Ticketing Anomalies - Starting a journey short

[Old Timer]

Maybe the Shotton one is debatable but Virgin didn't go round prosecuting people who were using the tickets from Chester because of the 'grey' area. I suspect that had it gone to court then Virgin would have lost as often if there is a discrepancy in consumer law then the customer is deemed to be correct.

Consumer law does not apply to Railway tickets.

 

[yorkie]

Maybe the Shotton one is debatable but Virgin didn't go round prosecuting people who were using the tickets from Chester because of the 'grey' area. I suspect that had it gone to court then Virgin would have lost as often if there is a discrepancy in consumer law then the customer is deemed to be correct.

I don't they can easily prosecute for something that is explicity allowed in the case of all day tickets, and all anytime (with or without the day) tickets, and also all off peak tickets unless a restriction code prevents it. In other words, with most ticket types it is fine.

On one walk-on ticket type it is fine unless some tiny little condition that is NOT printed on the ticket, NOT displayed on any website, and NOT likely to be given to the customer in any form, and on THAT basis the customer is going to be prosecuted? No chance.

Old Timer & Helvellyn only have a case against people starting short on Advance tickets, and Off Peak tickets where a restriction code prevents breaking journey and on the basis that starting short is included within the definition of breaking journey, and they would have to prove intent and they would also have to prove that the condition was made available to the customer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Consumer law does not apply to Railway tickets.

Source?

 

[nedchester]

If someone were deliverately starting a journey short, day in, day out, then a TOC might take a particular interest in that, and gather evidence to show that someone was doing this. For a one-off case? Less likely something would be done about it, but never say never.

Now wasn't there a case somewhere in Southern England where someone bought a season ticket from a station further out from where they were travelling daily because it was cheaper. It went to court and the train company lost.

 

[yorkie]

Now wasn't there a case somewhere in Southern England where someone bought a season ticket from a station further out from where they were travelling daily because it was cheaper. It went to court and the train company lost.

I'd like to hear the details, I am surprised the TOC took it to court (proves what scumbags they are, if true), and am not at all surprised they lost. Seasons are advertised as available on ANY permitted route and at ANY intermediate station for any intermediate journey.

 

[Helvellyn]

Are you saying starting short is invalid on a CDR/Anytime as well?

I'm saying nothing of the sort. I am saying that if a TOC was aware that someone was regularly travelling short, using a longer distance ticket, they may decide to look into it. Because they may decide that someone is showing intent to regularly and purposefully defraud in not buying the ticket for the journey they are regularly making. And note the may in all that, before you challenge me for examples and say I'm making it all up as I go along again.

 

[yorkie]

I'm saying nothing of the sort. I am saying that if a TOC was aware that someone was regularly travelling short, using a longer distance ticket, they may decide to look into it. Because they may decide that someone is showing intent to regularly and purposefully defraud in not buying the ticket for the journey they are regularly making. And note the may in all that, before you challenge me for examples and say I'm making it all up as I go along again.

So, is a CDR valid for starting short or not? It's a simple question, with a simple answer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Helvellyn if you are so experienced and know everything, why are YOU not replying to the OP and making it clear that you CAN start short on most ticket types, including all walk-on tickets except Off Peak (without the Day) where a note in the validity code restricts it? Why are you beating about the bush on a simple question about whether or not you can start your journey short on a CDR? Are you unsure yourself? or do you simply not want to answer in the passengers' favour?

 

[John @ home]

A ticket purchased from a station further out from that which is used to join the train (and which is cheaper than the published fare from the station you are joining at) is invalid because the cheaper priced ticket is only valid for the throughout journey from that station to destination.

Using such a ticket in such circumstances constitutes "obtaining goods or services by deception", because you are fraudulently obtaining the journey.

The above does not apply if the ticket is a full fare ticket for obvious reasons.

If you buy a ticket at a cheaper price from a station further out, and then use it for a shorter journey you are committing fraud in law because you are not paying the correct price of the journey being undertaken.

Sorry, Old Timer, I just don't understand how these two can both be right.

In the first, you say that it's OK to start late or end early on a full fare ticket. Well today's equivalent of a full fare ticket is an Anytime ticket. So, if I go to Motherwell station at 0800 tomorrow and ask for a £2.50 First Class single from Edinburgh to Glasgow route XC only, which the ScotRail ticket office is obliged to sell me under the impartial retailing rules in their franchise, that's OK because it's a full fare ticket.

Then in the second, you say I would be a criminal. But none of the railway conditions or regulations in the public domain offer any evidence of that.

Which one do you really believe?

 

[Old Timer]

I don't they can easily prosecute for something that is explicity allowed in the case of all day tickets, and all anytime (with or without the day) tickets, and also all off peak tickets unless a restriction code prevents it. In other words, with most ticket types it is fine.

