• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Southern Advance - Cancelled Train help

Status
Not open for further replies.

philthetube

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2016
Messages
4,181
It’s also not Southeastern’s either in this scenario

You wouldn’t expect this of airlines, buses or coach companies so I do find it strange when passengers expect this of the railway
Most bus and coach drivers would help out another driver is possible, just to get passengers off the first drivers back, I once took half a dozen Eastern counties passengers when I was running National Express and dropped them off at their desired bus stops.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,347
Location
LBK
Most bus and coach drivers would help out another driver is possible, just to get passengers off the first drivers back, I once took half a dozen Eastern counties passengers when I was running National Express and dropped them off at their desired bus stops.
This is really not the norm nationwide in my experience.

It's hard enough getting some drivers to accept valid tickets like Plusbus.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
I do think the rules are unfortunate here.

The reasonable/logical thing to do, if your reserved train is cancelled, is to allow travel on the next available service, whatever (reasonable) route it goes. Forcing people to delay their journey to the next Southern service is just plain passenger-unfriendly.

The fragmented approach to privatisation is of course responsible for this. Has splitting up the ex-Southern Region into three TOCs actually done anything useful other than fill the Southern Region with incompatible stock and add restrictions on what trains you can and cannot use?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The staff allowed a goodwill gesture of excessing tickets routed Southern Only for travel other than on Southern, and not charging the usual admin fee for changing an advance ticket (although it is not clear whether the change was requested before or after departure).

It would be bad customer service to full fare paying Southeastern passengers to allow someone holding a ticket that cost less than 20% of the fare to travel without any extra cost.
Would any full fare paying South Eastern passenger actually complain if a Southern passenger was put on their train due to a cancellation? Only someone extraordinarily mean and petty, I suspect.
 
Last edited:

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,908
Location
0036
Bad customer service is bad customer service whether someone complains or not.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
Bad customer service is bad customer service whether someone complains or not.

I wouldn't even call it bad customer service at all, though.

Is it really worse customer service for South Eastern passengers to suffer having to share their service with diverted Southern cheap fare holders, or to delay the Southern passenger further by forcing them to wait for the next Southern service? Remember this is not a case of the passenger missing the train because they were late arriving at the station; in no sense is it their fault.

Good customer service is for the railway to be flexible and adaptable at times of disruption and accommodate the passenger to the best of their ability, and not charge the passenger extra for things outside of their control. It's already been mentioned that other TOCs often apply discretion in cases like this, why not South Eastern?
If anything, South Eastern have profited unreasonably from the situation, in taking £21 from a passenger that they would not have received otherwise.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,399
Ironically, a taxi to Bexhill, where the train started on time, would have been cheaper if they wished to avoid a 30 minute delay.
But would people from outside the area know that? Not to mention that you are operating with the benefit of hindsight.
 

Falcon1200

Established Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
6,539
Location
Neilston, East Renfrewshire
This story shows just how problematic limited-validity tickets can be. It also seems to show how much railways are focused on making the most money in the present at the possible expense of future lost custom through disenchanted passengers.

Although the OPs' tickets cost all of £5 ! Whereas a more expensive ticket would have allowed travel by any reasonable route ? But I do agree, once disruption occurred flexibility should be shown, and if additional cost is incurred as here it should be refunded.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,399
This is where, to put it bluntly, service to customers stinks. The marginal cost to let them travel by South Eastern would've been zilch.
You are correct with respect to the marginal cost. Of course had Southeastern allowed them to do so they would have made absolutely nothing from the journey.

Sadly not uncommon. In times of disruption Avanti and LNWR are awful at taking each other's tickets from places such as Milton Keynes or Rugby for example.

I do though think that Southern should have either had ticket acceptance put in place or should make a good will gesture.
 
Last edited:

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
You are correct with respect to the marginal cost. Of course had Southeastern allowed them to do so they would have made absolutely nothing from the journey.
But they would not have made anything anyway had the train not been cancelled.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,399
But they would not have made anything anyway had the train not been cancelled.
They would have made nothing for providing nothing. You are asking them to make nothing for providing a service.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
They would have made nothing for providing nothing. You are asking them to make nothing for providing a service.
But the service would have run anyway. It was not put on specially for the affected passengers. I would argue, as above, that South Eastern have actually taken money that they would not have obtained had the Southern service not been cancelled.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,399
But the service would have run anyway. It was not put on specially for the affected passengers. I would argue, as above, that South Eastern have actually taken money that they would not have obtained had the Southern service not been cancelled.
The same logic could be used to justify fare dodging...
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
The same logic could be used to justify fare dodging...
How?
Fare dodging is a passenger dishonestly not paying the expected fare, such as, in this case, the passenger using the South Eastern service even if their booked Southern service was running.
 

jumble

Established Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,491
I do think the rules are unfortunate here.

