Incorrect information given out on Scotrail Facebook page.

[170401]

Yesterday someone asked:

David Mackinnon: Hi, i bought an advance ticket to arbroath but plans have changed and i was wanting to get off in dundee...is that ok or do i have to go to arbroath?

The converstation then went like this:

Scotrail: Hi David. Where are you travelling from? ^G
David Mackinnon: edinburgh to arbroath
Scotrail: Yes David that is fine. ^D..
David Mackinnon: Thanks, i was worried about being fined if i got off a stop early

But Scotrails website under Advance single says :
Can I break my journey?
No, you can't break up your journey unless it's for connectional purposes.


My query is, who is at fault when the passenger turns up at Dundee and is refused passage through the ticket gates and is forced to buy a new ticket then goes into a rage because Scotrail told him it would be fine?

This is the type of incompetence that makes the whole railway look like they are incompetent fools but sadly it'll be the poor gateline staff that get the sharp end of the stick because an 'official' channel has told this fellow it will be ok.

This isn't the first time nonsense advice like this has been given out either.

 

[alastair]

Yesterday someone asked:

David Mackinnon: Hi, i bought an advance ticket to arbroath but plans have changed and i was wanting to get off in dundee...is that ok or do i have to go to arbroath?

The converstation then went like this:

Scotrail: Hi David. Where are you travelling from? ^G
David Mackinnon: edinburgh to arbroath
Scotrail: Yes David that is fine. ^D..
David Mackinnon: Thanks, i was worried about being fined if i got off a stop early

But Scotrails website under Advance single says :
Can I break my journey?
No, you can't break up your journey unless it's for connectional purposes.


My query is, who is at fault when the passenger turns up at Dundee and is refused passage through the ticket gates and is forced to buy a new ticket then goes into a rage because Scotrail told him it would be fine?

This is the type of incompetence that makes the whole railway look like they are incompetent fools but sadly it'll be the poor gateline staff that get the sharp end of the stick because an 'official' channel has told this fellow it will be ok.

This isn't the first time nonsense advice like this has been given out either.

I am sure this question has been debated on other threads at great length,and it has been said that ATOC has has advised TOC's that unless it is obvious that the passenger is attempting to avoid paying a higher fare(if the Dundee fare was higher than the Arbroath fare) then they should be allowed to stop short on an advance ticket. The advice given by Scotrail just confirms this.

To 99% of the general public this is not "nonsense",it is just common sense.

 

[Llanigraham]

Yesterday someone asked:

David Mackinnon: Hi, i bought an advance ticket to arbroath but plans have changed and i was wanting to get off in dundee...is that ok or do i have to go to arbroath?

The converstation then went like this:

Scotrail: Hi David. Where are you travelling from? ^G
David Mackinnon: edinburgh to arbroath
Scotrail: Yes David that is fine. ^D..
David Mackinnon: Thanks, i was worried about being fined if i got off a stop early

But Scotrails website under Advance single says :
Can I break my journey?
No, you can't break up your journey unless it's for connectional purposes.


My query is, who is at fault when the passenger turns up at Dundee and is refused passage through the ticket gates and is forced to buy a new ticket then goes into a rage because Scotrail told him it would be fine?

This is the type of incompetence that makes the whole railway look like they are incompetent fools but sadly it'll be the poor gateline staff that get the sharp end of the stick because an 'official' channel has told this fellow it will be ok.

This isn't the first time nonsense advice like this has been given out either.

Aren't you talking about 2 different things here?
I read the first part as "stopping short" and the second as a "break of journey".
To me they are not the same.

 

[Flamingo]

Aren't you talking about 2 different things here?
I read the first part as "stopping short" and the second as a "break of journey".
To me they are not the same.

I'd also agree with this interpretation of the exchange...

 

[170401]

I am sure this question has been debated on other threads at great length,and it has been said that ATOC has has advised TOC's that unless it is obvious that the passenger is attempting to avoid paying a higher fare(if the Dundee fare was higher than the Arbroath fare) then they should be allowed to stop short on an advance ticket. The advice given by Scotrail just confirms this.

To 99% of the general public this is not "nonsense",it is just common sense.

Not much point in having the NRCOC anymore then is their and not much use to staff on the ground who haven't been informed of this 'policy change'

Aren't you talking about 2 different things here?
I read the first part as "stopping short" and the second as a "break of journey".
To me they are not the same.

Theirs no difference, whether you return or not is irrelevant, it's still a break of journey.

 

[Flamingo]

No, a break of journey means that you return to finish the journey on a different train.

 

[talldave]

Break of journey with no finish = stopping short??

