Winchester to London Terminals

[Roylang]

Could somebody confirm that I have applied the Roueting Guide correctly please?

I often travel Winchester to London, tickets being marked "Any Permitted Route". I was told by staff at Winchester that I could travel either directly to London Waterloo or travel via Reading to London Paddington. I have done both regularly and never had a problem.

Prompted by another thread regarding London Terminals, I was looking to see if any other routes are permissible. From the Routine Guide I think that Winchester -> London Marylebone is valid but would like to confirm this. My logic is as follows:

Winchester uses the Basingstoke routeing point. London is obviously London Group.

Basingstoke to London shows two map combinations which include map CS (CS+WR, CS+WX). Now, map CS alone shows both Basingstoke and two London Terminals - Paddington and Marylebone.

The cost of any anytime single from Winchester to both London Marylebone and London Passington are the same at £32.30.

Would I be right to say that I can, therefore, travel Winchester->Reading->Banbury->Marylebone on any Winchester -> London Terminals ticket that states it is "Any Permitted Route". There is no doubling back through a station that I can see.

Zone 1-6 travelcards from Winchester are also "Any Permitted Route" so, again, could I travel into Marylebone using a travelcard?

Thanks in advance,

Roy

 

[SickyNicky]

The maps valid for this route are:

Via Basingstoke - valid on map CS+WR
Via Basingstoke - valid on map CS+WX
Via Basingstoke - valid on map WW+WX
Via Basingstoke - valid on map WX+CS
Via Basingstoke - valid on map WX+WW

You must use ALL of the maps in order.

Maps WX-CS would allow this ONLY if you change at Farnborough (or Clapham Junction!). I don't think you can use a direct Basingstoke to Reading service.

Sorry.

edit: unless someone would care to speculate that the mere existence of Basingstoke on WX is enough to have "used" that map, then complete the journey on CS.

 

[Roylang]

Thanks for the reply.

So that would probably make Marylebone invalid :cry:

Surely the Basingstoke -> Reading direct train is permitted by the second CS map? Then using map WR for Reading to Paddington? I have travelled this route many times and never had an issue.

Edit - sorry, just re-read and realised you meant direct using the WX-CS combination.

Cheers,

Roy

 

[SickyNicky]

So that would probably make Marylebone invalid :cry:

Not necessarily - you just have to change at Farnborough (and walk between the two stations) or go all the way to Clapham Junction, and change there for a Reading train via Ascot and Wokingham. Then change at Reading and Banbury for Marylebone.

But good look pursuading the guard it's valid via Clapham

edit: by the way - if you buy a ticket to Basingstoke and another from there to London, you'll save a couple of quid.

 

[Roylang]

I think trying to justify going via CLJ may be stretching things a little too far. I am also not sure I want it to take that long to get there

The walk from Farnborough Main to Farborough North is an interesting option. Not done that in a very long time.

Thanks again,

Roy

 

[clagmonster]

Map CS contains both Basingstoke and two London Terminals. However, map WR does not contain Basingstoke but does contain 2 London Terminals. Therefore, as "ALL MAPS NEED TO BE CONSULTED IN SEQUENTIAL ORDER" ( http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/instructions.pdf page 5) you must start in Basingstoke with map CS and finish in London with map WR, thus this combination does not allow travel into Marylebone.

However, map WX also features both Basingstoke and a number of London Terminals not includig Marylebone.
On map WX, you could go:
Basingstoke-Farnborough
Then on CS:
Farnborough-Wokingham-Reading-Didcot-Oxford-Kings Sutton-West Ruislip-Marylebone

For me, the question is are you allowed to go to Kings Sutton as Banbury is shown on map CS. Doubling back Kings Sutton-Banbury is prohibited by easement 52.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not necessarily - you just have to change at Farnborough (and walk between the two stations) or go all the way to Clapham Junction, and change there for a Reading train via Ascot and Wokingham. Then change at Reading and Banbury for Marylebone.

Changing at Banbury is invalid by easement 52 as you would be doubling back from Kings Sutton. I'm not sure whether changing at Kings Sutton would be permitted though.

