London to Wolverhampton: refused travel

[MIKEYOW]

I wished to travel EUS- Stafford -Wolves but was refused access to the train at Euston

I had an anytime return -- " Any route permitted.

If the ticket states - any permitted route who is right the revenue inspector or the ticket

 

[telstarbox]

What was the train? Did they say why?

 

[yorkie]

You had an SOR routed Any Permitted?

From LONDON TERMINALS
To WOLVERHAMPTON
RouteANY PERMITTED
ADULT £182.00

You wished to travel at what time exactly?

If you held an Anytime Return and wished to travel via Stafford (on a non-direct train) at a time of day the Off Peak Return (SVR) routed via Stafford was valid, the change of route excess is £0.00.

What conversation took place exactly? Did you visit the ticket office? What did they say?

Unfortunately the staff who check tickets at London Euston do not appear to have adequate knowledge of rail fares. I am aware of numerous instances of incorrect actions and inappropriate behaviour by these individuals. Without knowing more details, I cannot be sure the staff were incorrect, but based on what you have said above, it sounds like they were. This is of no surprise. Incorrect behaviour is exactly what I have come to expect at Euston and Paddington.

 

[mmh]

It looks like the revenue inspector was unfortunately, as well as the Any Permitted fare there is a higher priced Route: Via Stafford fare: http://www.brfares.com/#!fares?orig=EUS&dest=WVH (216.00 rather than 182.00 - ouch at these fares!)

The nationalrail.co.uk journey planner seems to confirm this by offering Anytime fares for both via Stafford and via Birmingham routes but charging the higher fare for via Stafford.

 

[Gareth Marston]

There high fiving each other on the gateline at Euston as we type as they were right but it's a poor piece of nonmenculture from Virgin. It should be via Birmingham not Any Permitted. The OP could have rocked up at Marylebone or Paddington with it.

 

[yorkie]

It looks like the revenue inspector was unfortunately, as well as the Any Permitted fare there is a higher priced Route: Via Stafford fare: http://www.brfares.com/#!fares?orig=EUS&dest=WVH (216.00 rather than 182.00 - ouch at these fares!)

The customer states they held an Anytime Return fare. Until the customer can confirm the time of the train they tried to board, we cannot be certain if the excess (£17, assuming no discount) was payable or not.

However most journey opportunities are at times when the Off Peak Return (SVR) via Stafford would be permitted; if the return journey was made via Stafford at a time when the SVR via Stafford was valid, then clearly the appropriate excess fare is £0 and not £17.

Also the fact there is a higher route specific fare does not invalidate the Any Permitted fare, but via Stafford is not a permitted route for this journey. The existence of a higher priced routed fare does not alter the validity of the Any Permitted fare, but merely provides a mechanism in which case the Any Permitted can be excessed to allow travel via the route that is not a permitted route, in this case via Stafford.

The nationalrail.co.uk journey planner seems to confirm this by offering Anytime fares for both via Stafford and via Birmingham routes but charging the higher fare for via Stafford.

There is a limit to what you can confirm using the National Rail website. The question here is about excess fares, for which you won't get any information on NRE.

The excess was either £17 or £0 but we do not have enough information to know for sure. If the customer posted this immediately after being refused, the inspector was clearly wrong.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Virgin's barrier staff at Euston are unbelievable. Though it may well seem counter-intuitive for a Super Off-Peak ticket to be entirely valid to arrive or depart at 'rush hour' (I won't call it 'peak' here as that of course depends on the restriction code and journey), there are many such examples about. Their attitude, mirrored in a number of other TOCs' staff both at barriers, on trains and elsewhere, is sadly one where they are simply always right and there is no way that the customer might know something a little better than they do. Their unwillingness to even consider the potential validity of certain tickets is not acceptable and has caused countless issues in the past, and will no doubt continue to do so until they are properly trained in how to handle such situations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Virgin's barrier staff at Euston are unbelievable. Though it may well seem counter-intuitive for a Super Off-Peak ticket to be entirely valid to arrive or depart at 'rush hour' (I won't call it 'peak' here as that of course depends on the restriction code and journey), there are many such examples about. Their attitude, mirrored in a number of other TOCs' staff both at barriers, on trains and elsewhere, is sadly one where they are simply always right and there is no way that the customer might know something a little better than they do. Their unwillingness to even consider the potential validity of certain tickets is not acceptable and has caused countless issues in the past, and will no doubt continue to do so until they are properly trained in how to handle such situations.

Or until they are replaced with automatic barriers, which tend to cause fewer problems, just as online purchase and TVMs seem to cause fewer issues than a significant minority of ticket office staff who think they know it all but in fact don't.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Or until they are replaced with automatic barriers, which tend to cause fewer problems, just as online purchase and TVMs seem to cause fewer issues than a significant minority of ticket office staff who think they know it all but in fact don't.