 

[Llanigraham]

Theirs no difference, whether you return or not is irrelevant, it's still a break of journey.

Wrong.
"Break of journey" means you get off at an intermediate station and then get back on later to finish your journey to your original destination.
"Stopping short" means you get off at a station before your original destination and do not continue your onward journey.

 

[alastair]

Not much point in having the NRCOC anymore then is their and not much use to staff on the ground who haven't been informed of this 'policy change'



Theirs no difference, whether you return or not is irrelevant, it's still a break of journey.

discussed at length here:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=110098&highlight=stopping+short+on+advance+tickets

this is what I was referring to.

I am sure it says in NRCOC that you cannot "stop short" on advances,however my point is that you will always struggle to explain the logic of this to the average passenger. It would seem that ATOC share this view and feel that discretion should be shown provided there is no evidence of the passenger deliberately avoiding a higher fare. This seems reasonable and sensible.

 

[tsr]

Wrong.
"Break of journey" means you get off at an intermediate station and then get back on later to finish your journey to your original destination.
"Stopping short" means you get off at a station before your original destination and do not continue your onward journey.

Except on journeys on the Tube / DLR using Maltese Cross validity, where a break of transfer journey is in effect also stopping short on that leg of the journey.

Oh, so pedantic...

 

[Llanigraham]

Except on journeys on the Tube / DLR using Maltese Cross validity, where a break of transfer journey is in effect also stopping short on that leg of the journey.

Oh, so pedantic...

Yawn!
Since we are NOT talking about that area of the country........................

 

[yorkie]

My query is, who is at fault when the passenger turns up at Dundee and is refused passage through the ticket gates and is forced to buy a new ticket ...

The person who charges him a new ticket is at fault for that!

The NRCoC theoretically allows for an excess fare to be charged. This would be the difference between the fare paid and the cheapest available fare that would have allowed the actual journey made.

However rail industry policy is NOT to charge an excess fare.

This is the type of incompetence that makes the whole railway look like they are incompetent fools but sadly it'll be the poor gateline staff that get the sharp end of the stick because an 'official' channel has told this fellow it will be ok.

If gateline staff have been briefed correctly, they will allow the customer to exit.

I am sure this question has been debated on other threads at great length,and it has been said that ATOC has has advised TOC's that unless it is obvious that the passenger is attempting to avoid paying a higher fare(if the Dundee fare was higher than the Arbroath fare) then they should be allowed to stop short on an advance ticket. The advice given by Scotrail just confirms this.

To 99% of the general public this is not "nonsense",it is just common sense.

It has indeed, and it is common sense, agreed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Except on journeys on the Tube / DLR using Maltese Cross validity, where a break of transfer journey is in effect also stopping short on that leg of the journey.

Oh, so pedantic...

It's not relevant to this thread, but LU take the (common sense) view that they are only concerned with the 'journey' made on LU, for which they have their own rules (see 7.3.1 Cross-London transfer), which are very sensible. Any further discussion on that matter must be in a new thread though as it's off-topic

 

[PermitToTravel]

No, a break of journey means that you return to finish the journey on a different train.

On the wrong train on an AP?

 

[170401]

The person who charges him a new ticket is at fault for that!

The NRCoC theoretically allows for an excess fare to be charged. This would be the difference between the fare paid and the cheapest available fare that would have allowed the actual journey made.

However rail industry policy is NOT to charge an excess fare.


If gateline staff have been briefed correctly, they will allow the customer to exit.

Could you point me to the actual section in the NRCOC that allows an advance purchase ticket to be excessed to an appropriate fare.

I'm also keen to see the claim "ATOC has advised TOC's that unless it is obvious that the passenger is attempting to avoid paying a higher fare then they should be allowed to stop short on an advance ticket" backed up as I, many on train staff, ticket office staff, gateline staff, and management appear not to have been briefed on this. I have done a lot of asking over the last few days and the general consensus appears to be that said passenger would break the conditions of his ticket by stopping short at Dundee.

The only brief I'm aware of from ATOC is to say that passengers who have broken the conditions of an advance ticket should be charged the cheapest appropriate fare for their journey and that their ticket should be honoured where other services have delayed them.

Again, I'd be most grateful if someone could point me towards factual evidence and not just hearsay and theory.

 

[yorkie]

Could you point me to the actual section in the NRCOC that allows an advance purchase ticket to be excessed to an appropriate fare.

