Can a ticket from Reading to Lee (London) routed LONDON NOT UND be used from Reading to Paddington, then Charing Cross to Lee, assuming you use your Oyster card (or some other method) to get from Paddington to Charing Cross? Or must it be used via Waterloo/Waterloo East?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
London not Und
- Thread starter island
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I don't see why not. It's valid to and from London which includes all the stations you mention. Unless it specifically states Slough or Feltham or some other specific station then it must be valid.
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Well the way I see it you would be breaking your journey at Paddington and resuming it at Charing Cross, and forgoing a little bit of ticket validity in the middle (on the Underground). It is allowed to break and resume your journey along a permitted route. Paddington and Charing Cross are both on a permitted route between Reading and Lee, but only on an ANY PERMITTED ticket.
The effect of a particular routeing on a ticket is to reduce the number of permitted routes that ticket is valid on. In this case of a LONDON NOT UND ticket, that excludes any routes that involve an Underground journey as part of them. Thus it excludes any routes that require an Underground journey through Paddington and Charing Cross. As they are not on a permitted route for that ticket then you cannot break and resume your journey there. It's not just the actual Underground journey that is excluded, but the entirety of any routes that involve an Underground journey - that's how I see it anyway.
The effect of a particular routeing on a ticket is to reduce the number of permitted routes that ticket is valid on. In this case of a LONDON NOT UND ticket, that excludes any routes that involve an Underground journey as part of them. Thus it excludes any routes that require an Underground journey through Paddington and Charing Cross. As they are not on a permitted route for that ticket then you cannot break and resume your journey there. It's not just the actual Underground journey that is excluded, but the entirety of any routes that involve an Underground journey - that's how I see it anyway.
I think the only place where it'll be an issue is at the exit gates at Paddington. Since the worst that'll happen if the gate rejects the ticket and the attendant decides it's off-route is an excess to +ANY PERMITTED, I think we can give it a whirl.
I agree with this view. There is a slight complication in that walking between stations is normally allowed (it's unclear exactly when!) but I think you'd most likely get challenged trying this argument.
Is this hypothetical?
If so, it appears to be valid on routes that pass through London but is not valid on LU. I therefore see no reason to doubt it would be valid providing you do not use LU.
If it's a real question then I don't think it's worth the hassle. If travelling off peak it wouldn't be worth considering, because a CDR avoiding the Underground actually costs £2.60 more. A SVR is £1.20 extra to include LU (the excess being 60p each way - considerably cheaper than Oyster PAYG), if you are wanting to travel at peak time returning the same day then the SDR is £5.90, so admittedly there is a small saving to be had there, but not much.
If so, it appears to be valid on routes that pass through London but is not valid on LU. I therefore see no reason to doubt it would be valid providing you do not use LU.
If it's a real question then I don't think it's worth the hassle. If travelling off peak it wouldn't be worth considering, because a CDR avoiding the Underground actually costs £2.60 more. A SVR is £1.20 extra to include LU (the excess being 60p each way - considerably cheaper than Oyster PAYG), if you are wanting to travel at peak time returning the same day then the SDR is £5.90, so admittedly there is a small saving to be had there, but not much.
Well, it's a real question, although the actual journey is likely to be an SVR from LEE to RDG, and it's complicated by the fact that the outbound journey will be taking place during the evening peak when an SVR routed +ANY PERMITTED isn't valid, but LONDON NOT UND is :roll:
I'm thinking the best strategy will be to get the LONDON NOT UND ticket and excess the return leg to +ANY PERMITTED if challenged.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And I've looked up the National Rail Enquiries website and it gives this as an explanation:
"Route of ticket LONDON NOT UND - You must travel via London. Transfer between London Stations is available on the Docklands Light Railway and First Capital Connect (Thameslink Route) or by foot. Travel is not available on London Underground. This fare is only valid on trains travelling between certain times."
It looks like going via PAD/CHX is allowed as long as the bit between the two is done on our own steam (or by Oyster).
Still I won't be surprised if we get hassle from an FGW gripper/gate man.
I'm thinking the best strategy will be to get the LONDON NOT UND ticket and excess the return leg to +ANY PERMITTED if challenged.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And I've looked up the National Rail Enquiries website and it gives this as an explanation:
"Route of ticket LONDON NOT UND - You must travel via London. Transfer between London Stations is available on the Docklands Light Railway and First Capital Connect (Thameslink Route) or by foot. Travel is not available on London Underground. This fare is only valid on trains travelling between certain times."
