Mythbusting: doubling back

[yorkie]

I sometimes hear people repeat a myth that there is a blanket "no doubling back" rule

In reality, while there are rules about where you can or can't double back, there is certainly no blanket rule against it.

Here are some examples where doubling back is allowed:

Reading West to Bruton
example fare:

SSR Route: Any Permitted​

example itinerary:

Reading West 1427
Reading 1433

Reading 1505
Castle Cary 1640

Castle Cary 1707
Bruton 1712
​

This is valid. The fact you double-back between Reading West & Reading is indisputably valid providing you do not double-call at Reading West.

The origin Routeing Point (RP) is Reading Group. Although there is a clause in the Routeing Guide which does not allow doublebacks within the origin/destination routeing group, in this case we are doubling back within the same fares group (fares groups and routeing groups are not the same thing, though in some cases they may share the same membership) which takes priority, so the Routeing Guide check applies to Reading to Bruton, with preceding stations within the same fares group not needing to be considered for this check.

The destination Routeing Point for this journey is Castle Cary, which is an appropriate routeing point for Bruton in this case. There is no doubling back within the maps (in this case the relevant map is WE). Castle Cary to Bruton is a valid local journey from the destination. Again, providing there is no double-call at Bruton, the fact that this is a double-back for the overall journey is not relevant.

Cambuslang to Watford Jn
example fare:

SVR route +Any Permitted
​

example itinerary:

Cambuslang 1109
Glasgow Central 1122

Glasgow Central 1140
London Euston 1609

London Euston 1630
Watford Jn 1646
​

This is also valid. The origin RP is Glasgow Group. The fact that Cambuslang lies on the Glasgow-London main line is not relevant. Cambuslang-Glasgow is a permitted local journey. We then use the mapped routes from Glasgow to the destination RP.

As the ticket has a maltese cross, we can do the split route check to/from London Group. This means all permitted routes to London (in this case we are simply using map LM for that purpose) and all permitted routes from London (map EN in this case).

Although the customer would be entitled to use a multitude of routes which do not require a double-back (e.g. via Birmingham, Reading and Paddington), there is absolutely nothing preventing them from doubling back between Watford Jn and London Euston as the split route check has no doubling back on each of the component legs. The rules allow for it.

Cheadle Hulme to Watford Jn
example fare:

SVR route: +via London​

example itinerary:

Cheadle Hulme 1324
Stockport 1329

Stockport 1343
London Euston 1539

London Euston 1554
Watford Junction 1609​

Again, valid. The origin RP is Cheadle Hulme itself, however the double-back to Stockport is covered by easement 700074.

As the fare is routed +via London, this means it is valid via London (as well as on any cheaper flows e.g. route Not via London).

As we are travelling via London, we again have to do the split route check. We therefore take all permitted routes to London (in this case map EO) and all permitted routes from London (in this case map EN). If the split route check results in a double-back for the overall journey then so be it; there is absolutely no rule against it providing each component leg is valid.

Note however that the routeing does not compel passengers to travel via London. It is entirely legitimate to avoid the double-back and alight from a southbound train at Watford Jn. It would also be legitimate to break their journey at a valid location eg. Harrow & Wealdstone, and when they resume their journey there is no compulsion to do the double-back so they could proceed directly to Watford Jn.

However booking engines cannot handle this extended validity; they will only issue such a ticket if the route does actually go via London. See also:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/london-euston-to-edale-via-stockport.148525/ for another example of this, with a "via Manchester" fare; the passenger is permitted to double-back between Stockport & Manchester, and booking engines will only issue this fare for the itinerary concerned if the customer obtains an itinerary via Manchester however the passenger is not actually compelled to complete the double-back between Stockport and Manchester.

I hope that provides some clarification!

 

[bb21]

Examples 2 and 3 are fairly self-explanatory.

For Example 1 though, you may want to explain why calling at Reading West again on the second leg of the journey invalidates the itinerary.

 

[yorkie]

For Example 1 though, you may want to explain why calling at Reading West again on the second leg of the journey invalidates the itinerary.

If you do not double-call, then it's definitely valid without any doubt.

If you do double-call (an example of this might be Manchester Oxford Road to Liverpool if you doubled back via Manchester Piccadilly and called at Oxford Road twice) then it is a contentious issue; I would certainly not recommend it and booking engines will not allow it.