Exactly. Although barriers and TVMs aren't perfect, they're better than humans in many ways. Either it works or it doesn't (though the reason for it incorrectly not working - or incorrectly working - is often obscure).

 

[PeterC]

I would have expected a conscientious member of staff to make the initial assumption that the OP had made a mistake and was attempting to board the wrong train and to direct him to a direct service. What the ticket collector said and what the OP responded we don't know.

 

[transmanche]

[Edit to delete: The question asked has been answered later on in the thread.]

 

[Gareth Marston]

Virgin's barrier staff at Euston are unbelievable. Though it may well seem counter-intuitive for a Super Off-Peak ticket to be entirely valid to arrive or depart at 'rush hour' (I won't call it 'peak' here as that of course depends on the restriction code and journey), there are many such examples about. Their attitude, mirrored in a number of other TOCs' staff both at barriers, on trains and elsewhere, is sadly one where they are simply always right and there is no way that the customer might know something a little better than they do. Their unwillingness to even consider the potential validity of certain tickets is not acceptable and has caused countless issues in the past, and will no doubt continue to do so until they are properly trained in how to handle such situations.

However in this case these alleged untrained oinks correctly knew that a Wolves to London Terminals Any Permitted was not valid via Stafford. We constantly here how the Euston gateline mafia should be properly trained but people still criticise when they get it right?

Aside from possibly offering an excess (but not enough detail from OP to know for sure whether it was/ wasn't) just how do you want them to handle people with invalid tickets. Just let them through?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Or until they are replaced with automatic barriers, which tend to cause fewer problems, just as online purchase and TVMs seem to cause fewer issues than a significant minority of ticket office staff who think they know it all but in fact don't.

And the OP could have then started the thread by saying the barrier at Euston refused my Any Permitted Wolves to London Terminals ticket.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

However in this case these alleged untrained oinks correctly knew that a Wolves to London Terminals Any Permitted was not valid via Stafford. We constantly here how the Euston gateline mafia should be properly trained but people still criticise when they get it right?

Aside from possibly offering an excess (but not enough detail from OP to know for sure whether it was/ wasn't) just how do you want them to handle people with invalid tickets. Just let them through?

Not categorically say "you must buy a new ticket". I've seen that enough times to know those are pretty much the only two things the Euston barrier staff do - either let people through or tell them to buy a new ticket. A new ticket is a hell of a lot more than the correct excess in this case (which is a very low two-figure sum at most, rather than a medium three-figure sum) and yet I've never heard any barrier staff tell someone to get an excess.

 

[yorkie]

And the OP could have then started the thread by saying the barrier at Euston refused my Any Permitted Wolves to London Terminals ticket.

Totally wrong. They would have gained entry through the barrier, and the Guard would have issued a zero fare excess (or a £17 excess if the journey was at a peak time)

The facts are the Euston gateline are at best unhelpful and not giving the complete information, and at worst totally wrong, in many cases.

If anyone who was half-decent at customer service had handled the OP's case, then they would have explained the matter and dealt with it sufficiently that the OP didn't need to ask us. However you and I know what many of them are like and surely you cannot defend the indefensible.

Don't forget, they've mistreated your customers:

I know someone from Welshpool who carries a print out of the relevant restriction code with him when he travels to Euston. My local RUG periodically prints it out in their newsletter due to the amount of times Virgin staff get it wrong. The off peak return from west of Shrewsbury is valid in the evening peak from Euston, I will be in London on business a couple of times in the next few weeks and this thread has reminded me to go prepared for poorly trained staff.

And mistreated many other ticket sellers customers too.

There have been dozens of issues on this forum, and many more that you or I will know of that don't make it to the forum.

They're a disgrace.

 

[Hadders]

A change of route excess can be obtained on board with no penalty so arguable the OP should've been allowed to board anyway.

 

[AlterEgo]

However in this case these alleged untrained oinks correctly knew that a Wolves to London Terminals Any Permitted was not valid via Stafford. We constantly here how the Euston gateline mafia should be properly trained but people still criticise when they get it right?

Aside from possibly offering an excess (but not enough detail from OP to know for sure whether it was/ wasn't) just how do you want them to handle people with invalid tickets. Just let them through?

Because the correct action is to sell or suggest an excess. They should not need to purchase a new ticket and such advice constitutes mis-selling. I would hope you would be able to recognise that?

 

[BlueFox]

Because the correct action is to sell or suggest an excess. They should not need to purchase a new ticket and such advice constitutes mis-selling. I would hope you would be able to recognise that?

What makes you think they advised the original poster to buy a new ticket? He didn't say that, and hasn't returned since he started the thread.

 

[bb21]

I'm no fan of Euston barrier staff in general, but can we at least give the OP a chance to answer some important questions as raised in Posts 2 and 3 before diving in with chitchats that may or may not be relevant please?

Please remember that the disputes area of the forum is not for general discussion of any subject. It is specifically for offering relevant advice to those seeking help. Contributions in the disputes area must follow the guidelines set out in this post, in particular relevant facts to the case should be established first.