On one walk-on ticket type it is fine unless some tiny little condition that is NOT printed on the ticket, NOT displayed on any website, and NOT likely to be given to the customer in any form, and on THAT basis the customer is going to be prosecuted? No chance.

Old Timer & Helvellyn only have a case against people starting short on Advance tickets, and Off Peak tickets where a restriction code prevents breaking journey and on the basis that starting short is included within the definition of breaking journey, and they would have to prove intent and they would also have to prove that the condition was made available to the customer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Source?

Read my post (No 21) properly and you will see that the CPS are quite clear on the relationship between the Law and rail tickets/travel.

Go read the 1978 Theft Act, which is also used, particularly the part about obtaining services by deception.

Twist and turn as much as you wish but in Law (as against in YOUR judgement) it IS a Criminal Offence to deliberately avoid paying the correct fare for the journey, and to argue that buying a cheaper ticket from another station is NOT deliberately avoiding the fare is to push the boundaries of realism.

 

[yorkie]

Twist and turn as much as you wish but in Law (as against in YOUR judgement) it IS a Criminal Offence to deliberately avoid paying the correct fare for the journey, and to argue that buying a cheaper ticket from another station is NOT deliberately avoiding the fare is to push the boundaries of realism.

You consistently refuse to answer this question, but I am going to try again:

Could someone be prosecuted over doing Crewe-Shrewsbury on a Chester-Shrewsbury ticket (saving about £2) as originally proposed by Nedchester?

 

[Mojo]

Can someone please answer this above: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=378584&postcount=25 ?

It explicitly states that you can start at an intermediate station, so how could a court case result?

 

[John @ home]

Consumer law does not apply to Railway tickets.

Not true. The National Conditions of Carriage were re-written in 2006 at the insistence of the Office of Fair Trading in order to conform with consumer law.

 

[Old Timer]

John @ Home
The position is quite simple. If you have paid a higher price from a station further out than you would have done from the sdtation that you join at then there has been no loss to the TOC. IF however you buy a ticket from anoyther station which is further out, than the station at which you join, then you HAVE committed an offence. The offence is that you deliberately have avoided paying the correct fare for the actaul journey that you are undertaking.

You are not travelling from C to A but from B to A. If he price from B to A is more expensive then the TOC have lost revenue, and that is Prima Facie evidence of fare evasion under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 section 5 and for which people have been Prosecuted in the past
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You consistently refuse to answer this question, but I am going to try again:

Could someone be prosecuted over doing Crewe-Shrewsbury on a Chester-Shrewsbury ticket (saving about £2) as originally proposed by Nedchester?

How many more times do you need to be told ? You have been given that answer several times already :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not true. The National Conditions of Carriage were re-written in 2006 at the insistence of the Office of Fair Trading in order to conform with consumer law.

Then tell me what Consumer Law applies to Prosecution for fare evasion ?

 

[Mojo]

John @ Home
The position is quite simple. If you have paid a higher price from a station further out than you would have done from the sdtation that you join at then there has been no loss to the TOC. IF however you buy a ticket from anoyther station which is further out, than the station at which you join, then you HAVE committed an offence. The offence is that you deliberately have avoided paying the correct fare for the actaul journey that you are undertaking

If that was the case then why does the CofC say it is permitted?

 

[yorkie]

John @ Home
The position is quite simple.

Indeed it is! NCoC covers it!

If you have paid a higher price from a station further out than you would have done from the sdtation that you join at then there has been no loss to the TOC. IF however you buy a ticket from anoyther station which is further out, than the station at which you join, then you HAVE committed an offence. The offence is that you deliberately have avoided paying the correct fare for the actaul journey that you are undertaking.

NCoC says you can start at an intermediate station unless a restriction code prevents it. It does not say you cannot do this if the fare is lower. You made that up.

You are not travelling from C to A but from B to A. If he price from B to A is more expensive then the TOC have lost revenue, and that is Prima Facie evidence of fare evasion under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 section 5 and for which people have been Prosecuted in the past?

Nope, it's covered as valid in the NCoC as quoted earlier in this topic.

 

[Helvellyn]

Helvellyn if you are so experienced and know everything, why are YOU not replying to the OP and making it clear that you CAN start short on most ticket types, including all walk-on tickets except Off Peak (without the Day) where a note in the validity code restricts it? Why are you beating about the bush on a simple question about whether or not you can start your journey short on a CDR? Are you unsure yourself? or do you simply not want to answer in the passengers' favour?

So sorry in that going to make a cup of tea I didn't reply in the timeframe acceptable to you. :roll:

I have not said in this thread that starting short is not valid, so therefore did not believe I had to then make a statement on record to the fact that it can be. But if having me state it is of such importance to you, then yes, a passenger can start a journey short subject to the ticket allows it, including validity codes and routings.

