The Three mile rule

[USP45]

Hello all,

is the rule that the shortest route (or within 3 miles of the shortest route) mentioned in the new routing guides.

i cannot seem to find mention of it, but i am probably looking in the wrong place
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
i need glasses

page 1 of section F in clear black and white :roll: DOH (although a spell check was not used in the document "than" rather "then") unless of course someone has a better example???

To look up a journey in the Routeing Guide, an origin and destination routeing point
are needed. If a journey does not have an origin routeing point and a destination
routeing point, its permitted route is (1) the shortest route served by a regular
passenger service or (2) a route no more then 3 miles longer or (3) any other route
permitted by an easement.

http://data.atoc.org/routeing-guide


so i am still reading this right you DO NOT need the routing guide (and the fare check rule does not apply) if you are on the shortest route or within 3 miles of the shortest route.

i used be able to almost understand the routing guide but i must be getting old as i just cannot get my head around it now.

any experts your replies are greatly appericated.

 

[Merseysider]

The shortest route must always be a permitted route - nothing can override this.
Any route <=3 miles longer is also, under normal circumstances, a permitted route.

However, there are about 500 easements, available in a 26-page document, that occasionally forbid a route even if it would be otherwise permitted under the '3 mile rule'.

You are correct in saying you do not need to consult the routeing guide if you are travelling on the shortest route.

 

[USP45]

The shortest route must always be a permitted route - nothing can override this.
Any route <=3 miles longer is also, under normal circumstances, a permitted route.

However, there are about 500 easements, available in a 26-page document, that occasionally forbid a route even if it would be otherwise permitted under the '3 mile rule'.

You are correct in saying you do not need to consult the routeing guide if you are travelling on the shortest route.

Thanks for this. Like i said i used to be almost get my head around the routing guide but i just cannot get my head around it now.

Does the statement "do not need to consult the Routing Guide" also still apply to any route =< than 3 miles of the shortest route?

I assume you can know if your route has an easement by searching for the stations in the text search (Control F). If no mention of the route comes up when searching for the origin station, Via Station or destination station (or even a nearby station) then is it safe to assume there is no easement.

 

[yorkie]

Thanks for this. Like i said i used to be almost get my head around the routing guide but i just cannot get my head around it now.

Where are you based? Our popular fares workshops may be of interest (they've been attended by a wide range of people, right up to a pricing development manager at a major TOC)

I assume you can know if your route has an easement by searching for the stations in the text search (Control F). If no mention of the route comes up when searching for the origin station, Via Station or destination station (or even a nearby station) then is it safe to assume there is no easement.

Perhaps you can ask the DfT that question

I agree with your argument, though!

But it's questionable whether negative easements apply at all to routes that are valid by the 3-mile rule, for numerous reasons:

1) The NRCoC permits travel by the shortest route, but the method for doing so is apparently meant to be to use the NRT's inaccurate data to the nearest quarter mile (that can be a lot of rounding up or down!). Yet the rail industry uses decimalised Network Rail data which is generally more accurate. It's therefore reasonable to say that if you use a 3-mile margin that avoids a situation where the true shortest route is apparently invalidated due to the contractual method of calculating the shortest route being inaccurate.

2) It seems a reasonable assumption that the 3-mile rule is simply an extension of the shortest route rule, rather than a completely separate entity. Unfortunately this isn't clarified anywhere either way, and we'll never get consensus on that.

3) It's debatable whether negative easements are enforceable or even legal. One of the first (if not THE first) was number #44, yet until recently (12 November 2014) all easements were advertised as being positive easements. There is no evidence that authorisation was ever given by the DfT for the introduction of negative easements, and although ATOC now do state easements can be negative, this was not treated as a material change by the DfT, and permission for the introduction of negative easements was apparently still not sought.

4) Even if negative easements are enforceable, it's questionable whether it is reasonable to say that they apply to the 3-mile rule, and even more questionable whether it's reasonable to say that they apply if your origin or destination is not named, as without doing a Ctrl-F how are you meant to find out if a negative easement applies? You can't say that everyone should read a huge, partly incomprehensible, list of "negative easements" when purchasing any ticket at a station. If that was enforceable, ticket vending machines (TVMs) would surely have to be able to print out such a list on demand.

However some people at RSP love negative easements because it allows them to pander to the ludicrous demands of some of their more vocal members, even when such demands are not welcomed by, and infringe on the rights of, other members, and even when such demands would require DfT ratification to be legal.

In short, they make up the rules as they go along!