I will repeat. This is not a suitable thread for discussing general conduct of gateline staff at Euston. If anyone feels that the topic must be revisited, please use a more suitable area of the forum.

Thank you.

 

[etr221]

The real problem here is the railway not using the word 'any' in its normal English meaning in the term ANY PERMITTED (and not normally qualifying that). As (per posts above) there is a fare EUS-STA-WVH, and the National Rail journey planner gives options that way, it is reasonable to suppose that that is permitted route (or is the railway selling tickets that cannot be used?), and so it is reasonable that an EUS-WVH route ANY PERMITTED ticket can be used that way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The real problem here is the railway not using the word 'any' in its normal English meaning in the term ANY PERMITTED (and not normally qualifying that). As (per posts above) there is a fare EUS-STA-WVH, and the National Rail journey planner gives options that way, it is reasonable to suppose that that is permitted route (or is the railway selling tickets that cannot be used?), and so it is reasonable that an EUS-WVH route ANY PERMITTED ticket can be used that way.

It means "any route that is Permitted (by the Routeing Guide)" not "any route is permitted (i.e. whichever you like however silly)". But that confusion is why they're getting rid of it, not that "." is any less confusing.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The real problem here is the railway not using the word 'any' in its normal English meaning in the term ANY PERMITTED (and not normally qualifying that). As (per posts above) there is a fare EUS-STA-WVH, and the National Rail journey planner gives options that way, it is reasonable to suppose that that is permitted route (or is the railway selling tickets that cannot be used?), and so it is reasonable that an EUS-WVH route ANY PERMITTED ticket can be used that way.

As I said up thread it should really have Via Birmingham on it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As I said up thread it should really have Via Birmingham on it.

There could do with being a programme to tidy these up, really, and I agree with that point. Another thing they should tidy up is to move "negative easements" into ticket routes.

 

[etr221]

It means "any route that is Permitted (by the Routeing Guide)" not "any route is permitted (i.e. whichever you like however silly)". But that confusion is why they're getting rid of it, not that "." is any less confusing.

But all it says is ANY PERMITTED - which I would consider to mean 'any route that is permitted by any appropriate railway source (staff member or other)', while I would interpret any official advice or advertising of a route (where I have not specified it) as indicating that it is permitted.

I would not interpret it as meaning that every possible (however silly) route is permitted - but I would interpret route 'ANY' as meaning this.

And looking at http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types.aspx#Routeing%20information I see

Permitted routes cover all the reasonable routes available for making the journey indicated, including all direct services and suitable connecting services. When you book your journey online, any ticket offered in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner will be accepted as a permitted route.

and as via Stafford is a standard result from journey planner, why should any body think that an ANY PERMITTED ticket would not be valid?

As I said up thread it should really have Via Birmingham on it.

Agreed, this would have made the position clear.

 

[najaB]

and as via Stafford is a standard result from journey planner

Is this ticket offered "in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner" though?

 

[tiptoptaff]

Is this ticket offered "in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner" though?

I would suggest not, being that it's a higher fare!

 

[etr221]

Is this ticket offered "in connection with the timetable or itinerary produced by the journey planner" though?

I would suggest not, being that it's a higher fare!

As asking journey planner for times EUS to WVH (without specifying any route), generally provides options via Stafford (and does announcement/indicator display of train to Stafford and points north include a 'for Wolverhampton change at Stafford' type element?), then via Stafford is reasonable and hence permitted. So ANY PERMITTED should be valid via Stafford.
How is an ordinary traveller expected to know otherwise? (The fact that the fare via Stafford might be higher doesn't invalidate this)
Especially as there is no obvious option in journey planner to give 'ANY PERMITTED' only responses.
And - to change tack somewhat - I find it an interesting reflection on things that nobody on this thread has suggested what arguably should have been the optimum action by the barrier staff: directing the OP to a train (via Birmingham) on which their ticket was unarguably valid.

 

[tiptoptaff]

(The fact that the fare via Stafford might be higher doesn't invalidate this)

Actually, it does

 

[mmh]

Wouldn't it be more sensible to include via Stafford as a permitted route (either by updating the routeing guide maps or adding it as an easement) and having a cheaper route: Via Birmingham fare instead?

Although then I suppose if London - Wolverhampton is valid not via Birmingham by another route things get more complicated.

Actually, the most sensible thing would be to scrap the Via Stafford fare and just include it as a permitted route via an easement, and leave the any permitted fare untouched. So that will never happen.

 

[etr221]

How is an ordinary traveller expected to know otherwise? (The fact that the fare via Stafford might be higher doesn't invalidate this)

Actually, it does

To clarify what I meant, the 'this' referred to the immediately preceding question - what the fares are (even if known) doesn't affect it (the question).

So I will ask again, given that ANY PERMITTED should be valid via Stafford, how is an ordinary traveller expected to know otherwise?