Temple Meads to University Birmingham

[Waverley125]

Hi All

got to get from BTM to university for an evening lecture at 7pm. I've checked the times and it's fine, but was wondering why NXEC's website is telling me to change at Cheltenham from a Bristol-Newcastle service, as i thought these went via BNS, where i could change for a centro service to University. Any ideas?

 

[dan_atki]

It'll be because you'd be double backing - the train you'd be on would speed straight through University and then travelling there again would be forbidden.

 

[glynn80]

Yes unfortunately just because something is quicker or easier doesn't make it valid as the routeing guide is based on nothing logical. Your best bet would be to ask the guard on the XC service whether he'd allow you to travel via Birmingham to get to University and see what they say.

 

[devon_metro]

"fall asleep"

 

[87015]

Totally valid via Brum. Utter nonsense being spouted about it not being. Done it hundreds of times myself.

 

[Mojo]

Yes unfortunately just because something is quicker or easier doesn't make it valid as the routeing guide is based on nothing logical. Your best bet would be to ask the guard on the XC service whether he'd allow you to travel via Birmingham to get to University and see what they say.

Interesting. I've just put this journey in myself and it has suggested going via. New Street and didn't display the 'Multiple tickets' icon even though the RG suggests it would be invalid. Is there a chance you found one of the CrossCountry trains which call at University?

However, if you're questioned on the Cross-City Line train (highly unlikely - see the above post) could you not claim that you entered Birmingham via. Worcester & Smethwick (seems a valid route according to Map CE)? If questioned on CrossCountry from Bristol then again couldn't you just say that you've changed your plans and are only going to Birmingham - given it's the same price - I shouldn't doubt you'd have any problems.

 

[voyagerdude220]

Or you could be very awkward by getting an XC Plymouth to Manchester, which will not go via University, but will avoid it by running via Camp Hill, and St Andrews Junction.

(Not that it would be any use though, as you need to be in University by 19:00)

 

[dan_atki]

Totally valid via Brum. Utter nonsense being spouted about it not being. Done it hundreds of times myself.

Erm hold on - I'm not 'spouting nonsense' at all - double backing is expressly forbidden via the routeing guide. If you've got away with it before then I would say that's down to the inspector unaware of the rules more than the ticket being 'valid' (which I assure you isn't).

NRE say their fares information includes the entire routeing guide and its easements in it. However, there have been many times before when it has shown it hasn't. The multiple tickets symbol has shown before where a journey is valid on one ticket... I personally think (not that everyone would) it is foolish to believe everything NRE tell you without double checking it in the RG (following ALL rules in it).

 

[glynn80]

Totally valid via Brum. Utter nonsense being spouted about it not being. Done it hundreds of times myself.

Just because you've done something hundreds of times does NOT make it valid it just means on the majority of times guards accept it, but that wasn't the question that was asked.

Bristol Temple Meads is part of the Bristol Gp and University is a member of Barnt Green Gp and Birmingham Gp and using the fares check rule we use Barnt Green Gp (BTM to University is more expensive than BTM to Birmingham New Street).

Bristol Gp to Barnt Green Gp uses map CE only and that shows it is not valid as you would double back UNLESS you go via Worcester and Kidderminster to get to Birmingham.

 

[Waverley125]

the second service from Cheltenham is a XC train, so i would assume it's moving me off onto the first train that calls there (doing the journey in 1:39) even though staying on the first train and going back on the centro service would probably be quicker

 

[87015]

So exactly what IS valid from Cheltenham/Bristol direction to say Longbridge, Selly Oak or University then? How about Redditch?

 

[devon_metro]

Its probably a Cardiff - Nottingham 170. Much nicer than a Vomiter!

 

[87015]

Bristol Gp to Barnt Green Gp uses map CE only and that shows it is not valid as you would double back UNLESS you go via Worcester and Kidderminster to get to Birmingham.

So where does the fact there are no trains from Cheltenham to Barnt Green fall in?

 

[yorkie]

Just 'cos the RG says something isn't valid, doesn't mean it isn't sensible and also doesn't mean it won't be accepted by guards

Most guards ignore the RG and apply common sense. Which is good... except if you travel by a bizarre - but valid - route, in which case you need to bring documentation to avoid an argument!