 

[yorkie]

If that was the case then why does the CofC say it is permitted?

Well exactly. In 2009 it is permitted. Maybe it wasn't in the past. But all we can comment about is now.

 

[Old Timer]

Can someone please answer this above: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=378584&postcount=25 ?

It explicitly states that you can start at an intermediate station, so how could a court case result?

Mojo, the issue here is not the same at all.

In the circumstances here the issue is the deliberate purchasing of a cheaper ticket with the deliberate intent to to avoid paying the correct fare for the journey.

 

[Mojo]

Eh? :? It's exactly the same thing. The OP asked if it was possible to buy a ticket from a station further away from the origin and then use it for a journey that is closer to the destination.

 

[yorkie]

So sorry in that going to make a cup of tea I didn't reply in the timeframe acceptable to you. :roll:

It was not the timeframe - apologies if you thought I meant that. It was that you posted a post that implied it wasn't valid without actually specifying explicitly either way.

I have not said in this thread that starting short is not valid, so therefore did not believe I had to then make a statement on record to the fact that it can be. But if having me state it is of such importance to you, then yes, a passenger can start a journey short subject to the ticket allows it, including validity codes and routings.

You implied it though. But I see you accept it is valid, thankyou. I do think it would be helpful if you think you are more qualified than me to give fare advice, if you had stated it was valid to the OP?

So you do agree with us Crewe to Shrewsbury is valid on a Chester to Shrewsbury ticket as originally posted by Nedchester. That's good. I do wish you had stated this earlier but I do apologise for suggesting you could not understand the rules on this case, I now withdraw that suggestion.

That means everyone posting an opinion in this topic appears to believe that the suggestion by Nedchester to start a CDR short is valid, with the exception of Old Timer.

 

[amn140174]

Tried to think of something logical to add to this thread but I cant think of a good example.

One example that to me looks along the same lines is if I go into Macdonalds and only want a drink and burger I will buy a meal deal. With the meal deal I will also get fries this works out cheaper than buying just the drink and burger, guess im breaking the law by not eating the fries then.

Dam just rememberd I bought a 4 pack tonight becouse it was cheaper than the 3 cans I wanted to drink, better toddle of down to the fridge and get the 4th down me neck before I get a criminal record.

This is a becoming a health hazard, have to eat fries I dont want, drink more alcohol and sit on my backside on a train for a bit longer. Is it worth saving that few quid at the risk of becoming a criminal......

 

[Old Timer]

.....NCoC says you can start at an intermediate station unless a restriction code prevents it. It does not say you cannot do this if the fare is lower. You made that up......

THis is like arguing with a child.

Please will you explain exactly WHAT part of the fact that you are deliberately avoiding paying the correct fare and that this is contrary to various sections of Law, are you are having a problem with understanding ????

 

[thefab444]

In the circumstances here the issue is the deliberate purchasing of a cheaper ticket with the deliberate intent to to avoid paying the correct fare for the journey.

Well, surely then it's up to the TOCs to ensure consistency of pricing. :roll:

 

[yorkie]

One example that to me looks along the same lines is if I go into Macdonalds and only want a drink and burger I will buy a meal deal. With the meal deal I will also get fries this works out cheaper than buying just the drink and burger, guess im breaking the law by not eating the fries then.

No, but if a validity code against the meal deal restricts it, you are breaking McDonalds T&Cs. Fortunately only the rail industry (to the best of my knowledge) have such validity codes!

Dam just rememberd I bought a 4 pack tonight becouse it was cheaper than the 3 cans I wanted to drink, better toddle of down to the fridge and get the 4th down me neck before I get a criminal record.

This is a becoming a health hazard, have to eat fries I dont want, drink more alcohol and sit on my backside on a train for a bit longer. Is it worth saving that few quid at the risk of becoming a criminal......

Basically we need to campaign to get the criminalisation element removed. It is not acceptable that customers are threatened with criminal records for trying to get a decent rail fare. (I am not, before anyone asks, condoning people buying fares too short for their journey. But there is nothing wrong with buying a fare that is too long!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Please will you explain exactly WHAT part of the fact that you are deliberately avoiding paying the correct fare and that this is contrary to various sections of Law, are you are having a problem with understanding ????

A Chester-Shrews ticket is valid at Crewe. It is valid for starting at Crewe. Therefore the fare is not "incorrect", and it is not invalid. Starting short is explicitly valid as stated in the NCoC. You cannot be prosecuted for something that the NCoC explicitly permits.

 

[Old Timer]

Tried to think of something logical to add to this thread but I cant think of a good example.

