Reading to Gatwick via London

[NigelH]

A week or so ago I bought an off-peak return (with railcard) for the above route, and was offered two options: "via Gomshall" (i.e. the direct line via Guildford) and "Any permitted route".

I had previously checked permitted routes with the National Rail journey planner, and noted that Reading-Paddington-underground-Victoria-Gatwick was one of them, and this was the route I planned to use.

However, my ticket was rejected at the underground barriers and only then did I notice that it did not have the "+" symbol on it. I also got an orange light on the barriers at Paddington (return) and Victoria (both ways) but staff allowed me through.

The on board supervisor (OBS) on the Gatwick Express checked on his terminal and confirmed that the ticket I had should have been valid on that route, and I have put in a request to GWR to refund the underground fares.

However, checking on brfares.com after my return, I noticed that (as well as having increased) many of the fares on that route have two "Any permitted route" options, both at the same price and with the same fare setter, but one with and one without the "+" symbol, and the former ones also stating "Ticket issued from Reading/Reading West" - I don't recall seeing any of this before.

It seems very odd to me; I'd be grateful if anyone can explain it, please, or indeed if anyone has experienced the same problems that I have and whether they were successful in claiming back the underground fares.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Definitely seems potentially confusing to have the two variant Reading->Gatwick Airport route "Any Permitted" type tickets (one with cross London transfer and one without) but priced exactly the same!

@NigelH, how did you buy the ticket? TVM?

 

[CyrusWuff]

Doing some digging, the explicit Reading - Gatwick fares were introduced in October 2021, initially as route "." (01000), but this changed to "Any Permitted" at some point between then and the March 2022 fares change.

 

[NigelH]

Definitely seems potentially confusing to have the two variant Reading->Gatwick Airport route "Any Permitted" type tickets (one with cross London transfer and one without) but priced exactly the same!

@NigelH, how did you buy the ticket? TVM?

I used a machine at the station; there was no point in buying online (as I might normally have done) because I knew a paper ticket would be required to cross London.

 

[miklcct]

I think this is a mistake by GWR - maybe email them about the lack of + for the ticket and hope it can be fixed.

 

[Paul Kelly]

Separately from the obvious mistake here (missing Maltese Cross), loads of flows now have fares defined only from Reading as well as from the old READING STATIONS (now Reading or Reading West). Does anyone have any idea what the reason for this reduction in flexibility is?

 

[CyrusWuff]

Separately from the obvious mistake here (missing Maltese Cross), loads of flows now have fares defined only from Reading as well as from the old READING STATIONS (now Reading or Reading West). Does anyone have any idea what the reason for this reduction in flexibility is?

Given the existence of Pay As You Go fares in the data, my guess would be that PAYG is only intended to be available to/from Reading and not Reading West.

If that is the case, they've not handled it very well in the fares database, to say the least!

 

[Watershed]

It looks like GWR's Pricing Manager has messed up here. They've created some override fares (i.e. a set of point-to-point fares that are intended to override the clustered fares which apply for this journey) for Gatwick Airport to Reading. It is entirely unclear why they felt the need to do this, as there are no differences between the override fares and the clustered fares, other than that the override fares are issued to "Reading" rather than "Reading or Reading West" (what used to be Reading Stations). However, they omitted to mark these override fares as having a cross-London marker.

The tickets were still contractually valid on the Underground - see the following excerpt from the Routeing Guide:

In some instances (particularly long distance cross country journeys) the fares data will show an "any permitted" fare but without the via London, Maltese cross symbol. Reference to Section
C (the “yellow pages”) may show via London to be a permitted route for this journey and in such instances travel via London to include cross-London transfer would be permitted.

Therefore if the Underground gateline staff made you pay again for your journey, TfL are the ones who are in breach of contract here, even if GWR caused the situation to arise through their mistake.

I would contact both organisations - TfL to recover any additional fare you had to pay, and GWR to get them to give the override fares a cross-London marker.

 

[NigelH]

Separately from the obvious mistake here (missing Maltese Cross), loads of flows now have fares defined only from Reading as well as from the old READING STATIONS (now Reading or Reading West). Does anyone have any idea what the reason for this reduction in flexibility is?

This route seems to have both options, which begs the question of which one you should get when buying from a ticket machine. However, even if I look on brfares.com for a journey from Reading West, I still get the same two options at the same price!

So far I haven't found any other route from Reading with this issue; the few I tried which have sensible options both via London and not tend to offer either "Any permitted +" or "London not und" (or for longer journeys, routes restricted to a particular operator). I wonder what happens, though, if you use the Elizabeth Line and/or Thameslink to get across London; for example, one route I might have used is Reading-Paddington-(Elizabeth Line)-Farringdon-(Thameslink)-Gatwick

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Mar 2023 ==

It looks like GWR's Pricing Manager has messed up here. They've created some override fares (i.e. a set of point-to-point fares that are intended to override the clustered fares which apply for this journey) for Gatwick Airport to Reading. It is entirely unclear why they felt the need to do this, as there are no differences between the override fares and the clustered fares, other than that the override fares are issued to "Reading" rather than "Reading or Reading West" (what used to be Reading Stations). However, they omitted to mark these override fares as having a cross-London marker.

