I wonder if anyone could shed any light on this?

My wife and I are going for a day out in York tomorrow (probably) and 
thought it would be nice to go on the train so we can have a pub lunch.

On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60 each.

Now I know York is outside the WY Metro area, but this seems a bit steep for 
a 25 minute journey.

That said it probably won't stop us going, but I could go there and back 
from our house on well under a gallon of diesel...

Is there any way of doing this journey cheaper without resorting to spending 
nearly an hour on a bus?

Thanks

Dave

"Dave X"  wrote


> My wife and I are going for a day out in York tomorrow (probably) and 
> thought it would be nice to go on the train so we can have a pub lunch.
>
> On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60 each.


I had to do an evening in York last week and because my departure was after 
the evening closure of the park & ride system it meant I had to use a city 
centre car park.  Arriving just after 4pm it cost me 2.60 to park until 6pm 
and then an additional 2.00 for the evening.  That coupled with around two 
gallons of diesel for the return trip from Hull meant the immediate journey 
costs were around 12.60 and would have made me consider using the train BUT 
the last departure was just after 10pm and there was no guarantee I would 
make it back by that time - isn't public transport wonderful.

8.60 for the journey from Leeds sounds good to me.  The fare from Hull is 
around 15.00!!!

John.

Dave X wrote:

> I wonder if anyone could shed any light on this?
> 
> My wife and I are going for a day out in York tomorrow (probably) and 
> thought it would be nice to go on the train so we can have a pub lunch.
> 
> On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60 each.
> 
> Now I know York is outside the WY Metro area, but this seems a bit steep for 
> a 25 minute journey.
> 
> That said it probably won't stop us going, but I could go there and back 
> from our house on well under a gallon of diesel...
> 
> Is there any way of doing this journey cheaper without resorting to spending 
> nearly an hour on a bus?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Dave 


The only other way of doing this is going on the Northern train which 
stops at Micklefield (WY boundary) and buying 2 separate tickets before 
boarding. Although Leeds - Micklefield  is 2.20 return and Micklefield 
- York is 7.30 - but of course this would be more expensive.

Parking in central York is getting on for a tenner and it's Ebor racing 
this week - the diesel is the least of your worries.

I've been Leeds - York every day this week and the trains have been 
punctual, clean, lots of seats - better than the A64 anyday!

Dave X wrote:

> I wonder if anyone could shed any light on this?
> 
> My wife and I are going for a day out in York tomorrow (probably) and 
> thought it would be nice to go on the train so we can have a pub lunch.
> 
> On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60 each.
> 
> Now I know York is outside the WY Metro area, but this seems a bit steep for 
> a 25 minute journey.


I think it's pretty average, it's just we're rather fortunate to have 
subsidised public transport in West Yorkshire.

I wonder whether Metro should subsidise cross-boundary services like 
this (if they don't already).  It'd encourage public transport use and, 
in the other direction, bring people from York into Leeds.


> Is there any way of doing this journey cheaper without resorting to spending 
> nearly an hour on a bus?


Not that I'm aware of.  Considering most journeys are [timetabled to be] 
twice as fast as the Yorkshire Coastliner bus, it might be considered 
worth the 2.80 extra?

For people travelling from elsewhere in WY to York is sometimes cheaper 
to get separate tickets from origin-Leeds and Leeds to York.

"Dave X"  wrote

>
> On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60 each.
>
> Now I know York is outside the WY Metro area, but this seems a bit steep
for
> a 25 minute journey.
>

51 mile round trip, about 17 pence per mile. Pretty typical I would say for
a CDR on a line served by frequent fast, including InterCity, trains.

Peter

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 20:27:38 +0100, Steve Jonson  wrote:



>
>The only other way of doing this is going on the Northern train which 
>stops at Micklefield (WY boundary) and buying 2 separate tickets before 
>boarding. Although Leeds - Micklefield  is 2.20 return and Micklefield 
>- York is 7.30 - but of course this would be more expensive.


Some TPE trains stop at Garforth these days, so you can do it on two
tickets and ride on a faster train too. Wouldn't be much cheaper
though.

The other thing you can't do is get any other kind of return ticket
between Leeds and York than a day return, so if you are going out on
one day, and coming back the next you're stuck with buying two
singles.

Market pricing / ripoff - take your pick.

Not as bad as going from Dewsbury to Whitby for the day by train,
though. 33.20 for a saver return. I'm betting I can do it cheaper
using buses and the NYMR. Most people either drive or go on coach
trips. No wonder.