The reasonable/logical thing to do, if your reserved train is cancelled, is to allow travel on the next available service, whatever (reasonable) route it goes. Forcing people to delay their journey to the next Southern service is just plain passenger-unfriendly.

The fragmented approach to privatisation is of course responsible for this. Has splitting up the ex-Southern Region into three TOCs actually done anything useful other than fill the Southern Region with incompatible stock and add restrictions on what trains you can and cannot use?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


Would any full fare paying South Eastern passenger actually complain if a Southern passenger was put on their train due to a cancellation? Only someone extraordinarily mean and petty, I suspect.
It also assumes that another passenger would have a clue or care what the southern passenger has paid which of course is none of their business
 

WesternLancer

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
15,078
They would have made nothing for providing nothing. You are asking them to make nothing for providing a service.
But this is now an out of date attitude. Since covid all the fares money is going to HM Gov anyway - paper walls between TOCs are irrelevant now to anyone but internal 'bean counters' as some like to call them.

Advance tickets sole purpose now should only be to drive demand to off peak services that would otherwise have more empty seats. But the moment such an off peak service is cancelled then that objective can not be filled anyway and some other part of the govt run railway should step in and convey the people concerned at no extra cost. I don't want to be rude about the staff, but it seems to me that if rail staff had been doing the job properly at control (when they decided to cancel the train) that part of the task would have been put in place to ensure precisely this outcome for any affected passengers.

And we can't pretend the govt are not in charge of this since another recent thread illustrates SWT being unable to decide how to refund a passenger with a season ticket they can't use post Salisbury crash because SWT albeit admit they have basically not been told what to do about that scenario by HM govt yet...
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,399
How?
Fare dodging is a passenger dishonestly not paying the expected fare, such as, in this case, the passenger using the South Eastern service even if their booked Southern service was running.
Your argument keeps shifting. Initially it was that there was no/low marginal cost to Southeastern. That is exactly what faredodgers say.

For what it's worth l agree that it would have been good if the collective railway had allowed the passenger to use the next service, regardless of operator. However, given the type of ticket held and the level of delays, there was no obligation to do so under the current rules to do so.
 

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
24,596
. Since covid all the fares money is going to HM Gov anyway - paper walls between TOCs are irrelevant now to anyone but internal 'bean counters' as some like to call them.
This isn't really true as each TOC is still being monitored and held responsible for the revenue it generates. However, that is not the crux of the matter in this case.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
Your argument keeps shifting. Initially it was that there was no/low marginal cost to Southeastern. That is exactly what faredodgers say.
Except if fare dodgers could 'get away' with it, then a lot of people would do it and there would end up being a substantial cost. But I'd prefer to bring this to a conclusion now TBH as the discussion isn't really going anywhere and my argument is not 'shifting'. It's plain and simple, that IN THIS CASE, it would cost South Eastern nothing to convey the delayed passenger. Completely different to the case of a fare dodger; that is simply common sense.
 
Last edited:

jumble

Established Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,491
Your argument keeps shifting. Initially it was that there was no/low marginal cost to Southeastern. That is exactly what faredodgers say.
I doubt a fare dodger is likely to be asked to return the favour next time by supplying a free service when the boot is on the other foot so I don't see the situations as remotely the same
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
27,219
Location
Bolton
Bad customer service is bad customer service whether someone complains or not.
What you identified is in no way bad customer service however, and you provided no supporting reasoning or evidence. I say that it's you bringing in a silly counter-argument for the sake of it, which you know is daft, to try to make it appear as though there are two sides to the story.
 