Calling at your destination twice is arguably even more dubious than calling at the origin twice, as arguably the contract expires once you reach your destination station, although the overall concept is essentially the same. See:

Yes, but I think the answer lies in Contract Law. When the passenger has been conveyed to the destination printed on the ticket, then the Company has fulfilled its obligation to the ticket-holding passenger and has no further obligation to convey that passenger (nor to underwrite any other liability or risk).

 

[bb21]

Right, yes, that I agree.

 

[philthetube]

As I read the Cambuslang example doubling back at Euston is only allowed if you are prepared to pay an extra £11.80 for the honour, (based on off peak single),£152.40 via London, £140.60 not London, and an of peak return Watford Junction, Euston is 11.40, interesting split to save 40p!

 

[yorkie]

As I read the Cambuslang example doubling back at Euston is only allowed if you are prepared to pay an extra £11.80 for the honour, (based on off peak single),£152.40 via London, £140.60 not London, and an of peak return Watford Junction, Euston is 11.40, interesting split to save 40p!

If an Off Peak Return (SVR) is held, it's only £5.90 for the excess to go via London in one direction. The problem with a combination of fares, is that for ordinary non-Season point to point fares, the train would need to call at Watford Junction. The fastest journey opportunities often involve trains that are non-stop from Warrington to London Euston, and this is why it's so important that a fare does exist that allows passengers to double-back.

 

[hawk1911]

I got pulled up on a doubling back, by a Northern guard, a week ago.

Its one I use to save a couple of pounds, so I won't mention the exact details, but basically my train goes from A to B. Just before B my train passes through X without stopping, so I buy a cheaper day return ticket from A to X and end my journey 'early' at B, by not completing the double back. The fare and route is valid according to NRE Journey Planner, and it seems to comply with the Routeing Guide.

I maintained I was correct, the guard stated that I wasn't, so I produced a print from NRE and Northern's own site, showing the route, and price, matched my ticket.

He wasn't convinced and said I had to pay the difference, which I declined to do. So he then said something along the lines of: as the price difference was only a couple of pounds, he wouldn't pursue it.

Footnote
Interestingly, there's another fare saving journey, using Northern, which is also shown as valid at NRE, but, in this particular case, I don't think its valid according to the Routeing Guide. But then I would just refer to the NRCoT which states, under section 13.3 that:

The easiest way to check for valid routes is to use the journey planner at www.nationalrail.co.uk.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/46427.aspx

 

[MichaelAMW]

Yorkie: could you post the inverse of your OP, by which I mean give a few examples of what the doubling-back rule does forbid, as opposed to double backs that are (nevertheless) allowed? (You don't need to mention double calling again.)

 

[Paul Kelly]

give a few examples of what the doubling-back rule does forbid, as opposed to double backs that are (nevertheless) allowed?

The main one is that you cannot doubleback while tracing a mapped route, unless it is allowed by a doubleback easement. There was an example on the forum just yesterday: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/seaford-sussex-to-west-norwood-booking-engine-question.159667/ - here the origin routeing point is Lewes and the destination routeing point is Streatham Group - you can trace a route from Lewes to Streatham Group via Clapham Junction on the relevant maps, but because it involves a doubleback through Balham it's not permitted.

 

[MichaelAMW]

I think, therefore, that you are confirming something that I have always thought was true, which is that a double back is fine if it arises from the initial travel from the origin to the relevant routeing point. Indeed, Yorkie's Reading West and Reading example is one of these.

 

[alistairlees]

If you do not double-call, then it's definitely valid without any doubt.

If you do double-call (an example of this might be Manchester Oxford Road to Liverpool if you doubled back via Manchester Piccadilly and called at Oxford Road twice) then it is a contentious issue; I would certainly not recommend it and booking engines will not allow it.

Calling at your destination twice is arguably even more dubious than calling at the origin twice, as arguably the contract expires once you reach your destination station, although the overall concept is essentially the same. See:

In general, agreeing with what Yorkie says here.

It might be helpful to clarify a point though - so far as I understand, doubling back within a routeing group is permitted provided your destination (and origin, I suppose) station is outside the routeing group.