-- 
 
Regards

Mike

mikedotroebuckatgmxdotnet

Mike Roebuck  wrote:

> Not as bad as going from Dewsbury to Whitby for the day by train,
> though. 33.20 for a saver return. I'm betting I can do it cheaper
> using buses and the NYMR. Most people either drive or go on coach
> trips. No wonder.


Almost certainly, actually you could do Coastliner up to Pickering, NYMR
and then (if it was an alternate Vernal Equinox and the event was
witnessed by three lawyers who were present at your birth) you might
even be in time for one of the rare Esk Valley pacers ;)

I would guess that that'd be under 25 quid return.

pete
-- 
pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas"

Mike Roebuck wrote:

> The other thing you can't do is get any other kind of return ticket
> between Leeds and York than a day return, so if you are going out on
> one day, and coming back the next you're stuck with buying two
> singles.


Or getting a SVR from somewhere a bit further back than Leeds:

Shipley-York SVR = 12.10
2 x Leeds-York SDS = 17.00


> Not as bad as going from Dewsbury to Whitby for the day by train,
> though. 33.20 for a saver return. I'm betting I can do it cheaper
> using buses and the NYMR. Most people either drive or go on coach
> trips. No wonder.


I've done Leeds-Whitby on TPX to Scarborough and then the hourly 93 bus 
from outside Scarborough station to Whitby.  That's better than the 
Yorkshire Coastliner to Whitby for which you'll need a good bladder and 
a cushion (although it is the cheapest option).

"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:de2n0h$trf$1@newsreaderg1.core.theplanet.net...

>
> "Dave X"  wrote
>
>> My wife and I are going for a day out in York tomorrow (probably) and 
>> thought it would be nice to go on the train so we can have a pub lunch.
>>
>> On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60 each.
>
> I had to do an evening in York last week and because my departure was 
> after the evening closure of the park & ride system it meant I had to use 
> a city centre car park.


I don't know if this would help but Askham Bar Park & Ride is now open until 
Midnight.

Probably not very easy to get to from Hull though

Andrew

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 22:04:39 +0100, Mark Morton
 wrote:


>Mike Roebuck wrote:
>> The other thing you can't do is get any other kind of return ticket
>> between Leeds and York than a day return, so if you are going out on
>> one day, and coming back the next you're stuck with buying two
>> singles.
>
>Or getting a SVR from somewhere a bit further back than Leeds:
>
>Shipley-York SVR = 12.10
>2 x Leeds-York SDS = 17.00
>
>> Not as bad as going from Dewsbury to Whitby for the day by train,
>> though. 33.20 for a saver return. I'm betting I can do it cheaper
>> using buses and the NYMR. Most people either drive or go on coach
>> trips. No wonder.
>
>I've done Leeds-Whitby on TPX to Scarborough and then the hourly 93 bus 
>from outside Scarborough station to Whitby.  That's better than the 
>Yorkshire Coastliner to Whitby for which you'll need a good bladder and 
>a cushion (although it is the cheapest option).


There's an option at the moment for Tuesdays to Thursdays only, to
take the first train from Dewsbury to York, the 0700hrs Coastliner to
Malton, change into the connection for Pickering, class 101 dmu with
the front blinds raised, to Grosmont, and steam from Grosmont to
Whitby. Works in the other direction in the late afternoon too, I
gather.

I'm not sure what that would cost. The steam supplement appears to be
5.00 each way.

-- 
 
Regards

Mike

mikedotroebuckatgmxdotnet

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 21:14:50 +0100, Pete Fenelon 
wrote:


>Mike Roebuck  wrote:
>> Not as bad as going from Dewsbury to Whitby for the day by train,
>> though. 33.20 for a saver return. I'm betting I can do it cheaper
>> using buses and the NYMR. Most people either drive or go on coach
>> trips. No wonder.
>
>Almost certainly, actually you could do Coastliner up to Pickering, NYMR
>and then (if it was an alternate Vernal Equinox and the event was
>witnessed by three lawyers who were present at your birth) you might
>even be in time for one of the rare Esk Valley pacers ;)


LOL:-)

The Pacer has been replaced by a 156 Sprinter. Same number of seats as
a 3-car 144, allegedly, but still inadequate in summer. The 1038hrs
Middlesbrough - Whitby and 1605hrs return were both full and standing
for much of the way on Tuesday.

snip

-- 
 
Regards

Mike

mikedotroebuckatgmxdotnet

Mike Roebuck wrote:

> Not as bad as going from Dewsbury to Whitby for the day by train,
> though. £33.20 for a saver return. I'm betting I can do it cheaper
> using buses and the NYMR. Most people either drive or go on coach
> trips. No wonder.


