

I don't think there has been any indication that Merseyrail consider the West Kirby line to be anything other than the line trains to West Kirby use, as used here. I don't think we're looking at a Merseyrail policy here, but the opinion of a member of staff (whether on a train, at a station or at a call centre) who would rather passengers using Merseyrail services bought Merseyrail-only tickets.

I confess that I didn't word that very well. My point was that the easement applied specifically to the journey being undertaken, not the ticket held.

I don't think the issue is with your wording. An easement which includes the effects of articles 16 and 19 of the NRCoC would have to explicitly includes journeys, or those parts of a journey made using the ticket in question, which do not go through Birkenhead Hamilton Square, but could be used as part of a longer route between the stations shown on the same ticket which does do this.

If the routeing guide is understood to only affect section 13(a)(iii) of the NRCoC, then the word "journey" is suitable. Articles 16 and 19 are generally unfavourable

If the OP's journey is from a Chester Line station rather than a West Kirby Line station, it is absurd to think that an otherwise invalid route but for the existence of the easement suddenly becomes a permitted route.

You get absurdities however you interpret the regulations as they're too complex for anything else. For instance, if you said that "journey" meant the journey actually undertaken by the passenger, then someone who wanted to go from Scunthorpe to Goole via Doncaster would be unable to do so legally however much he paid.

 

[yorkie]

I agree with John @ Home, and if the journey was from Leasowe to Hawarden then the easement would apply, and that it can certainly be argued that the easement does not apply to journeys from Bidston.

However Swirlz has admitted that his journey is not even from Bidston, let alone one of the qualifying stations. The journey is quite simply between two stations on the Liverpool to Chester line. How can someone making a journey between two stations on that line can claim to be making a journey between stations on different lines?

 

[Swirlz]

Thanks for the responses.

As an alternative, If I buy a Birkenhead North (the station after Bidston), to Shotton season ticket, all of the journey planners allow me to travel via Rock Ferry and Bache.

Is this still not allowed? I know it is 10p more than a Rock Ferry to Bache season ticket but it gives a lot more area.

So, would a Birkenhead North to Shotton ticket be valid to start at Rock Ferry and alight at Bache?

I found trainscanbecheaper website and is says it is allowed by easement 030252 which doesn't exist.

National Rail says valid though.

From BIRKENHEAD NORTH to SHOTTON via BACHE
Permitted by map ME
Allowed by easement 030252
9.72m over min distance
Route used for check Miles Routeing Point
Birkenhead North 0
Liverpool Group 2.08
HOOTON 9.14
CHESTER 17.47
SHOTTON 25.31

Would this ticket also be valid via Liverpool Central?

 

[yorkie]

...if you said that "journey" meant the journey actually undertaken by the passenger...

What other definition could there be?

then someone who wanted to go from Scunthorpe to Goole via Doncaster would be unable to do so legally however much he paid.

I disagree. A Scunthorpe to Goole ticket is valid for that journey according to National Rail Enquiries. Without getting into a debate about the routeing of that particular ticket, even if it isn't valid, some journeys do require multiple tickets, it's still possible to make the journey.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As an alternative, If I buy a Birkenhead North (the station after Bidston), to Shotton season ticket, all of the journey planners allow me to travel via Rock Ferry and Bache.

Is this still not allowed? I know it is 10p more than a Rock Ferry to Bache season ticket but it gives a lot more area.

So, would a Birkenhead North to Shotton ticket be valid to start at Rock Ferry and alight at Bache?

Yes, that's valid on map CH in the Routeing Guide, and you are fine to make any number of journeys between any intermediate stations on any permitted route.

I would advise anyone who buys a Season to look at maximising the coverage they get, and I agree it is worth paying a few pence extra if you get a lot more flexibility as a result.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

EDITED: Sorry got the wrong station (ooops!)

The Hawarden ticket should be valid via Birkenhead, I don't know why NRES doesn't show it unless the intention was to allow journeys to North Wales only. However, a ticket to Shotton is cheaper and valid aswell.

 

[Swirlz]

Bidston is a "West Kirby line station" but Hawarden Bridge is not beyond Shotton if you travel direct.

So does the easement allow the Op's route? Well, imo, no. For me, the easement says that if you are going from a Wets Kirby line or New Brighton line station to North Wales, you may go via Birkenhead Hamilton Square rather than via Hawarden Bridge. Bidston to Hawarden Bridge would not require you to go to or via Shotton, so travel via Birkenhead Hamilton Square would not be allowed.

I'm not buying to Hawarden Bridge, I am buying to Hawarden, (after Shotton).

