Reading to Newark new ticket

[londoner13]

I was travelling with an specified train only advance ticket from Reading to Newark during the tube strike. All went well until Paddington, I was booked on the 1214 to Paddington and then tube to King's Cross (KGX) for the 1330 to Newark (NNG) arriving 1443. There was a five minute delay into Paddington and then the tube was chaos (may have been due to the strike). By the time I had made it to KGX with all my luggage the 1330 wasn't on the departure board and had obviously been shut up ready to go. I then asked a very helpful East Coast customer service person who was extremely polite what I should do and he said that since it wasn't my fault I could get the 1408 to NNG. The train steward disagreed :cry: and charged me for a new ticket since I was on the wrong train.

Was the guard right to do this and can I get my cash back for the part of the
ticket from Reading to Newark I didn't use?

 

[91103eastcoast]

If the delay was not your fault then I see no reason why a guard should charge you for a new ticket. You could try contacting East Coast customer services and explain everything.

If you ever encounter a similar delay in the future, perhaps you could check with the guard before departure just to double-check that they are okay with it.

 

[sonic2009]

What date were you travelling? And what tickets did you hold?

Welcome to the forum

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There is a "Minimum Interchange Time" between London stations which should always be allowed if a passenger with an Advance ticket such as yours wants to be conveyed on the next train after a delay. That time is 45 minutes when making an interchange between Paddington and Kings Cross but if I'm not mistaken, the 12:14 from Reading will give you exactly 46 minutes.

However, if the ticket retail system sold you just the one Advance ticket for the journey from Reading all the way through to Newark (albeit with separate seat reservation coupons) then you should not have to worry yourself about the "Minimum Interchange Times" as the retailling system should be compliant with those restrictions. If that was the ticket you held, then the East Coast Guard was mistaken in disallowing your travel. As 91103eastcoast said, I would echo the recomendation to ask the Guard before boarding.

If you had bought two separate Advance tickets (one to Paddington and one from Kings Cross) and were going to make your own way between stations without adequate time for the connection, then I would not expect you to be carried on the next train without cost, though I would still ask!

 

[Haywain]

If what you say is correct, you should drop a line to East Coast Customer Relations asking for a refund on the ticket that was sold to you on the train.

If you experience such problems in the future I would recommend enquiring at the ticket office where, if you have allowed sufficient time, you will be authorised to travel on another train.

 

[londoner13]

It was a through advance ticket routed EC and Connections - presumably meaning East Coast and connecting train?, with separate reservations for the legs on 29th April.

I will contact the East Coast customer services - sounds like the guard made a small error which we all do from time to time, we are human after all.

Thanks for all the help guys.

 

[bb21]

The guard should have checked with control to verify your story.

 

[34D]

The guard should have checked with control to verify your story.

Surely knowledge of the effect of the tube-strike would have been second nature? I suspect that on the guards' service into Kings Cross he was instructed to announce about the tube strike and for passengers to seek assistance?

 

[bb21]

Surely knowledge of the effect of the tube-strike would have been second nature? I suspect that on the guards' service into Kings Cross he was instructed to announce about the tube strike and for passengers to seek assistance?

I don't know. It's irrelevant since not knowing about the strike does not give him an excuse anyway.

 

[Flamingo]

The guard should have checked with control to verify your story.

Whilst theoretically possible, in practice, if I was to ring Control about this, I'd expect the reply to be a polite (as it's a recorded line) variation of "bugger off, we're busy!"

As has already been said, I think this is one for Customer Services to sort out, (if the facts are as given), as they should have been allow travel. The only other advice I would give the OP is keep copies/scans of everything before posting them off.

 

[londoner13]

I called East Coast today, and they said that if I send them the new ticket and the old ones they will refund the new ticket completely.

Thanks to everyone for your help, and well done to East Coast for being so helpful when I spoke to them.

 

[bb21]

Good to hear.

 

[Chapeltom]

I called East Coast today, and they said that if I send them the new ticket and the old ones they will refund the new ticket completely.

Thanks to everyone for your help, and well done to East Coast for being so helpful when I spoke to them.

Common sense decision, you really shouldn't have been charged for a new ticket in the first place. One of those things though.

 

[maniacmartin]

I wouldn't say 'well done' for them refunding the value of a ticket they shouldn't have charged in the first place.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Indeed.

I'd be disappointed that they're not chucking in a little bit of "goodwill" for the inconvenience of having to pay out for something you shouldn't have been charged.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Well, yes. Woe betide if THEY catch YOU having made a genuine mistake. But when YOU catch THEM making one, it's a different tale.

£80 administrative fee, anyone?

 

[Flamingo]

Well, yes. Woe betide if THEY catch YOU having made a genuine mistake. But when YOU catch THEM making one, it's a different tale.

£80 administrative fee, anyone?

If you don't like it, catch a bus...

 

[Lee_Again]

If you don't like it, catch a bus...

Lovely attitude.

If I was in the OP's situation I wouldn't have paid under any circumstances. The guard was wrong. What would happen if it developed in to stand off? These things turn nasty very quickly.

I love the railways but this attitude that the customer is always wrong reinforces the view of many that the industry is staffed and managed by 70's style dinosaurs.

 

[Flamingo]

Lovely attitude.

Sorry sir, won't happen again sir, please don't report me on twitter sir... :roll:

 

[Lee_Again]

Sorry sir, won't happen again sir, please don't report me on twitter sir... :roll:

I don't know if you work for the railways or not but may I ask what you would have done if you were the...

1 - Guard on the train
2 - the OP

 

[gordonthemoron]

I love the railways but this attitude that the customer is always wrong reinforces the view of many that the industry is staffed and managed by 70's style dinosaurs.

railway staff in the 70s probably would not have behaved in this manner

 

[Haywain]

Well, yes. Woe betide if THEY catch YOU having made a genuine mistake. But when YOU catch THEM making one, it's a different tale.

£80 administrative fee, anyone?

East Coast issue Unpaid Fares Notices, so an admin fee would not apply for a "genuine mistake". And a UFN is what would have been issued if the OP had refused to pay. Unless, of course, he also then refused to give his name and address.

 

[bb21]

I think the OP's issue has been resolved so this thread is now closed. Anyone wishing to discuss other more general issues should start a separate thread.