If you buy CDRs to/from York you'll save £14.20!  (Dewsbury-York
£10.10  York-Whitby £8.90 GBP Route 'Direct' - in other words going
via Yarm, not via Darlington).

A 'Moorslink' ticket (
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/promotions/?a=displayPreviewPromotion&id=03393900c35ce741019c1642cf327550
) is a useful ticket if combining bus/NYMR/Northern Rail but bring
along a leaflet or a print out of that page as at some (poorly trained)
Northern conductors have never heard of it and refuse to accept it
until convinced that the ticket exists!

Steve Jonson wrote:

> The only other way of doing this is going on the Northern train which
> stops at Micklefield (WY boundary) and buying 2 separate tickets before
> boarding. Although Leeds - Micklefield  is £2.20 return and Micklefield
> - York is £7.30 - but of course this would be more expensive.


The cheapest option I know of, although this is is available only on
few trains that call at Church Fenton is as follows:-

York to Church Fenton SDR £3.60
Pontefract Stations to Garforth CDR £2.30
Garforth-Leeds CDR £1.70

Total £7.60, but probably not worth it due to the fact you are limited
to the (roughly) every 2 hours Church Fenton stoppers! It might be
worth it to someone who holds a 'Metrocard' and wants a cheap way of
getting to the boundary.

In case anyone is wondering, Pontefract to Garforth is definitely valid
via Church Fenton (and you can start your journey 'short' there on a
CDR legitimately), as it is the shortest route.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 19:09:00 +0000 (UTC), Dave X wrote:


> On checking the trainline, it seems the cheap day return is 8.60
> each. Now I know York is outside the WY Metro area, but this seems a
> bit steep for a 25 minute journey.


It isn't, compared with the rest of the country, but I can easily
understand why it looks like it to someone who is used to the good-value
WY Metro fares.

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683799.html
(153 318 at Bridgend, 2 Jul 1999)

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:10:42 GMT, Chris Tolley 
wrote:


>It isn't, compared with the rest of the country, but I can easily
>understand why it looks like it to someone who is used to the good-value
>WY Metro fares.


Indeed.  Some PTE fares, especially things like GMPTE Evening Rangers
and capped CDRs, are incredibly cheap.  You don't appreciate it until
you live in the expensive Sarfeast!

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On 18 Aug 2005 16:58:32 -0700, "Yorkie"  wrote:


>In case anyone is wondering, Pontefract to Garforth is definitely valid
>via Church Fenton (and you can start your journey 'short' there on a
>CDR legitimately)


Hate to rain on the parade here, but there is nothing explicitly
saying you can start your journey short. Common sense dictates that
you should be able to, as you have paid for the entire journey you are
making (and then some), but if a particularly ruthless ticket
inspector decides not to accept it, there is no rule you can hold up
in your defence.

(You could claim to have earlier travelled from Pontefract Stations to
Church Fenton and broken your journey there, but that won't work if
your tickets say they were bought just before you boarded the train at
York, and you've been on the train ever since!)

Then again, as it's not a Compulsory Ticket Area, the worst that can
happen is having to buy a standard single for a short journey. It's
more of an issue in places where penalty fares (and worse) apply.

"Andrew Hillyard"  wrote


> I don't know if this would help but Askham Bar Park & Ride is now open 
> until Midnight.


That's certainly worth knowing, but I suspect on this occasion using it 
would have added 30 minutes to my trip home.


> Probably not very easy to get to from Hull though


I have used it on occasions, but only to drop my wife off for a day's 
shopping whilst I've gone on elsewhere.

John.

asdf wrote:

> Hate to rain on the parade here, but there is nothing explicitly
> saying you can start your journey short. Common sense dictates that
> you should be able to, as you have paid for the entire journey you are
> making (and then some), but if a particularly ruthless ticket
> inspector decides not to accept it, there is no rule you can hold up
> in your defence.


I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey 
short.  If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket 
then your ticket is valid for the journey is valid for the journey 
you're making, namely B-C.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Mark Morton wrote:


> I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey 
> short.