One example that to me looks along the same lines is if I go into Macdonalds and only want a drink and burger I will buy a meal deal. With the meal deal I will also get fries this works out cheaper than buying just the drink and burger, guess im breaking the law by not eating the fries then.

Dam just rememberd I bought a 4 pack tonight becouse it was cheaper than the 3 cans I wanted to drink, better toddle of down to the fridge and get the 4th down me neck before I get a criminal record.

This is a becoming a health hazard, have to eat fries I dont want, drink more alcohol and sit on my backside on a train for a bit longer. Is it worth saving that few quid at the risk of becoming a criminal......

That is a wholly spurious and incorrect argument.

There has been no loss to the seller, only to you.

In the railway case the TOC has lost the difference between the correct fare and the lower fare. In the case of the journey cited, this amounts to only £2 but in law that is irrelevant. There can be no logical debate that the TOC has lost revenue, and thus the person undertaking the journey is in depriving the TOC of the money that should have been paid.

It is a Criminal offence to travel on the railway with intent to avoid paying the correct fare. The correct fare is defined as being that which is applicable to the journey being made, in this case B to A. In the case cited the loss is £2.

Will someone please tell me how they figure out that the TOC has not lost money ??????

 

[Helvellyn]

Well, surely then it's up to the TOCs to ensure consistency of pricing. :roll:

I think momentum for this is building. Yet I think many would actually scream if it was brought in, as it would need to be revenue neutral and a lot of fares would go up. We've already got passengers complaining that the introduction of Oyster PAYG to the SWT network in January will see peak fares on travel in the Travelcard area in the evening peak, something SWT has never had before.

As to why it would have to be revenue neutral, well the Government is still pushing through with moving from a 50/50 split for taxpayer/passenger support of the railway to a 25/75 split. They don't like to publicise that fact in support of the TOCs at fare change time! So unless the Government wanted to rewrite every franchise agreement, a national fares restructuring would need to be revenue neutral. That though, is a whole different topic.

 

[Mojo]

Please will you explain exactly WHAT part of the fact that you are deliberately avoiding paying the correct fare and that this is contrary to various sections of Law, are you are having a problem with understanding ????

The fact that the CofC says you can do it?

Can you answer the below?

1. Do you agree that the CofC says "You may start, or break and resume, a journey (in either direction in the case of a return ticket) at any intermediate station?"

2. On a railway line that goes A > B > C > D do you agree that a ticket from A to D allows you to travel A > D?

3. On a railway line that goes A > B > C > D do you agree that B is an intermediate station between A > D?

4. If I get on a train at B, intending to alight at D would I be starting a journey?

5. If you said yes to (2), (3) and (4), then how can you dispute the legality of it?

 

[mathmo]

I totally agree that a Chester-Shrewsbury ticket is valid for Crewe-Shrewsbury (given that this is a valid route).

Old Timer: so what would you say to someone who wanted to go from Crewe to Shrewsbury and then back to Chester that day? Would you expect them to buy two tickets or are they committing fraud too by buying the Chester-Shrewsbury ticket and not using it for Chester-Crewe?

 

[Old Timer]

No, but if a validity code against the meal deal restricts it, you are breaking McDonalds T&Cs. Fortunately only the rail industry (to the best of my knowledge) have such validity codes!

Basically we need to campaign to get the criminalisation element removed. It is not acceptable that customers are threatened with criminal records for trying to get a decent rail fare. (I am not, before anyone asks, condoning people buying fares too short for their journey. But there is nothing wrong with buying a fare that is too long!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A Chester-Shrews ticket is valid at Crewe. It is valid for starting at Crewe. Therefore the fare is not "incorrect", and it is not invalid. Starting short is explicitly valid as stated in the NCoC. You cannot be prosecuted for something that the NCoC explicitly permits.

The NCoC assumes that you have paid the correct fare for the journey, and that this is more than that from the shorter station. It does not assume deliberate attempt at fare evasion which is what you continue to suggest.

Tickets which are generally cheaper in such circumstances do have restrictions placed upon them I am sure.

 

[amn140174]

I can see whats wrong with buying a ticket from A to B and traveling to C. But I just cant get my head around what is wrong with buying a ticket from A to C and getting of at B.

 

[Old Timer]

I can see whats wrong with buying a ticket from A to B and traveling to C. But I just cant get my head around what is wrong with buying a ticket from A to C and getting of at B.

What is wrong is that if it is cheaper to buy a C to A ticket than a B to A ticket, and you deliberately buy a C to A ticket for the journey B to A then you are evading the correct fare. That is against the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 section 5.

It is also in effect a contravention of the 1978 Theft Act.

It is no different to taking a reduced label from one product and putting it on another.

There has been a loss to the TOC and that is all that it is necessary to prove for a section 5 Prosecution.