Single Leg Pricing - Not making it simpler after all

[Ziggiesden]

As you may be aware Single Leg Pricing (SLP) has been brought in over most of the East Coast.

I had an interesting one today.

A lady had bought Dunbar to East Linton (CDR any permitted) & East Linton to Edinburgh (CDR any permitted).

The lady turned up at Haymarket to go on the LNER 17:21 Kings Cross back to Dunbar.

Because of SLP and NRCOT 14.2 her tickets were basically invalid as there is no CDR from Haymarket to Dunbar any permitted or I could have done an overdistance X-S to ease the pain a little.

The lady was forced to buy a new ticket as she had to get that train.

Funnily enough the Brief said that this was to simplify ticketing. We didn’t believe it at the time – turns out we were right.

 

[JBuchananGB]

Could she not have taken the 1720 service to Edinburgh then the 1734 TPE Newcastle service?

 

[Haywain]

Sometimes splitting tickets comes with a down side. Looks like this is one of those cases.

 

[Starmill]

I would strongly advise anyone against splitting tickets if there's a chance they want to use a service that doesn't call at where they're splitting. As there are quite a few services between Edinburgh and Dunbar which do not call at anywhere in between, I think this is one of those times. I hope the lady didn't buy the split from trainline, not realising the extra restrictions she'd need to accept in exchange for the price she was paying. If that were the case for anyone I'd advise they contact trainline to complain and as for a pro rated refund.

If you use trainsplit you get a specific warning that you can't use any trains that don't stop at your particular list of split points.

 

[Haywain]

I hope the lady didn't buy the split from trainline, not realising the extra restrictions she'd need to accept in exchange for the price she was paying.

I hope she wasn't sold that by the ticket office on the basis of it being cheaper or more convenient because there isn't a return fare.

 

[redreni]

Isn't single leg pricing a red herring, here? Or are you saying the lady wouldn't have split at East Linton prior to SLP as it wouldn't have been cheaper?

 

[Starmill]

Isn't single leg pricing a red herring, here? Or are you saying the lady wouldn't have split at East Linton prior to SLP as it wouldn't have been cheaper?

I think what @Ziggiesden is saying is that they'd have been able to issue an excess fare if a return were available, which is one way to correct a poor split. It can sometimes be a cheaper option, even though it involves paying for something you only use in one direction. It's good that this is at least being attempted.

A better solution might have been for ScotRail to take over this flow.

 

[redreni]

I think what @Ziggiesden is saying is that they'd have been able to issue an excess fare if a return were available, which is one way to correct a poor split. It can sometimes be a cheaper option, even though it involves paying for something you only use in one direction. It's good that this is at least being attempted.

A better solution might have been for ScotRail to take over this flow.

Hmm, yeah.

A change to single leg pricing could conceivably make things simpler if done across the board (which I'm absolutely not advocating). Otherwise, come to think of it it's not in the least bit surprising that it complicates things more than it simplifies if you've a system where returns are available on some flows and not others!

 

[Haywain]

to issue an excess fare if a return were available, which is one way to correct a poor split.

Refund and rebook is also an option, and would better fit the situation.

 

[Titfield]

Hmm, yeah.

A change to single leg pricing could conceivably make things simpler if done across the board (which I'm absolutely not advocating). Otherwise, come to think of it it's not in the least bit surprising that it complicates things more than it simplifies if you've a system where returns are available on some flows and not others!

It depends upon what you mean by simpler.

If you increase the number of single fares available then as a return is 2 single fares added together then the number of permutations increases. This could be argued to be more complex not simpler.

If you reduce the number of fare restrictions and allow the number of tickets to be sold at a specific price to act as a means of managing demand through availability then it could be argued to be simpler because the general public understand that principle.

I think the general public generally struggle with the concept of a ticket being valid only on the booked train particularly when the fare differential between an "advance" and a "walk up" can be very small on some flows.