It looks like going via PAD/CHX is allowed as long as the bit between the two is done on our own steam (or by Oyster).
Still I won't be surprised if we get hassle from an FGW gripper/gate man.
Last edited:
LexyBoy
Established Member
I'm not sure it is - the quoted text may refer to valid routeings by DLR, FCC or foot, which would mean WAT-WAE (since this is a recognised connection "by foot"), but I'm not sure WAE-PAD would be allowed, since it's not on any routeing map.
Of course, the text doesn't say that
I'd take a printout along though just in case (although as the excess is so small, probably not worth arguing).Where did you get that info BTW? When I tried to look up the validity I got the helpful message:
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/pdfs/SVR_US.pdf said:
Good work SWT!
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Ah maybe it is valid then, given that National Rail Enquiries claims to have definitive information. I tried to think of a clearer way that "user-friendly" description of the routeing could be written that would make it closer to how I interpreted the meaning, but all I could come up with was "The ticket is valid for travel by any permitted route that passes through London but does not involve a journey on London Underground. Any necessary transfer between London terminals may be made via the Docklands Light Railway, First Capital Connect (Thameslink Route) or by foot." Which still implies walking from PAD to CHX is allowed! Of course an addition to the note saying that transfer by foot was only allowed between specific pairs of stations, and listing these, would sort that out. Good luck anyway...
I got the long-winded explanation of "LONDON NOT UND" from the NR Enquiries website by punching in the journey details and then clicking "or view summary" under the "buy now" button. I've printed it and it'll be coming with me.
I got the text of restriction code US from Avantix (the program that you can buy on a CD for around £15 which has lots of fares on it).
I got the text of restriction code US from Avantix (the program that you can buy on a CD for around £15 which has lots of fares on it).
I'm not sure it is - the quoted text may refer to valid routeings by DLR, FCC or foot, which would mean WAT-WAE (since this is a recognised connection "by foot"), but I'm not sure WAE-PAD would be allowed, since it's not on any routeing map.
Of course, the text doesn't say that
Where did you get that info BTW? When I tried to look up the validity I got the helpful message:
Good work SWT!
NR are aware that it is missing and have said they will update the site with the information, though I don't expect that to happen until around the 22nd May.
First class
Established Member
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Messages
- 2,731
I have to disagree. The route clearly states no tUnderground. The valid route for this would be to go to Waterloo East and then got to Waterloo and get a train to Reading. Hence you are not travelling on the underground.
Even if you use your Oyster card you are still going via the underground so the Route would not be valid. I mean it state quite clearly on the ticket ROUTE not Undergound and you could hardly argue you have not travelled via that route !!
Even if you use your Oyster card you are still going via the underground so the Route would not be valid. I mean it state quite clearly on the ticket ROUTE not Undergound and you could hardly argue you have not travelled via that route !!
Have you read the definition of London Not Underground, specifically where it says that you can go by foot instead?
How is someone going "via the Underground" if you don't take the Underground?
Because the OP said that was what he was going to do !!
For the sake of argument, let's say I walk the three miles from CHX to PAD. Does that make my ticket valid?
MichaelAMW
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2010
- Messages
- 1,021
It seems fairly clear that this is just an error by SWT. There are lots of tickets with this routeing, e.g. Lee to Staines, where there is only a remote chance that the Underground will be required. Removing the cross-London marker reduces the number of tickets that are involved with the payment to LUL for the use of the underground on through tickets. In effect, if the + symbol is shown then the underground part has to be paid for, although as others have said previously on this forum it's an agreed payment rather than exact calculation. So, if the underground is not going to be used, why pay for it?
Presumably, based on the routeing given, the intention is for the ticket to be used only via SWT - that, indeed, is how it seems to be priced and restricted time-wise. However, as Yorkie and others have in effect said, it doesn't actually say that. The lack of a + sign doesn't mean you can't cross London, because the + sign just means the underground is included. We wouldn't conclude that the presence of the + means your ticket is *not* valid if you choose to walk! Nor, indeed, if you used the '+ Any Permitted' ticket to go via Staines. 'Not Und' is just a code to emphasis the lack of validity on the underground that is generally provided for a via London ticket.
I would also say that the underground is not shown explicitly in the routeing guide, so it's not particularly relevant when it comes to defining routes, regardless of whether + or 'Not Und' is shown on the ticket.
Well, that's my interpretation, anyway...
LexyBoy
Established Member
Whilst there doesn't seem to be anything preventing the ticket being used in this way, I suspect that their intention was to restrict routes to those not involving Underground - i.e. not Paddington, since there is no routeing available from WAE to PAD which doesn't involve the Underground.