Consider the following examples:

Perth to Carlisle will come up with some itineraries via Edinburgh (changing there), rather than changing at Haymarket (even though both the Perth - Edinburgh train and the Edinburgh - Carlisle train both stop at Haymarket). This is because (as I understand it) changing at Haymarket would only lead to you being on the same train as changing at Edinburgh, and waiting time is minimised (also, Edinburgh has a higher interchange status than Haymarket), and both are in the same routeing group. If the journey was from Perth to Haymarket, and the train from Perth stopped at Haymarket (they all do I think) then this would definitely not be fine - the contract ends on the first call at Haymarket.

A similar situation can arise from a journey between Filey and York. Most of the time it's best to change at Seamer, but sometimes Scarborough is better (same reasons as above). Both Seamer and Scarborough are in the same routeing group.

Would welcome any thoughts on the above.

 

[maniacmartin]

Its one I use to save a couple of pounds, so I won't mention the exact details, but basically my train goes from A to B. Just before B my train passes through X without stopping, so I buy a cheaper day return ticket from A to X and end my journey 'early' at B, by not completing the double back. The fare and route is valid according to NRE Journey Planner, and it seems to comply with the Routeing Guide.

Sometimes the double-back is wholely within the destination Routeing Point Group. The NRG instructions say that this is permitted 'for interchange purposes only'. The consensus is that this prohibits break of journey and topping short within the doubleback.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I think, therefore, that you are confirming something that I have always thought was true, which is that a double back is fine if it arises from the initial travel from the origin to the relevant routeing point.

Yes, correct, all that is required here is that the routeing passes the fares check and if it does, and the journey from the origin/destination to/from the routeing point is a valid local journey in itself, then all is fine - no need to consider any doublebacks between the part of the journey to/from the routeing point and the main mapped part of the journey.

Indeed, Yorkie's Reading West and Reading example is one of these.

No, unfortunately not - bad example! Reading West and Reading are both in the same routeing group (i.e. Reading Group), so this constitutes a doubleback within a routeing group (rather than a local journey to a routeing point). A doubleback within a routeing group is fine mid-journey (indeed that's the main purpose of routeing groups, to facilitate these where it's advantageous to the passenger), but is not normally allowed at the start or end of a journey, unless there is an easement covering it.

The difference with Reading is that Reading West and Reading are in the same fares group (i.e. Reading Stations), and you would be issued with the exact same fare no matter which one of them you were travelling from. This is a very interesting grey area that hasn't been much discussed on the forum before. My take on it is that fares groups pre-date the routeing guide and are a concept alien to it and not really taken account of in any of its rules, which lends weight to the idea they should be considered separately. In this case, the argument goes that it's only the journey from Reading to Bruton that is subject to the routeing guide, and the initial doubleback from Reading West to Reading is allowable as it's entirely within the same fares group, as long as you don't call at Reading West (or indeed Reading) again. This doesn't appear to be documented anywhere but seems consistent with custom and practice and how the London Terminals fares group works, for which there is slightly more "case law".

 

[hawk1911]

Its one I use to save a couple of pounds, so I won't mention the exact details, but basically my train goes from A to B. Just before B my train passes through X without stopping, so I buy a cheaper day return ticket from A to X and end my journey 'early' at B, by not completing the double back. The fare and route is valid according to NRE Journey Planner, and it seems to comply with the Routeing Guide.

My guess is that NRE is allowing the route because the double-back is within the destination Routeing Point Group. The NRG instructions say that this is permitted 'for interchange purposes only'. The consensus is that this prohibits break of journey and topping short within the doubleback.

In this particular case its not part of the destination Routeing Point Group, so I believe break of journey and stopping short are allowed. It does pass the NRM64 fares check, even though current fares produce a saving.

 

[JB_B]

A doubleback within a routeing group is fine mid-journey (indeed that's the main purpose of routeing groups, to facilitate these where it's advantageous to the passenger), but is not normally allowed at the start or end of a journey, unless there is an easement covering it.

Having a bit of brain-fade - can you remind me of the source for that rule ( doubleback allowed within intermediate RPGs but not normally within the org and dest routeing groups) ?


There is no general double-back rule so it's only when tracing a route that we need to keep track of stations and not pass through the same station again (except within intermediate routeing groups or where allowed by easement) until we reach the destination routeing point (or group).

