Over distance on "front" of journey

[father_jack]

Anyone got any opinions on the following-

Pax has return portion SSR Bath to London terminals (£56). They wish to get on at Brighton. The STAR TIS will issue an over distance excess to make that return portion start at Brighton for £13 (SSR BTH to BTN= £67.) Much cheaper than a separate single BTN-VIC which is potentially £26.40 plus the tube.

Is this allowed ? There's nothing to say any clearly whether it isn't or is in the Manual.

 

[najaB]

Is this allowed ? There's nothing to say any clearly whether it isn't or is in the Manual.

There was a long thread about this about a year back, there wasn't a clear consensus reached (no surprise there!) It was pretty much agreed that you can't overdistance excess to the front of a journey, but the reason for the dispute was the question of if a return ticket should be treated as two separate journeys (Journey 1: London - Bath, Journey 2: Bath-London) or one journey with two segments (London-Bath-London).

The difference is that in the first interpretation Bath is the origin of the second journey and so you cannot excess to a starting point further out. In the second interpretation, Bath is a destination along a route so you can excess it.

I don't expect the answer to be any clearer this time round either.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The Manual (along with the TSA) documents that an 'over-distance' excess is for when someone is travelling "beyond the destination" of the ticket. It should not therefore be used to 'start early'.

However, it would be possible to do an 'over-distance' excess on the outward portion, for both directions, provided this is done before outward travel (unless no facilities exist to do it).

The question of 'travelling beyond the destination' on the return leg is somewhat less clear.

 

[PermitToTravel]

In general ticket offices sell it and guards accept it. Railway ticketing enthusiasts on the internet can't agree on whether it's permitted.

In this particular case: is the passenger going from Brighton to London via Bath? That's a ludicrously long way round that I doubt is on any permitted routes. If not it sounds like the Bath ticket should be refunded and a Brighton one sold, as the former is basically unrelated

 

[greatkingrat]

I think he wants to go from Brighton to Bath via London, the return half of the SSR already covers the London - Bath section.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Ah, sorry. There's nothing wrong with that at all then!

 

[James Wake]

Shame the passenger can't use the Brighton to Bath direct trains that run a few times a day.

 

[Haywain]

Shame the passenger can't use the Brighton to Bath direct trains that run a few times a day.

Which would then open another can of worms about whether, once the excess has been issued, the journey is required to follow the route of the original ticket (ie: travel via London).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which would then open another can of worms about whether, once the excess has been issued, the journey is required to follow the route of the original ticket (ie: travel via London).

If we moved to single-fare pricing, all this complexity could be removed entirely - you could simply allow a fee-free (or reduced fee) refund of a single ticket provided you at the same time purchased another which would be valid for the journey already undertaken as well as that planned.

Excesses as they are are a complicated nuisance that few staff understand properly. The idea of trading in your ticket for another relevant ticket is a much simpler one.

 

[ainsworth74]

Which would then open another can of worms about whether, once the excess has been issued, the journey is required to follow the route of the original ticket (ie: travel via London).

Well the excess turns the ticket from a Bath - London to a Bath - Brighton which means you can use any routes permitted for Bath - Brighton surely? In which case both via London and via the South Coast are valid as are direct trains of course.

 

[PermitToTravel]

The TSA says you're right, the iKB says you're wrong, and all passenger facing contracts are silent on the matter

 

[Haywain]

Well the excess turns the ticket from a Bath - London to a Bath - Brighton which means you can use any routes permitted for Bath - Brighton surely? In which case both via London and via the South Coast are valid as are direct trains of course.

I quite agree, but there are others who hold a different view.

 

[yorkie]

The TSA says you're right, the iKB says you're wrong, and all passenger facing contracts are silent on the matter

The TSA is definitive. Train Companies are obliged to honour it.

“Excess Fare” means a variation in the Rights and Restrictions applicable to a Fare which has the impact of converting that Fare into another Fare”

If a Train Company was to decide to give passengers less rights than those stipulated in the TSA, that would be a breach of their franchise agreement and would be a very serious matter indeed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I quite agree, but there are others who hold a different view.

I am also in agreement... and you can point those who aren't in the direction of the TSA

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The TSA is definitive. Train Companies are obliged to honour it.

If a Train Company was to decide to give passengers less rights than those stipulated in the TSA, that would be a breach of their franchise agreement and would be a very serious matter indeed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am also in agreement... and you can point those who aren't in the direction of the TSA

And Fare is a defined term in the TSA.

"“Fare” means the right, exercisable against one or more Operators (and, where applicable, another person or persons), subject to the Rights and Restrictions applicable to it and the payment of the relevant Price (less any applicable discounts):-

(a) to make one or more journeys on the Network (whether or not together with other rights); or

(b) to carry on such a journey an item of luggage or an animal, where this right does not arise (except on the payment of a fee) under the National Rail Conditions of Carriage or, as the case may be, the CIV Rules or any additional conditions that are applicable,

and, where applicable, to obtain other goods or services from an Operator or another person or persons. However, it does not include an Excess Fare or any rights that are evidenced by a London Concessionary Travel Permit that is issued under the London Concessionary Travel Scheme."

And even ATOC notes that the TSA may have different interpretations.

 

[OwlMan]

“Excess Fare” means a variation in the Rights and Restrictions applicable to a Fare which has the impact of converting that Fare into another Fare”

It does NOT say that if you hold a A to B ticket and buy an overdistance excess it turns it into a A to C ticket.

What it does do is convert into another fare - which could mean changing form A to B into A to B to C as quoted in the iKB.

 

[yorkie]

I think it's pretty clear! The fare is converted into another fare.

It doesn't become a combination of two fares.

 

[OwlMan]

I think it's pretty clear! The fare is converted into another fare.

It doesn't become a combination of two fares.

A to C via B is one fare

 

[hairyhandedfool]

A to C via B is one fare

You won't get Yorkie to agree with you here, doesn't matter what you say or do. Yorkie has decided and that's all you'll get.

 

[furlong]

A to C via B is one fare

Only if the A to C Fare has the Route restriction "VIA B".

4-4 REQUIREMENT TO CREATE FARES PRIOR TO SELLING THEM
An Operator may not offer any Fare for Sale, or authorise another person to do so, unless that Fare has been Created in accordance with this Chapter (and has not been discontinued or replaced).

and

(5) Requirement to honour Permitted Routes
The Rights and Restrictions applicable to a Fare may not prohibit a Purchaser of that Fare from travelling via a route which is one of the Permitted Routes for the Flow to which the Fare relates.

In my opinion, the 'conversion' from the old Fare to the new Fare is simple and unambiguous. The get-out clause for the company comes from the very restricted set of circumstances under which there is any obligation to sell this particular type of Excess Fare. (Roughly speaking, if it was possible for them to buy a Brighton ticket in the first place, then there's no obligation to sell the excess.)

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Only if the A to C Fare has the Route restriction "VIA B".

4-4 REQUIREMENT TO CREATE FARES PRIOR TO SELLING THEM
An Operator may not offer any Fare for Sale, or authorise another person to do so, unless that Fare has been Created in accordance with this Chapter (and has not been discontinued or replaced).

....

However, an Excess Fare is not a Fare, and so the Operator is not offering a Fare for sale.