It's rail industry policy not to charge this, but in theory an excess could be charged under Condition 16 "...you will be liable to pay an excess fare. This excess fare will be the difference between the price paid for the ticket you hold and the price of the lowest priced ticket(s) available at a ticket office for immediate travel that would have entitled you to start, break and resume, or end your journey at that station on the service(s)
you have used. "

I'm also keen to see the claim "ATOC has advised TOC's that unless it is obvious that the passenger is attempting to avoid paying a higher fare then they should be allowed to stop short on an advance ticket" backed up as I, many on train staff, ticket office staff, gateline staff, and management appear not to have been briefed on this. I have done a lot of asking over the last few days and the general consensus appears to be that said passenger would break the conditions of his ticket by stopping short at Dundee.

It was released around September 2012, but it's difficult for me to do a forum search at present.

The only brief I'm aware of from ATOC is to say that passengers who have broken the conditions of an advance ticket should be charged the cheapest appropriate fare for their journey....

Where is this briefing, when was it issued, and who at ATOC issued it? (feel free to PM me) as this completely contradicts the actual guidance from ATOC.

Again, I'd be most grateful if someone could point me towards factual evidence and not just hearsay and theory.

I'll see what I can do.

 

[suzanneparis]

I think there is a problem if the rail industry policy differs from the written regulations. The vast majority of the population wouldn't know about rail industry policy (rip??? )

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Could you point me to the actual section in the NRCOC that allows an advance purchase ticket to be excessed to an appropriate fare.

I'm also keen to see the claim "ATOC has advised TOC's that unless it is obvious that the passenger is attempting to avoid paying a higher fare then they should be allowed to stop short on an advance ticket" backed up . . . .

. . .

Again, I'd be most grateful if someone could point me towards factual evidence and not just hearsay and theory.

It's rail industry policy not to charge this, . . . .

. . .

It was released around September 2012, but it's difficult for me to do a forum search at present.

It was in September 2012 that someone at ATOC informally suggested that this relaxation in the Advance rules on stopping short were forthcoming. There was no 'instruction' or 'guidance' on the situation at that time.

It was not until June 2014 that the guidance issued by ATOC was changed to reflect this relaxation, and it appeared in the 'Advance Fares. Frequently Asked Questions about Advance Fares' - an internal document to the industry which, for reasons I cannot explain, is not released to passengers and consequently would not be seen as a Condition of Contract - the following extract is not in the NRCoC:

Q26 - Can a passenger alight short of the destination on their Advance ticket, or board after the origin shown on their Advance ticket but on the same booked train?

A: Although Advance tickets are intended to be used only between the origin and destination stations shown on the ticket, there may be occasions where a passenger joins the correct train but at a later station, or alights earlier than the indicated destination. Although this is not strictly in accordance with the rules for Advance tickets, the Rail industry has agreed that in such cases, no additional fare should be charged unless there is clear evidence of intent to try and avoid a higher fare.

This publication should have been disseminated to all operators and their front line staff, though as I and others have remarked on here in the past, releasing this information to passengers (as I have just done) when there is no assurance that Companies will have disseminated the change in policy in an effective manner, places all staff in an unsatisfactory position.

It also leaves doubt as to the appropriate interpretation of "clear evidence of intent to try and avoid a higher fare", a doubt which places passengers and staff in an unsatisfactory position.

I regret that I find it hard to imagine a more poorly worded and poorly published policy! As a consequence, I hesitate to recommend any passenger to attempt to take advantage of this relaxation which is not repeated in the published Conditions of Carriage.

 

[Flamingo]

Has anybody seen this yet, on page 8 of this document http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/wp-content/uploads/file/2015-03_retail_information_CoP.PDF just posted by Yorkie on http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=114249 about advice that should be given on ticket restrictions on purchase...

. Advance tickets: a passenger can only get on/off a train at the origin and destination for which the ticket is valid, ticket is only valid with accompanying proof of reservation (where required), and any restrictions on refunds;

 

[yorkie]

Has anybody seen this yet, on page 8 of this document http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/wp-content/uploads/file/2015-03_retail_information_CoP.PDF just posted by Yorkie on http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=114249 about advice that should be given on ticket restrictions on purchase...

Yes, the T&Cs do not officially allow it, so passengers are advised of these restrictions at the point of purchasing. That doesn't change rail industry guidance though.

I agree with Dave that this contradiction is unsatisfactory.

It would be a huge step forward if the Conditions could clearly state the policy in place, but we all know that is very unlikely to happen

 

[neilmc]

Here's a very possible scenario:

My son lives in London and comes up to Manchester to visit and avails himself of a cheap Advance to Manchester.

I happen to be available to pick him up and, when he's on the train, I suggest that he gets off at Stockport instead as it's a much easier pick-up by car than Piccadilly.