If you're starting from a routeing point group member, when do you start tracing the route on the map (from the first origin group member visited or the last ?)

If you're travelling to a routeing point group member when do you stop tracing the route on the map (from the first dest group member arrived at or the last ?)

I don't think the routeing guide tells you which approach to take.



Thanks for expanding on how being part of the same fares group could arguably be helpful. I can see that you've got something more than paying the same fare - you actually have the exact same ticket - I'm not yet 100% convinced, though.

 

[Paul Kelly]

Having a bit of brain-fade - can you remind me of the source for that rule ( doubleback allowed within intermediate RPGs but not normally within the org and dest routeing groups) ?

From Section A "National Routeing Guide Instructions" http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/nrg_instructions.pdf

GROUP STATIONS
Some stations are grouped together to improve interchange between trains by offering customers access to a wider choice of train services and station facilities. A customer may travel via any station in such a group, including doubling back, provided that the group is on one of the permitted routes between their origin and destination stations. This extended availability is for interchange purposes only and does not apply where the origin or destination stations are part of a group.

(emphasis added by me)

If you're starting from a routeing point group member, when do you start tracing the route on the map (from the first origin group member visited or the last ?)

If you're travelling to a routeing point group member when do you stop tracing the route on the map (from the first dest group member arrived at or the last ?)

I don't think the routeing guide tells you which approach to take.

Good question, but possibly over-thinking it - you just start tracing at the first station of the journey (although I should say this is just my opinion). The rules of the routeing guide are reasonably internally consistent in this regard. It's just when you start to get fares groups involved as well as routeing groups it gets a lot more complicated, e.g. yorkie's Reading West example.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

No, unfortunately not - bad example! Reading West and Reading are both in the same routeing group (i.e. Reading Group), so this constitutes a doubleback within a routeing group (rather than a local journey to a routeing point).

Talking of Reading, National Rail Enquiries from Maidenhead and more especially Twyford will sometimes find quicker journeys to Paddington by heading out to Reading and back by non-stop services. The ticket price is invariably higher.

 

[JB_B]

From Section A "National Routeing Guide Instructions" http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/nrg_instructions.pdf

(emphasis added by me)

Thanks - those words must have passed across my retinas - I'm not sure why they made it no further.

Good question, but possibly over-thinking it...

You're probably right.

 

[ScotTrains]

Would an Anytime Day Single ticket from North Berwick to Drem allow you to break your journey at Edinburgh (or anywhere else between Drem and Edinburgh) using the easement that allows you to go via Edinburgh?

 

[Kite159]

Would an Anytime Day Single ticket from North Berwick to Drem allow you to break your journey at Edinburgh (or anywhere else between Drem and Edinburgh) using the easement that allows you to go via Edinburgh?

Why on earth would a North Berwick to Drem ticket be valid via Edinburgh, the vast majority of the trains to/from North Berwick call at Drem? Unless you mean Dunbar or Berwick Upon Tweed to Drem

 

[clagmonster]

The only easement that could apply is 30095:
"Journeys to North Berwick are allowed via Edinburgh even when doubleing back through Drem. This easement applies in both directions."
http://iblocks-rg-publication.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/easement_text.pdf

I'd say that on North Berwick - Drem, you aren't doubling back through Drem when you terminate there, but it is arguable.

Certainly though on a train which actually stops at Drem the contract would terminate when you get to Drem the first time.

 

[Starmill]

All easements must be read literally in my view, and you must follow what they actually say as closely as possible. It sometimes seems that almost every easement is written in its own way, using its own language.

As Clangmonster says, 030095 easement is:

Journeys to North Berwick are allowed via Edinburgh even when doubleing back through Drem. This easement applies in both directions.

It does not specify which journeys this applies to, so if the journey is to North Berwick, regardless of tickets (not mentioned) or origin (not mentioned) then travel via Edinburgh is permitted. I think you can ignore "even when doubling back through Drem" because that's not a condition on travel being allowed via Edinburgh, it's just an example. So my interpretation of what that says is that if you're travelling to North Berwick, you can always go via Edinburgh.

Some may take a different view, such as differing on the meaning of "even".

The electronic meaning of an easement is generally junk to a human, bearing little or no resemblance to what the text says (see also: time restrictions), but that's the data that must be used in the booking engine so...