The tickets were still contractually valid on the Underground - see the following excerpt from the Routeing Guide:


Therefore if the Underground gateline staff made you pay again for your journey, TfL are the ones who are in breach of contract here, even if GWR caused the situation to arise through their mistake.

I would contact both organisations - TfL to recover any additional fare you had to pay, and GWR to get them to give the override fares a cross-London marker.

Thanks for that reference - I thought I'd seen it but couldn't remember where. I'll try TfL, I've already emailed GWR.

 

[Watershed]

So far I haven't found any other route from Reading with this issue; the few I tried which have sensible options both via London and not tend to offer either "Any permitted +" or "London not und" (or for longer journeys, routes restricted to a particular operator). I wonder what happens, though, if you use the Elizabeth Line and/or Thameslink to get across London; for example, one route I might have used is Reading-Paddington-(Elizabeth Line)-Farringdon-(Thameslink)-Gatwick

"London Not Und" tickets are again contractually valid on the Elizabeth line (it is an operator restricted ticket, not valid on London Underground Ltd - the Elizabeth line is operated by MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Ltd which is a different company). However, good luck getting through any gatelines, as TfL pretends that the Elizabeth line constitutes part of the Underground during its central section.

 

[Snow1964]

"London Not Und" tickets are again contractually valid on the Elizabeth line (it is an operator restricted ticket, not valid on London Underground Ltd - the Elizabeth line is operated by MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Ltd which is a different company). However, good luck getting through any gatelines, as TfL pretends that the Elizabeth line constitutes part of the Underground during its central section.

Does that mean could change at Farringdon from Elizabeth line to Thameslink, and would you need to use a ticket gate to do so

 

[Watershed]

Does that mean could change at Farringdon from Elizabeth line to Thameslink, and would you need to use a ticket gate to do so

Yes. There is no need to use a ticket gate to undertake this change, but there is to change between the Elizabeth line 'low level' platforms and the 'high level' platforms at Paddington, if you want to get to Reading faster than sticking on an Elizabeth line stopper.

 

[miklcct]

Does that mean could change at Farringdon from Elizabeth line to Thameslink, and would you need to use a ticket gate to do so

The change at Farringdon can be done inside the gate.

However, the concern is the change at Paddington as you need to enter the gateline at the Elizabeth line station.

 

[MikeWh]

Yes. There is no need to use a ticket gate to undertake this change

If travelling from Thameslink to the Elizabeth line you need to make sure you interchange at the southern (City Thameslink) end of the platforms. If you follow signs from the middle you will end up going through both sets of gates.

 

[mangyiscute]

The tickets were still contractually valid on the Underground - see the following excerpt from the Routeing Guide:


Therefore if the Underground gateline staff made you pay again for your journey, TfL are the ones who are in breach of contract here, even if GWR caused the situation to arise through their mistake.

Although getting the staff to understand this can be a big issue - had one recently where i had a not via london ticket and an excess to go with it, and one member of gateline staff refused to let me through despite the excess even having a maltese cross on it (she wasn't even listening to what i was saying and was claiming it was a receipt so not valid for travel)
I had to go up to the ticket office as it turned out the excess was issued the wrong way round, and when I can back to the barriers the member of staff had changed and the new person let me through in about 10 seconds having checked my original ticket and the excess.
I had previously asked the first member of staff to speak to someone else, but she was the station supervisor so apparently the most senior member of staff in the station - somehow though, doesn't know the rules

 

[miklcct]

Therefore if the Underground gateline staff made you pay again for your journey, TfL are the ones who are in breach of contract here, even if GWR caused the situation to arise through their mistake.

I would say that National Rail is in breach of contract here, because:

The Routeing Guide specifies that such ticket is contractually valid for travel across for London. As the contract is with National Rail, it's the responsibility of National Rail to issue a correct ticket which allows travelling via London, i.e. a Maltese Cross.

TfL has no obligation to accept a National Rail ticket which doesn't have the correct specification for Underground travel.

Therefore I believe that the correct procedure is to pay the tube fare, and chase GWR for compensation for that as the ticket has been issued incorrectly.

 

[sheff1]

Separately from the obvious mistake here (missing Maltese Cross), loads of flows now have fares defined only from Reading as well as from the old READING STATIONS (now Reading or Reading West). Does anyone have any idea what the reason for this reduction in flexibility is?

To simplify things, clearly - "it's what passengers want".

 

[Watershed]

I would say that National Rail is in breach of contract here

National Rail isn't an entity you can claim against, it's just a brand.

As the contract is with National Rail

The contract is both with the Train Companies as defined under the NRCoT, as well as with London Underground Ltd.

it's the responsibility of National Rail to issue a correct ticket which allows travelling via London, i.e. a Maltese Cross.

The ticket was not 'incorrect' (in the legal sense) or invalid merely because it lacked a Maltese Cross. The Routeing Guide makes this clear; there is validity regardless of whether there is a Maltese Cross.

TfL has no obligation to accept a National Rail ticket which doesn't have the correct specification for Underground travel.