He does so and some official collars him at Stockport, declares that he has broken the terms of his Advance by stopping short, his ticket is invalid and and he is liable for the full cost of additional single from London to Stockport.

Can anyone here definitively declare that, if someone felt like being officious, that could not possibly happen any more? Can the general public be informed that that could not possibly happen any more? If not, then any reference to any internal memos are worthless and the travelling public are still vulnerable to being ripped off in this way and TOCs are still technically quite within their rights to behave like this if they choose.

 

[najaB]

Can anyone here definitively declare that, if someone felt like being officious, that could not possibly happen any more? Can the general public be informed that that could not possibly happen any more?

Based on what has been posted so far, then no it is not possible to provide that level of certainty. It shouldn't happen, but since the policy guidance is just that - guidance - there is no guarantee that it won't happen. As yorkie pointed out, stopping short is still technically a violation of the T&Cs.

 

[170401]

Based on what has been posted so far, then no it is not possible to provide that level of certainty. It shouldn't happen, but since the policy guidance is just that - guidance - there is no guarantee that it won't happen. As yorkie pointed out, stopping short is still technically a violation of the T&Cs.

With everything said to date then, technically Dundee gateline staff would be correct to deny said passenger exit without purchasing a new ticket and Scotrail are still wrong to declare that it is acceptable to stop short as the conditions of advance tickets have never actually changed.

To be honest this is just symptomatic of everything that is wrong in the railways today. Their is no consistency any more, this just serves to make things even more frustrating for passengers and staff alike and just increases the likelihood of verbal and physical assaults on staff.

What we need is one set of good, clear, concise set of rules for both staff and passengers which is easy to understand. Thank you to everyone who has contributed so far, I'm finding all of the information very useful. Sadly though I don't think feeding it back to my employers will make a single bit of difference and the apathy which many bring to the job through inconsistencies such as this shall continue.

 

[RJ]

Guidance on discretion to railway staff and the T&Cs of the product are not one and the same thing.

 

[yorkie]

With everything said to date then, technically Dundee gateline staff would be correct to deny said passenger exit without purchasing a new ticket and Scotrail are still wrong to declare that it is acceptable to stop short as the conditions of advance tickets have never actually changed.

When you say "new ticket", assuming you mean "excess fare" and assuming it was to the cheapest available fare to Dundee, then I agree it would be within the Conditions (but, as you say, not within the rail industry's policies)

To be honest this is just symptomatic of everything that is wrong in the railways today. Their is no consistency any more, this just serves to make things even more frustrating for passengers and staff alike and just increases the likelihood of verbal and physical assaults on staff.

If staff enforce the policy which is more lenient than the conditions, they are not at greater risk of verbal or physical assaults.

What we need is one set of good, clear, concise set of rules for both staff and passengers which is easy to understand. Thank you to everyone who has contributed so far, I'm finding all of the information very useful. Sadly though I don't think feeding it back to my employers will make a single bit of difference and the apathy which many bring to the job through inconsistencies such as this shall continue.

I agree, that would be nice, and the terms of Advance tickets should state the policies so that people in neilmc's position are not having to worry unnecessarily.

This, however, will not happen.

But many of us have to do jobs where we cannot rigidly enforce every rule, and applying reasonable discretion along with adhering to common sense policies is a compulsory part of the role. It's not ideal but it's sometimes unavoidable.That's certainly the case in my job!

 

[VauxhallandI]

Here's a very possible scenario:

My son lives in London and comes up to Manchester to visit and avails himself of a cheap Advance to Manchester.

I happen to be available to pick him up and, when he's on the train, I suggest that he gets off at Stockport instead as it's a much easier pick-up by car than Piccadilly.

He does so and some official collars him at Stockport, declares that he has broken the terms of his Advance by stopping short, his ticket is invalid and and he is liable for the full cost of additional single from London to Stockport.

Can anyone here definitively declare that, if someone felt like being officious, that could not possibly happen any more? Can the general public be informed that that could not possibly happen any more? If not, then any reference to any internal memos are worthless and the travelling public are still vulnerable to being ripped off in this way and TOCs are still technically quite within their rights to behave like this if they choose.

I have a similar issue with Stockport and there are always ticket people at the bottom of the stairs. They never seem to look that closely at my ticket though. The annoying thing is that iirc the price from Euston to Manc or Stockport is the same!

 

[PermitToTravel]

It's usually STM ticket people at the bottom of the stairs, who only care that you have a card that's approximately the right size and has some orange on it. It's very very rare to see VT RPIs there (I've only seen it once) - those might well care.