Via London / London Terminals

[big_dirt]

I buy a season ticket from North Dulwich to Elephant and Castle. I usually travel from Tulse Hill which, as such a journey involves travelling through TUH, is permitted.

My office has moved and I might start to travel to City Thameslink instead.

As it is London Terminals rather than specifically to City Thameslink, would it still be permitted to start in Tulse Hill?

 

[maniacmartin]

If the season ticket is to London Terminals and not to Elephant & Castle specifically, then I believe it would be valid for journeys between Tulse Hill and City Thameslink, as via TUH would be less than 3 miles over the shortest route.

Someone more knowledgeable than me will be able to confirm

 

[bicbasher]

Looking at BR Fares for North Dulwich to Elephant and Castle there's London NOT UND which may be valid to City Thameslink as it's a London terminal and Not Via LONDON which I assume the OP uses currently?

The latter would be the cheaper via Tulse Hill direct to E&C which wouldn't be valid via London Bridge or Blackfriars.

 

[John @ home]

Are you asking for advice about the validity of your current North Dulwich - Elephant & Castle ticket? If so, we need to know what is printed below the word "Route" on the ticket?

Are you asking for advice about the best ticket to buy for your new Tulse Hill - City Thameslink journey? If so, please tell us in which areas you would like to be able to travel if available at the same price.

 

[big_dirt]

Are you asking for advice about the validity of your current North Dulwich - Elephant & Castle ticket? If so, we need to know what is printed below the word "Route" on the ticket?

Are you asking for advice about the best ticket to buy for your new Tulse Hill - City Thameslink journey? If so, please tell us in which areas you would like to be able to travel if available at the same price.

My current ticket is North Dulwich to Elephant, not via London which I use to get on at Tulse Hill. What I'm querying is if I buy North Dulwich to Elephant via London but not Underground, will that cover Tulse Hill to City Thameslink.

 

[jopsuk]

I'm prepared to be amazed, but I really don't see any possible reason why such a ticket WOULD be valid at City Thameslink?

 

[island]

I think that would be OK under the three-mile rule, but can't accurately check just now.

 

[yorkie]

I'm prepared to be amazed, but I really don't see any possible reason why such a ticket WOULD be valid at City Thameslink?

If the route is via London then surely the expected route is via Blackfriars & London Bridge? That would surely be the shortest route via London in which case it would then be permitted to double-back between Blackfriars & City Thameslink on the basis of the 3 mile rule.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

If the route is via London then surely the expected route is via Blackfriars & London Bridge? That would surely be the shortest route via London in which case it would then be permitted to double-back between Blackfriars & City Thameslink on the basis of the 3 mile rule.

Unfortunately "the shortest route" isn't necessarily "the shortest route via London".

 

[yorkie]

Unfortunately "the shortest route" isn't necessarily "the shortest route via London".

If you are suggesting there are no permitted routes via London, then given that the route is "via London" then the rules are that you take permitted routes to/from London.

If you are not suggesting that, then I assume you are only denying the shortest route via London to be valid, in which case you are accepting mapped routes are valid, in which case doubling-back via City Thameslink is permitted due to the Group Stations rule (though with the caveat that it's for "interchange purposes only").

Either way, it is valid at City Thameslink, though whether it is valid for "starting short" at City Thameslink is questionable.

 

[Stats]

Here's a thought why not remove the complications by buying a ticket to City Thameslink (London Terminals) which costs the same as the ticket to Elephant via London.

 

[island]

That would make a whole lot of sense.

 

[big_dirt]

Here's a thought why not remove the complications by buying a ticket to City Thameslink (London Terminals) which costs the same as the ticket to Elephant via London.

Because I start at Tulse Hill 90% of the time and 10% from North Dulwich. A ticket from North Dulwich to Elephant is logical to go through Tulse Hill. I am not sure if the same argument could be made for "London Terminals".

 

[John @ home]

A ticket from North Dulwich to Elephant is logical to go through Tulse Hill. I am not sure if the same argument could be made for "London Terminals".

Agreed. A North Dulwich - London Terminals ticket fails the fares check for Tulse Hill Routeing Point. The only mapped Permitted Route to London is via Peckham Rye.

 

[t0ffeeman]

North Dulwich to Elephant via London is the same price as
North Dulwich to London Terminals as
North Dulwich to Kentish Town / West Hampstead / Zone 2 NLL

Id go with the latter

 

[John @ home]

North Dulwich to Elephant via London is the same price as
North Dulwich to London Terminals as
North Dulwich to Kentish Town / West Hampstead / Zone 2 NLL

North Dulwich - Elephant via Tulse Hill is a Permitted Route because, despite Tulse Hill failing the fares check, the route via Tulse Hill is only half a mile longer than the shortest route via Denmark Hill.

Similarly, North Dulwich - Kentish Town via Tulse Hill is a Permitted Route because, despite Tulse Hill failing the fares check, the route via Tulse Hill is only half a mile longer than the shortest route via London Bridge.

Therefore I agree with t0ffeeman's recommendation. North Dulwich - Kensal Rise route Not Underground seems to give a wide range of journey opportunities. North Dulwich - Kensal Rise via Tulse Hill and Loughborough Jn is a Permitted Route because, despite Tulse Hill failing the fares check, the route via Tulse Hill and Loughborough Jn is only three quarters a mile longer than the shortest route via Tulse Hill and Kensington Olympia.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

If you are suggesting there are no permitted routes via London, then given that the route is "via London" then the rules are that you take permitted routes to/from London.

If you are not suggesting that, then I assume you are only denying the shortest route via London to be valid, in which case you are accepting mapped routes are valid, in which case doubling-back via City Thameslink is permitted due to the Groe up Stations rule (though with the caveat that it's for "interchange purposes only").

Either way, it is valid at City Thameslink, though whether it is valid for "starting short" at City Thameslink is questionable.

The NRCoC states that the shortest route and the mapped routes together are the permitted routes. It goes on to state that the route you can use may be restricted by a routeing shown on a ticket (source:NRCoC). The Routeing Guide states that where a place named in the route field of the ticket is not along a permitted route it may be necessary to use the Routeing Guide to find a route to that place and a route from it (source:The Routeing Guide). However we know you cannot doubleback on a mapped route, so if via London is not the shortest route the ticket would not be valid to/from City Thameslink unless you are making a connection there.

So in answer to your question yorkie, no I am not saying there are no permitted routes via London.