Leyland to Warrington

[hairyhandedfool]

That certainly helps matters...what exactly would be issued in this case?

Neil

An excess fare ticket would be issued, and should be kept with the original tickets as proof that the fare has been paid.

The price will vary according to what ticket is held and what would be required.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An excess fare ticket would be issued, and should be kept with the original tickets as proof that the fare has been paid.

The price will vary according to what ticket is held and what would be required.

Presumably in this case what would be required would be a Leyland-Warrington single, plus a single to Deansgate and one back to Leyland...without moving to single ticket pricing that's still a fair penalty for not travelling the same way in both directions, though is obviously better than losing all the value from the existing ticket.

Neil

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Presumably in this case what would be required would be a Leyland-Warrington single, plus a single to Deansgate and one back to Leyland...without moving to single ticket pricing that's still a fair penalty for not travelling the same way in both directions, though is obviously better than losing all the value from the existing ticket.

Neil

If we take the view that via Manchester is not permitted for the 'Any Permitted' fare, then passengers taking that route would get an excess to the 'Via Manchester' fare (half the difference for half a return ticket). The 'Via Manchester' fare would be valid by any permitted route as it costs more than the 'Any Permitted' fare.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If we take the view that via Manchester is not permitted for the 'Any Permitted' fare, then passengers taking that route would get an excess to the 'Via Manchester' fare (half the difference for half a return ticket). The 'Via Manchester' fare would be valid by any permitted route as it costs more than the 'Any Permitted' fare.

Ah, I see - I forgot the existence of that fare. Sorry.

I guess if you travelled via Preston with a double-back, that would cause the excess to be to three singles? Or would that be a straight "no ticket held"?

Neil

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Ah, I see - I forgot the existence of that fare. Sorry.

I guess if you travelled via Preston with a double-back, that would cause the excess to be to three singles? Or would that be a straight "no ticket held"?

Neil

That could depend on interpretation, the attitude test, who issues the ticket and when it is done. As much as it could be 'Off-Route', it could also be seen as 'Over-riding'. I don't think there is such a simple answer for that one.

 

[Merseysider]

Travelling via Preston would be overriding, no?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Travelling via Preston would be overriding, no?

Yet it seems to me a more reasonable route than via Manchester (even though I know it is clearly prohibited by the Routeing Guide)!

(There is a strong argument for planning timetables on a "hub and spoke" basis, which does require double-backs for some journeys - to me the way to handle those is that there should be a through fare allowing the double-back at the same fare as the more distant station - which is basically how you already can do it with season tickets - you simply buy one to the more distant station)

It's a funny world...

Neil

 

[Merseysider]

There is a way to get around forbidden double-backs being more convenient than other permitted journey opportunities, illustrated in the case of Manchester Piccadilly to Entwistle. A fare exists 'via Darwen' to specifically allow the double back.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is a way to get around forbidden double-backs being more convenient than other permitted journey opportunities, illustrated in the case of Manchester Piccadilly to Entwistle. A fare exists 'via Darwen' to specifically allow the double back.

Yes, I think there need to be more of those - arguably in any case where there could be a time saving such as this one. Bletchley at certain times of day on an evening/Sunday is another example.

Neil

 

[hairyhandedfool]

There is a way to get around forbidden double-backs being more convenient than other permitted journey opportunities, illustrated in the case of Manchester Piccadilly to Entwistle. A fare exists 'via Darwen' to specifically allow the double back.

It does lead to amusing tickets though, like Manchester Stns to Darwen 'Via Darwen'.

 

[sheff1]

The weather plays no part in deciding what routing is valid, and the introduction of it is irrelevant (and ridiculous, in my view).

Not irrelevant* or ridiculous at all. The ticket is valid either way and personally when making a choice on which of various permitted routes to use I factor in things such as the weather when a lengthy walk is a feature of some the routes.

Apparently, though, taking a decision to avoid such a walk in inclement weather means I am 'not of right mind' - a right minded person would, of course, take the walk and arrive at their destination later than if they had travelled by train all the way, via a permitted route, in the dry .

*In fact, the comment was made in the context of choosing the relevant station in Warrington

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apparently, though, taking a decision to avoid such a walk in inclement weather means I am 'not of right mind' - a right minded person would, of course, take the walk and arrive at their destination later than if they had travelled by train all the way, via a permitted route, in the dry .

In reality I'd probably take a taxi to the relevant station if the weather was *that* bad.

Neil

 

[Merseysider]

It does lead to amusing tickets though, like Manchester Stns to Darwen 'Via Darwen'.

One of my favourites...
Presumably the ticket wouldn't be valid to alight at Darwen until you'd already travelled via Darwen

 

[sheff1]

......