Therefore I'd be prepared for some arguing to be necessary at Paddington!
To take a silly example, could I use a Exeter-Manchester route:NOT LONDON ticket to go to Ealing Broadway, then walk to Willesden Junction to head to Manchester? (A: no.)
Therefore I'd be prepared for some arguing to be necessary at Paddington!
To take a silly example, could I use a Exeter-Manchester route:NOT LONDON ticket to go to Ealing Broadway, then walk to Willesden Junction to head to Manchester? (A: no.)
Last edited:
But that's because Exeter Group to Manchester Group doesn't include LONDON on the permitted routes in the Routeing guide.
LexyBoy
Established Member
OK - I assumed it did since there's a LONDON fare. How about the same thing for Reading-Glasgow (I guess London must be a permitted route in this case, but let's pretend it is just for argument's sake).
Although I wouldn't go to any London Terminal, the permitted route I'd be on is via London, since the walk from Ealing to Willesden Jn is not a mapped route. Therefore even though I'm not going via London, I'm on a route which is only valid with a "+Any Permitted" ticket, and not a "Not London" ticket. (Correct me if I'm doing this wrong!)
I'd think the same would (or is supposed to) apply to the NOT UND fare - going via Paddington is only valid for the route mapped via the underground.
However, I think the explanation provided by the National Rail site is sufficiently vague that your plan should be allowed. (I'd be interested to see the full restriction text though).
Do let us know what happens! (Chances are that you'll be waved through / have an unbarriered platform & we'll never know).
Although I wouldn't go to any London Terminal, the permitted route I'd be on is via London, since the walk from Ealing to Willesden Jn is not a mapped route. Therefore even though I'm not going via London, I'm on a route which is only valid with a "+Any Permitted" ticket, and not a "Not London" ticket. (Correct me if I'm doing this wrong!)
I'd think the same would (or is supposed to) apply to the NOT UND fare - going via Paddington is only valid for the route mapped via the underground.
However, I think the explanation provided by the National Rail site is sufficiently vague that your plan should be allowed. (I'd be interested to see the full restriction text though).
Do let us know what happens! (Chances are that you'll be waved through / have an unbarriered platform & we'll never know).
I think the problem is that no routeing point is disallowed - so long as the route is otherwise allowed (including the underground) then so long as you don't use that ticket on the underground you should be fine (you don't have to walk, you could use a taxi or bus). Can you break your journey? If so you're breaking your journey when you get on the underground and starting a different journey and then resuming your original journey once you're off the underground.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,274
But walking or any other method of travel between Charing Cross and Paddington doesn't count as a break of journey, as it is covered by 'changing trains'.
But Paddington is London. The ticket is routed via London.
The fact that you are not alowed to use the Underground is neither here nor there, it's like having a ticket that said "Not valid on Metrolink"; you'd have to walk between Man Vic and Man Picc (or pay to use the tram).
The existence of the Underground in no way prevents Paddington to Waterloo from being a valid interchange by any other method!
LexyBoy
Established Member
Fair enough. I think I was getting confused thinking that "NOT UND" was somehow a routeing instruction - that it is referring to the Underground as part of the route rather than merely stating that the ticket doesn't include Underground travel. As you and Deerfold pointed out however, "Underground" is not a routeing point and so doesn't exclude that route. (Though it's obviously a SWT priced ticket and supposed to be used on that route).
Interesting to see what happens.
I realise that - I'm covering the case where they *do* get the underground and start using a different ticket as walking from Paddington is actually quite a long way. If break of journey is allowed I think it's even more clear cut that it's allowed. If not I think someone may find it easier to argue against unless you actually don't use the tube.
LexyBoy
Established Member
That would seem the obvious choice. Maybe they didn't because:
a) It would mean that going via Basingstoke wouldn't be allowed, making the route less attractive (fewer connections/potentially longer waits at Waterloo)
b) It might allow other routes from Lee which they don't want you taking (?) (The NOT UND specifically says you must travel via London)
c) It's just a hangover from BR days?
Last edited:
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Those are exactly my thoughts too. It seems that the route shown on this ticket is incompatible with the way permitted routes are defined in the routeing guide. Would a public list of pairs of stations that may be walked between as part of a permitted route help clarify things at all?
RJ
Established Member
The ticket is priced by SWT and my route validity checker shows only Waterloo/Waterloo East as a valid route. I specified Paddington as a via point and it was rejected.
- Status