 

[Roylang]

Map CS contains both Basingstoke and two London Terminals. However, map WR does not contain Basingstoke but does contain 2 London Terminals. Therefore, as "ALL MAPS NEED TO BE CONSULTED IN SEQUENTIAL ORDER"

Ah, but I did consult them, just do not want to use them all

Seriously though, going into Marylebone was a nice idea when it looked simple, but it is now looking like a monster of a journey and one that i think would be highly likely to raise problems.

At least I have learned to apply the Roueting guide better.

Thanks,

Roy

 

[SickyNicky]

Changing at Banbury is invalid by easement 52 as you would be doubling back from Kings Sutton. I'm not sure whether changing at Kings Sutton would be permitted though.

Bl***y negative easements :-x. I'm not convinced that they're actually enforceable - but there are many folks out there better positioned to make that determination than me.

 

[CheapAndNerdy]

Map CS contains both Basingstoke and two London Terminals. However, map WR does not contain Basingstoke but does contain 2 London Terminals. Therefore, as "ALL MAPS NEED TO BE CONSULTED IN SEQUENTIAL ORDER" ( http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/instructions.pdf page 5) you must start in Basingstoke with map CS and finish in London with map WR, thus this combination does not allow travel into Marylebone.

However, map WX also features both Basingstoke and a number of London Terminals not includig Marylebone.
On map WX, you could go:
Basingstoke-Farnborough
Then on CS:
Farnborough-Wokingham-Reading-Didcot-Oxford-Kings Sutton-West Ruislip-Marylebone

For me, the question is are you allowed to go to Kings Sutton as Banbury is shown on map CS. Doubling back Kings Sutton-Banbury is prohibited by easement 52.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Changing at Banbury is invalid by easement 52 as you would be doubling back from Kings Sutton. I'm not sure whether changing at Kings Sutton would be permitted though.

Am I correct in thinking that without "easement" 52, doubling back through Kings Sutton would be valid due to its membership of Banbury routeing group?

I notice there are some direct services from Kings Sutton to Marylebone, but not frequent. So changing at Kings Sutton (Banbury routeing group member) looks like it might be OK (if inconvenient).

With regards to the chaining of routeing maps, WX covers Eastleigh to Basingstoke (with Winchester along the way), would it be within the rules to consider arriving at Basingstoke to be "using" map WX, which would then allow travel direct to Reading and onwards using CS? Just a thought.

 

[SickyNicky]

With regards to the chaining of routeing maps, WX covers Eastleigh to Basingstoke (with Winchester along the way), would it be within the rules to consider arriving at Basingstoke to be "using" map WX, which would then allow travel direct to Reading and onwards using CS? Just a thought.

My personal view is no because the maps are for specific named points. But I'm sure others will differ

 

[Greenback]

My personal view is no because the maps are for specific named points. But I'm sure others will differ

I agree with your interpretation. Given my past record with the RG, that probably means we are wrong!

 

[clagmonster]

Am I correct in thinking that without "easement" 52, doubling back through Kings Sutton would be valid due to its membership of Banbury routeing group?

No, because Banbury is a routeing point and not a routeing group, so soubling back for interchange purposes would not be permitted. I seem to recall that there used to be an easement which stated the exact opposite of the current easement 52. I could be wrong though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

With regards to the chaining of routeing maps, WX covers Eastleigh to Basingstoke (with Winchester along the way), would it be within the rules to consider arriving at Basingstoke to be "using" map WX, which would then allow travel direct to Reading and onwards using CS? Just a thought.

Like Sicky Nicky and Greenback, I'm going to say no to this also. The reason is in this from the NRG:
"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."
http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/instructions.pdf
So for the Winchester-Basingstoke strech you are making your way to the routeing point, you are not using any maps whatsoever.

 

[John @ home]

Ah, but I did consult them, just do not want to use them all

Rule 2 of the route tracing procedure on page F8 of The National Routeing Guide in Detail insists All maps must be used.

the question is are you allowed to go to Kings Sutton as Banbury is shown on map CS.