Having different systems on different routes just creates more and more confusion.

Split ticketing where we see some legs being advance and some not is a recipe for disaster.

 

[redreni]

Split ticketing where we see some legs being advance and some not is a recipe for disaster.

Funnily enough I recently asked if any journey planners for split ticketing sites have advanced options that allow the user to specify that they are only happy to consider Advances on part of the journey, so that the intercity portion of the journey can be 'booked train only' but you have flexibility around which local connections to use at either end of the journey.

Rather than the current system where you're told you don't have any flexibility at all, when in reality you sometimes do and sometimes don't and it depends what the internal knowledge base says or whether the train is reservable, or on some other nuance that even relatively nerdy passengers may have no idea about.

 

[Starmill]

Refund and rebook is also an option, and would better fit the situation.

That would have been a lot more useful here if ot had been available!

 

[Haywain]

That would have been a lot more useful here if ot had been available!

It's available to every ticket office in the country on the network to some extent. It really depends how the customer had bought the tickets and in what format they were held.

 

[sheff1]

Isn't single leg pricing a red herring, here? Or are you saying the lady wouldn't have split at East Linton prior to SLP as it wouldn't have been cheaper?

That is quite possible, but as East Linton was not open prior to single leg pricing being introduced by LNER there are no pre-SLP fares available to check. What we do know is that LNER introduced a sneaky price increase by not making singles half the price of the return fares which were withdrawn.

 

[Ziggiesden]

Could she not have taken the 1720 service to Edinburgh then the 1734 TPE Newcastle service?

Yeah, didn't want to - needed that train for some reason.

 

[Ziggiesden]

I hope she wasn't sold that by the ticket office on the basis of it being cheaper or more convenient because there isn't a return fare.

No, TOD.

 

[Ziggiesden]

I think what @Ziggiesden is saying is that they'd have been able to issue an excess fare if a return were available, which is one way to correct a poor split. It can sometimes be a cheaper option, even though it involves paying for something you only use in one direction. It's good that this is at least being attempted.

A better solution might have been for ScotRail to take over this flow.

Yes, exacly.

 

[Wallsendmag]

You haven't read the Retail Brief on SLP then? It covers how to X/S return tickets when a return isn't available.

 

[redreni]

You haven't read the Retail Brief on SLP then? It covers how to X/S return tickets when a return isn't available.

Presumably the price of the excess is the cost of two singles less the fare already paid?

 

[Wallsendmag]

Presumably the price of the excess is the cost of two singles less the fare already paid?

It was slightly more complex but the gist was the same

 

[glasgowniteowl]

Is it not scotrail practice to treat Haymarket and Edinburgh tickets as inter changeable so shouldn't have been an issue for the customer to board at haymarket?

 

[Haywain]

Is it not scotrail practice to treat Haymarket and Edinburgh tickets as inter changeable so shouldn't have been an issue for the customer to board at haymarket?

The customer had tickets split at East Linton but wanted to board a train that doesn’t call there.

 

[glasgowniteowl]

The customer had tickets split at East Linton but wanted to board a train that doesn’t call there.

Missed that and it's clear as day on the thread!

Though still interested to find out why did she come to anyones attention as she should have been at least able to board the 17.21 from haymarket to edinburgh

Also would it not have been possible for an over distance excess from Livingston north rather than haymarket and that would have still have "eased the pain" so to speak (assuming the advice from wallsendmag wasn't know)

 

[Starmill]

Missed that and it's clear as day on the thread!

Though still interested to find out why did she come to anyones attention as she should have been at least able to board the 17.21 from haymarket to edinburgh

Also would it not have been possible for an over distance excess from Livingston north rather than haymarket and that would have still have "eased the pain" so to speak (assuming the advice from wallsendmag wasn't know)

The OP says the customer needed to travel on that service to Dunbar. I guess they were aware they didn't have a ticket for it and went to speak to a member of staff for help.