 

[dan_atki]

It doesn't - I assume (without checking properly) you'd be expected to change in Worcester for such a journey.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just 'cos the RG says something isn't valid, doesn't mean it isn't sensible and also doesn't mean it won't be accepted by guards

Indeed and that's something that annoys me. ATOC swear by the RG and say its the authoratative source, but then guards (applying common sense which is, as you say, fine) go against the routeing guide (kinda rendering it useless). I say bring back 'Any Reasonable Route'...

 

[LilLoaf]

Hi no idea about ticket validy as i use a pass. If you don't want to go through New Street station then take train from Bristol and change at Cheltenham onto a XC Nottingham service some of these stop at Univercity

 

[Mojo]

Hi no idea about ticket validy as i use a pass. If you don't want to go through New Street station then take train from Bristol and change at Cheltenham onto a XC Nottingham service some of these stop at Univercity

Unfortunately it's only a few trains per day from Cheltenham which stop at University during the week. The majority of non-local services which call there are the London Midland services to Hereford/Malvern.

 

[devon_metro]

the 1757 from Cheltenham (catch 1700 from Bristol TM) stops at University arriving at 1839

 

[yorkie]

Indeed and that's something that annoys me. ATOC swear by the RG and say its the authoratative source, but then guards (applying common sense which is, as you say, fine) go against the routeing guide (kinda rendering it useless). I say bring back 'Any Reasonable Route'...

I disagree.

If it's reasonable but not valid, they'll accept it!

If it's valid, but not reasonable, then you can show the RG and they have to accept it. In the bad old days if the guard said it was "unreasonable" what do you do? it's your word against theirs as to what is "reasonable", so if you did some unusual route and got a desperate guard you'd be stuffed!

 

[dan_atki]

True, but this 'reasonable but not valid' also concerns me because you could get a guard who knows the RG inside out and will catch you out. As much as it's unlikely, it's still possible. Whilst they might agree it's a reasonable route they might wish to enforce the rules too.

I see your point about being stuffed if a guard deemed you off route themselves when you think it is fine. Maybe it could be used as an additional routeing in some cases where double backing is needed to avoid stupid changes between services (as above). I'd agree that many guards will probably allow the ticket via BHM, but on the other hand expect no sympathy from me if they tell you no or sell you another ticket to make that route valid, because at the end of the day it isn't.

There are ways I think 'any reasonable route' could be implemented alongside the current structure of fares (with different prices as necessary) but that will just complicate matters and some of the ideas I have for the implementation are barmy tbh (and if I was to say some of them I'd probably be laughed at), so it probably isn't suitable. Still it is a way of allowing several 'legitimate' double backings otherwise invalid by the RG.

 

[glynn80]

I think when people's opinions are involed, in today's UK, it would not work and enforcing rules that involve opinion would be too difficult. The easy way to allow these "reasonable" routes is to lobby ATOC to allow these routes to become Easements.

 

[dan_atki]

Too true - one of my ideas was a separate, independent group who have access to fares data, timetables, and maps to set a list of what could be classed as 'reasonable'. They could distribute the list to guards or be contactable centrally (like I said above, strange ideas I have). I admit there are several flaws with this, though, and don't need to be told so .

Updating the easements did occur to me earlier but I thought it would be too impractical given the number of journeys they'd have to define easements for. Still this does actually make me wonder now how ATOC do update the routeing guide. Do they leave it to eagle-eyed members of staff and public to spot 'errors' and tell them, whilst they amass a list that they use to change it when the list gets to a certain length? Or do they actually systematically check it and correct errors?

Former is the most likely and I think the latter is very unlikely. Maybe there's a few more options I haven't covered too...

 

[OwlMan]

Erm hold on - I'm not 'spouting nonsense' at all - double backing is expressly forbidden via the routeing guide.

I am not sure about this-

looking at Section A of the Routeing Guide:

Step 3 states No doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey) is allowed - but this does not apply to us as we do not have a common routeing point

Step 4 - The Routeing points for University are Barnt Green & Birmingham
The fare to Barnt Green is cheaper & the Fare to Birmingham is the same so both can be used.