Map CS shows Banbury with a circular green symbol which it defines as "Routeing Point on Route". A circular green symbol means "Routeing Point on Route" and therefore refers to the whole of the Routeing Point.

This is in contrast to, for example, Stafford which has a square green symbol defined as "Routeing Point Group station on Route". A square green symbol indicates a specific station within a Routeing Point Group, although sometimes detailed knowledge of the railway network is needed to work out which station is relevant.

National Routeing Guide - Group Stations

BANBURY GROUP: BANBURY, KINGS SUTTON
...
STAFFORD GROUP: NORTON BRIDGE, STAFFORD
http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/group_stations.pdf

The Guide is therefore explicit that, when using Stafford on map CS, one must travel via Stafford station not Norton Bridge. (Just as well - Norton Bridge station has been demolished!)

But it is clear that "BANBURY" on map CS refers to Banbury Routeing Point Group. A passenger may travel via either or both stations within that Routeing Point Group, subject to that being on a Permitted Route for their journey.

Therefore, using map combination CS+WX, a Winchester - London Terminals ticket is permitted:

Winchester - Basingstoke, then
WX: Basingstoke - Farnborough Group
CS: Farnborough Group - Wokingham - Reading Group - Didcot Parkway - Oxford - Banbury Group - West Ruislip - Marylebone

or

Winchester - Basingstoke, then
WX: Basingstoke - Farnborough Group
CS: Farnborough Group - Guildford - Dorking - Redhill - (East) Croydon - Streatham - Clapham Jn - (rail replacement bus) - Ealing Bdy - Hayes & Harlington - Slough - Reading Group - Didcot Parkway - Oxford - Banbury Group - West Ruislip - Marylebone

Doubling back Kings Sutton-Banbury is prohibited by easement 52.

Mmm. The Routeing Guide has two relevant statements on this subject.

National Routeing Guide - Instructions

GROUP STATIONS
Some stations are grouped together to improve interchange between trains by offering customers access to a wider choice of train services and station facilities. A customer may travel via any station in such a group, including doubling back, provided that the group is on one of the permitted routes between their origin and destination stations. This extended availability is for interchange purposes only and does not apply where the origin or destination stations are part of a group.

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/instructions.pdf

National Routeing Guide - Routeing Guide Easements

52 Journeys from stations south of Kings Sutton may not go via Banbury to London nor via Banbury and London to stations beyond London. This prohibition applies in both directions.

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/easements.pdf

Plainly, this is a contradiction, which takes us back to:

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

Written contracts
7. - (2) If there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1999/19992083.htm

 

[b0b]

Map CS shows Banbury with a circular green symbol which it defines as "Routeing Point on Route" in contrast to, for example, Stafford which has a square green symbol defined as "Routeing Point Group station on Route".

Wait; what you are saying is, that a Routeing Group could be:
(a) A green square; representing the group;
(b) A green circle; representing the specific station in the group?

and could be different from map to map?

 

[clagmonster]

I failed to consider that Banbury was a group because it is shown as a circle in map CS.
In that case, John I agree with you that travel into Marylebone is valid via Kings Sutton on either of your two routes. The question is now solely about doubling back to Banbury, and I don't think we'll ever know which trumps which, the 'easement' or the group station rule.

I think you have got muddled regarding your quote from one of Nicky's posts. He was answering a question about placing Winchester on map WX ( http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=748514#post748514 ) it was nothing to do with the Banbury element.

 

[John @ home]

what you are saying is, that a Routeing Group could be:
(a) A green square; representing the group;
(b) A green circle; representing the specific station in the group?

and could be different from map to map?

Taking map CS and considering Banbury Group and Stafford Group, it seems to me that it is different on the same map.

Due to the Group Stations rule in the NRG Instructions, I don't think it normally affects route availability. Do we know of any instances other than Banbury Group where a negative Easement purports to over-ride the Group Stations rule?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think you have got muddled regarding your quote from one of Nicky's posts. He was answering a question about placing Winchester on map WX ( http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=748514#post748514 ) it was nothing to do with the Banbury element.

Yes, thanks. I quoted the wrong post, and have now edited post #13.