Parham Wood

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2011
Messages
406
It all goes to show that making a journey involving bus and train is nearly always a risk which is magnified when there are large gaps between services. In general the more reduced price your ticket is the less flexibility you have and increases the chance of having to pay considerably more if things go wrong. If the passengers had said that they would miss their bus if would have been nice to think ticket acceptance could have been arranged as a customer service gesture but I doubt that there would have been a mechanism in place to get this arranged quickly enough even if parties were willing.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,347
Location
LBK
Can someone offer any advice on what they can do - seems very unfair that for a reason that is out of their control they have had to pay £43 to get back to London
Unfortunately they paid very little money indeed for a heavily restricted ticket. This comes with risks which you have to accept. One of those is - what happens if my train is cancelled, or I'm late?

If they didn't have a Plan B, or didn't bake in enough time for "stuff to go wrong", I don't have a huge amount of sympathy at having to pay extra to make their non-rail connection.

If they had paid for a through ticket - or even a combination of - to Birmingham via the railway then there was much more that could have been done for them, but if extreme thrift was of the essence and they paid to take the bus, then I can't say the railway has been terrible here by charging them only the excess. Which is actually a bit of a fiddle to save them money on the clerk's part; an entirely new ticket was the strictly correct course of action.

When connecting between modes of transport on separate tickets, always have a Plan B.
 

trainophile

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2010
Messages
6,972
Location
Wherever I lay my hat
They will probably take the car next time ☹️.

Maybe they only made the trip because the tickets were so cheap. It’s not like commuters having to get to the office regardless.

We wonder why rail travel is losing popularity.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,347
Location
LBK
They will probably take the car next time ☹️.

Maybe they only made the trip because the tickets were so cheap. It’s not like commuters having to get to the office regardless.

We wonder why rail travel is losing popularity.
They were already taking the bus from London to Birmingham. I don't see why the railway should just write off the restrictions they accepted on their £5 fare because they chose extreme thrift by using the railway's competitor from London to Birmingham, to be honest.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Not moot if you make the claim. Rail travel is very popular partly because you can still get £5 fares to London! But those do come with restrictions and people do need to take a modicum of responsibility for making plans which have no slack at all if one thing goes awry.
 

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
6,174
Maybe. I think it depends on the companies. Down here GWR and XC fairly frequently help each other during disruption - mutual ticket acceptance in times of disruption is common.
Likewise TfW will routinely help out, and be helped out by, Avanti, Crosscountry, WMR and GWR on common routes or diversionary routes. All it takes is a phone call between the control offices of the TOCs concerned.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,296
The upshot of this sort of problem is the removal of TOC-specific fares (which is already stated policy) and alignment of fares at the most expensive levels.

Totally with 'AlterEgo' on this. Whilst these cheaper fares continue to exist, the restrictions have to be followed even if there is a cancellation.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
16,613
Location
UK
I don't see why the railway should just write off the restrictions they accepted on their £5 fare
The restriction, as far as most people are concerned, being that you have to take the booked train.

But when the railway is at risk of reneging on its side of the deal by cancelling the train, it should do everything reasonably its power to mitigate the delay, including allowing people to travel on other TOCs and routes. That would seem a prime example of what might be considered reasonable care and skill.

because they chose extreme thrift by using the railway's competitor from London to Birmingham, to be honest.
What has that got to do with anything? They may just as well be flying out to Spain.

Yes, of course it's sensible to allow some slack when transferring between modes, but it seems little more than victim blaming suggest that the passenger is at fault where the railway has delayed them!

If the connection at London were onto another train with a split ticket, would you, absent the clear position in the NRCoT, be suggesting "well it's their own damn fault for splitting their ticket"?

The upshot of this sort of problem is the removal of TOC-specific fares (which is already stated policy) and alignment of fares at the most expensive levels.

Totally with 'AlterEgo' on this. Whilst these cheaper fares continue to exist, the restrictions have to be followed even if there is a cancellation.
If you happened to hold an Avanti Advance from Preston to London and were booked on a service via Birmingham that was cancelled, you would be allowed to travel on the next service - even if that means arriving slightly earlier than booked.

The same would apply if you've booked to travel on SWR from Portsmouth to London via Fareham. Or on WMT from Rugby to London via Northampton and so on and so forth.

So why should passengers be disadvantaged just because some politician or civil servant in the 1990s arbitrarily decided to split Hastings-London services between two different operators?

This is typical of the attitudes that are so so ridiculous they could only happen on the railway.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top