The RDG, in producing and publishing the Routeing Guide, has the requisite apparent authority to bind TfL, regardless of whether that suits TfL. LUL is obliged to accept valid tickets, which includes tickets without a Maltese Cross in the circumstances described here.

Therefore I believe that the correct procedure is to pay the tube fare, and chase GWR for compensation for that as the ticket has been issued incorrectly.

There is no harm in asking GWR to be reimbursed, but the ticket has not been issued incorrectly and they were not the ones that wrongly refused to accept it. So they could (for once) rightly say that they will not help.

Clearly, from a customer service point of view, GWR are the root cause here - all of these issues would have been avoided if they hadn't have created such a ludicrously messy fares structure in the first place. But just because they are the underlying cause does not necessarily mean they are liable.

 

[Benjwri]

The RDG, in producing and publishing the Routeing Guide, has the requisite apparent authority to bind TfL, regardless of whether that suits TfL. LUL is obliged to accept valid tickets, which includes tickets without a Maltese Cross in the circumstances described here.

The Through Ticketing Agreement is also clear on this, it defines a cross London journey as:

Cross-London Tickets shall mean single or return tickets of any type (excluding tickets bearing the routeing "DLR not London") issued by an Operator for a journey
Page 36 Q:\groups\MA\Agreements\Through Ticketing Agreement\TTA2000\1909FnlVersnThrTicktg(Non-Travcd)Agr.doc

which may involve interchange between any two of the stations listed below and which begins and ends on Railway Services:
Aldgate Amersham
Baker Street Balham
Bank
Barking Blackfriars Blackhorse Road Canning Town Cannon Street Charing Cross Ealing Broadway Edgware Road Elephant & Castle Embankment Euston
Euston Square Farringdon
Finsbury Park Greenwich
Highbury & Islington Kensington Olympia Kentish Town
King's Cross/St Pancras
Cross-London Tickets shall mean single or return tickets of any type (excluding tickets bearing the routeing "DLR not London") issued by an Operator for a journey
Page 36 Q:\groups\MA\Agreements\Through Ticketing Agreement\TTA2000\1909FnlVersnThrTicktg(Non-Travcd)Agr.doc

which may involve interchange between any two of the stations listed below and which begins and ends on Railway Services:
….

The agreement provides that TfL provide access to underground services for any cross London ticket, there is no mention of the Maltese cross being a requirement, and it is simply something which helps staff identify a ticket is valid. (That being said TfL could argue they aren’t being paid for the ticket because it isn’t marked cross London, but that isn’t the passengers issue)

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The agreement provides that TfL provide access to underground services for any cross London ticket, there is no mention of the Maltese cross being a requirement, and it is simply something which helps staff identify a ticket is valid. (That being said TfL could argue they aren’t being paid for the ticket because it isn’t marked cross London, but that isn’t the passengers issue)

It very quickly becomes the passenger's issue if the ticket held doesn't work the barriers on the central cross-London part of the journey, and TfL staff then don't let you through, either.

 

[NigelH]

The change at Farringdon can be done inside the gate.

However, the concern is the change at Paddington as you need to enter the gateline at the Elizabeth line station.

Or you could take the Elizabeth Line as far as Slough and change there.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Mar 2023 ==

I would say that National Rail is in breach of contract here, because:

The Routeing Guide specifies that such ticket is contractually valid for travel across for London. As the contract is with National Rail, it's the responsibility of National Rail to issue a correct ticket which allows travelling via London, i.e. a Maltese Cross.

TfL has no obligation to accept a National Rail ticket which doesn't have the correct specification for Underground travel.

Therefore I believe that the correct procedure is to pay the tube fare, and chase GWR for compensation for that as the ticket has been issued incorrectly.

I did complain to both organisations as requested, and GWR responded:

"Looking at your tickets, and the travel restrictions that would not apply at the weekend, I see no reason why they would not have been accepted for travel on the London Underground. As such, Transport for London should not have charged your Oyster card [it was contactless rather than Oyster]. Therefore, I am forwarding your case to Transport for London as they would be responsible for issuing compensation for not accepting your valid ticket. Please keep an eye out for an email from them in the coming days."

No mention of fixing their fare structure, though! Still waiting for a reply from TfL.

As far as the Maltese Cross symbol is concerned, while it may not be essential I assume that it also corresponds to something on the magnetic stripe that causes the ticket to be accepted at the LUL gates - so if it's not present, you're relying on the staff to understand the issue and let you through manually. In my case, they just kept saying "this is a rail ticket, not an underground one".

Interestingly, the same ticket gave an orange light (as opposed to the usual green, or red for invalid) at the ticket barriers at Paddington and Victoria, but the staff let me through without question there.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Mar 2023 ==

TfL's initial response was to say that if the ticket didn't have the Maltese cross icon then it wasn't valid on the underground, which previous posts have confirmed to be untrue. I've responded quoting the routeing guide and forwarding GWR's email, but if that doesn't resolve things I'm wondering who I should appeal to: London TravelWatch (who dela with the underground) or the Rail Ombudsman (who deals with train companies). There seems to be an element of buck passing between the two of them at the moment!