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Yes, sorry, I just noticed that (I was looking at a Merseyrail map rather than the national rail map), edited my post to show that.

 

[Swirlz]

God I'm confused:

Can someone give me a yes or no on these tickets PLEASE!:

BIDSTON - SHOTTON 7 DAY SEASON - £15.60
Is this valid via Rock Ferry & Bache?
If it is valid, can you start/end journey at Rock Ferry & Bache?
Northern Rail Planner says this is a valid route and you can break/resume your journey at any point along the route (2 changes, Hamilton Square and Chester)

BIRKENHEAD NORTH - SHOTTON 7 DAY SEASON - £23.10
Is this valid via Rock Ferry & Bache?
If it is valid, can you start/end journey at Rock Ferry & Bache?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

BIDSTON - SHOTTON 7 DAY SEASON - £15.60
Is this valid via Rock Ferry & Bache?
If it is valid, can you start/end journey at Rock Ferry & Bache?

Yes and Yes. The route is shown on NRES as a valid route. You can always start, break and resume, or end your journey at an intermediate station along a permitted route when you are using a Season ticket.

BIRKENHEAD NORTH - SHOTTON 7 DAY SEASON - £23.10
Is this valid via Rock Ferry & Bache?
If it is valid, can you start/end journey at Rock Ferry & Bache?

Yes and Yes. The route is shown on NRES as a valid route. You can always start, break and resume, or end your journey at an intermediate station along a permitted route when you are using a Season ticket.

 

[sheff1]

If a Bidston - Hawarden ticket is valid for the journey being made, then a Bidston - Shotton ticket must also be valid under the same easement.

Swirlz - As this is cheaper still @ £15.60, is there a specific reason you did not choose that option?

 

[Swirlz]

If a Bidston - Hawarden ticket is valid for the journey being made, then a Bidston - Shotton ticket must also be valid under the same easement.

Swirlz - As this is cheaper still @ £15.60, is there a specific reason you did not choose that option?

Simply brainfreeze, I picked a destination VIA Shotton, rather than TO Shotton.

If this is valid, how do I stop the problems with Merseyrail conductors and inspectors? I did once try to explain about a route guide with them and they said they were told it no longer existed since they got a new computer system.

Also, if I buy a longer season ticket for Bidston-Shotton, (say annual), if they subsequently remove the "easement" does my ticket retain the right to use the easement for the duration?

 

[sheff1]

If this is valid, how do I stop the problems with Merseyrail conductors and inspectors? I did once try to explain about a route guide with them and they said they were told it no longer existed since they got a new computer system.

As you clearly already know, this is nonense. If it were me, I would ask whether Merseyrail complied with the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. If they said yes (and any 'no' response needs to be pursued) then I would say that according to the NRCoC I am entitled take the routes shown in the National Routeing Guide. If they persisted with their claims I would make a formal complaint .. to Merseyrail in the first instance.

Also, if I buy a longer season ticket for Bidston-Shotton, (say annual), if they subsequently remove the "easement" does my ticket retain the right to use the easement for the duration?

I believe the answer is yes, but cannot immediately point to a link which confirms this.

 

[kieron]

if you said that "journey" meant the journey actually undertaken by the passenger,

What other definition could there be?

The routeing guide could be seen purely as a way to give meaning to section 13(a)(iii) of the NRCoC. Other sections discuss when you can carry out a journey which does not use a single ticket to travel its full length.

For instance, if you said that "journey" meant the journey actually undertaken by the passenger, then someone who wanted to go from Scunthorpe to Goole via Doncaster would be unable to do so legally however much he paid.

I disagree. A Scunthorpe to Goole ticket is valid for that journey according to National Rail Enquiries. Without getting into a debate about the routeing of that particular ticket, even if it isn't valid, some journeys do require multiple tickets, it's still possible to make the journey.

That doesn't surprise me at all. It looks as though NRE doesn't look at easement 700261 unless your trains stop at both Thorne stations. It springs into action at 6 in the morning, though.

My point was that easement 700261 explicitly states that customers may not make that journey. This would be a problem if you said that "journey" meant the journey actually undertaken by the passenger. Luckily NRE doesn't.

Incidentally, I notice that NRE doesn't allow a traveller to use the shortest route between Conwy and Conway Park with one ticket. Only the route which relies on easement 700076 is allowed. I don't know how common this sort of thing is, though (routes with non-rail sections aside).

 

[sheff1]

My point was that easement 700261 explicitly states that customers may not make that journey.

Indeed.

Also of interest is that 700261 is directly contradicted by easement 47