Step 5
If one station is a routeing point and the other one is a related station - the permitted route is the shortest route to the routeing point plus the permitted
routes between routeing points.
Therefore using Birmingham as the routeing point we have to travel from New Street - University by the shortest route.
Also note that the permitted route is the shortest route to the routeing point plus the permitted routes between the routeing points (It does not say that you can not double back on the shortest route to the routeing point)

Step 7 -
Each code refers to a map. If a single code is indicated the route is via any route on that map from the first routeing point to the final routeing point without doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey).
The routeing guide itself underlines the words routeing point in the above and says that you can not double back between Routeing Points NOT that can not double back on a route taken to that routeing point.

It can be said from the above that you can not double back between the routeing points and must use the shortest route from the routeing point to the starting or finishing station (allowing doubling back on the main journey) although I can also see your view that it is not valid


Peter.

 

[yorkie]

They are underlined because they are hyperlinked.

But, reading your comments, and looking at it again, you may actually be right.

If so, this explains the Clapham and Ealing scenarios, and a lot more. It also makes the University ticket valid via Birmingham.

 

[dan_atki]

Again another part of the RG that can be interpreted in a different way... :roll:, and again your explanation is perfectly plausible.

The underlining of RP is because it's a hyperlink I believe to enable you to find the definition of it rather than them trying to emphasise it.

The reason I say that the RG expressly forbids double backing (except where easements/fares allow) is because of their definition in brackets afterwards: 'passing through the same station twice on a single journey'. To me, that means the entire journey, for others based on what is said prior to that in Step 7, it could be taken to mean between the two routeing points - something else that is not made clear.

It's fast looking like the RG is full of interpretation of what things mean because it doesn't specify clearly enough, nor account for every possible circumstance like I think it should do.

 

[OwlMan]

It's fast looking like the RG is full of interpretation of what things mean because it doesn't specify clearly enough, nor account for every possible circumstance like I think it should do.[/QUOTE]


I agree - but things will not change

Peter

 

[yorkie]

Perhaps we can ask ATOC for clarification. ATOC do not do hypothetical examples, but we can use the University example as a real journey. The response may be interesting and I've no idea which way they'll go...

 

[OwlMan]

The clincher for me is Section 5
If one station is a routeing point and the other one is a related station - the
permitted route is the shortest route to the routeing point plus the permitted
routes between routeing points.
If both are related stations, use the shortest distance to the first routeing point,
followed by the permitted routes between the routeing points, then finally the
shortest route from the final routeing point.
Where there are local journey easements, shown in the easements section,
these may permit use of a longer route to and from the routeing points.

There is no mention about not doubling back on the two routes

Peter

 

[dan_atki]

Perhaps we can ask ATOC for clarification. ATOC do not do hypothetical examples, but we can use the University example as a real journey. The response may be interesting and I've no idea which way they'll go...

Do they do real examples then? If they do then the odd hypothetical (dressed up enough to make it look as though it's real) shouldn't be a problem! Perhaps they'll have a RG board meeting to discuss what exactly double backing in a journey is...

Seriously though, if ATOC are going to look at this journey and clarify what exactly is meant by double backing (whether it be to a leg of a journey or the entire journey), then maybe it should be done.

One reservation I have though is are such queries handled solely by one person? Or do a group of them discuss it? If only one of them does then I fear that based on what training they may have received they too wil come to their own interpretation of the meaning rather than the 'real' one. Hence, a different answer could be received depending on who answers your query.
(Or perhaps I just worry too much ).

 

[Hyperen]

I don't see why you don't just do what National Rail or NXEC suggest.

Just get the 1700 XC from BRI to CNM and catch the 1757 XC service from Cardiff Central onto UNI. It is scheduled to stop there at 1839 leaving you time to get to your lecture (By the way, 1900 - that's a bit harsh hehe). It's quicker than going via New St and you shouldn't even need to change platforms at Cheltenham whereas you probably will have to at New St.

Whilst I can't add anything solid to the debate about validity as that is way above my head but I can say that I have done Newport to Five Ways and vice versa via New St (XC 170 from Newport and London Midland 323 to Five Ways) when National Rail has told me to change at University and no-one has ever said anything.