I'd say that there is: the NCoC says that tickets have to be used in 
accordance with their terms and conditions.  It goes on to say that 
terminating short is in general permissible, except perhaps for 
certain special offers subject to published restrictions, so we can 
deduce that terminating short is indeed OK if nothing to the contrary 
is published.  However, it says nothing about starting at other than 
the starting station named on the ticket, so I can see no grounds for 
concluding that starting at an intermediate point is permissible.


> If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket 
> then your ticket is valid


"petitio principii".  Validity isn't something that you can assume.  
You have to verify it against the terms and conditions.  And, based on 
the fact that terminating short is permitted in so many words (and 
knowing that there was a time when it was prohibited), I say that if 
starting at an intermediate point was permissible then that, too, 
would be stated explicitly: but it is not.

Treat this as barrack-room-lawyer mode if you will: I am not a lawyer 
and that was not legal advice, merely my interpretation of the NCoC.

I've been told in the past by some informants that if one were 
suspected of starting at an intermediate point, "they could never 
prove it", but, by saying that, the informant has clearly already 
decided that if the truth came out, it wouldn't be allowed, so let's 
not go there.  "Getting away with it" is not by any means the same as 
"being allowed to do it".

"Mark Morton"  wrote in message 
news:3mmgfmF170j5aU1@individual.net...

> asdf wrote:
>> Hate to rain on the parade here, but there is nothing explicitly
>> saying you can start your journey short. Common sense dictates that
>> you should be able to, as you have paid for the entire journey you are
>> making (and then some), but if a particularly ruthless ticket
>> inspector decides not to accept it, there is no rule you can hold up
>> in your defence.
>
> I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey short. 
> If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket then your 
> ticket is valid for the journey is valid for the journey you're making, 
> namely B-C.


Could you not have (or thought to have) broken your journey from A at B and 
therefore ended the journey short.
Or am I confused?   Probably!

KW

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:42:30 +0100, Mark Morton
 wrote:


>I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey 
>short.  If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket 
>then your ticket is valid for the journey is valid for the journey 
>you're making, namely B-C.


I agree, there's nothing saying you can't. However, there's nothing
saying you *can*. So if a ticket inspector says he is not allowing it,
your position is indefensible.

Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Mark Morton wrote:
> 
>>I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey 
>>short.
> 
> I'd say that there is: the NCoC says that tickets have to be used in 
> accordance with their terms and conditions.  It goes on to say that 
> terminating short is in general permissible, except perhaps for 
> certain special offers subject to published restrictions, so we can 
> deduce that terminating short is indeed OK if nothing to the contrary 
> is published.  However, it says nothing about starting at other than 
> the starting station named on the ticket, so I can see no grounds for 
> concluding that starting at an intermediate point is permissible.


I tend to believe if there are no laws or rules stopping me from doing 
something then I'm allowed to do it.  If there's nothing in the NCoC or 
the terms and conditions of my ticket to say I can't join at an 
intermediate station, then I'm happy to accept that I can.


>>If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket 
>>then your ticket is valid
> 
> "petitio principii".  Validity isn't something that you can assume.  
> You have to verify it against the terms and conditions.  And, based on 
> the fact that terminating short is permitted in so many words (and 
> knowing that there was a time when it was prohibited), I say that if 
> starting at an intermediate point was permissible then that, too, 
> would be stated explicitly: but it is not.


See above.  If there's explicitly to say I can't do it, then I'll always 
presume that I can.

The only time I can recall starting my journey intermediately is one day 
when I went from Guiseley to Ilkley and then back through Guiseley to 
Leeds.  I told the man at the ticket office what my journey plans were 
and he was happy to sell me a Leeds-Ilkley CDR*.  Again, as there's 
nothing in the T&C for CDRs to say I can't join at an intermediate 
station, I assumed that as my Leeds-Ilkley ticket was valid through 
Guiseley, the ticket would be valid for the journey I was making.

It does need clarifying in the NCoC.  Perhaps joining at an intermediate 
station does need to follow the same rule where you can do so unless 
there's a pecuniary advantage to you doing so.... which would close the 
Shotton-Chester-London SVR 'loophole'.

*(Yes, I know I might have been able to get a Guiseley-Ilkley CDR 
excessed on the return through to Leeds, but I wasn't going to make the 
nice man in the ticket office jump through hoops!)

asdf wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:42:30 +0100, Mark Morton
>  wrote:
> 
>>I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey 
>>short.  If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket 
>>then your ticket is valid for the journey is valid for the journey 
>>you're making, namely B-C.
> 
> I agree, there's nothing saying you can't. However, there's nothing
> saying you *can*. So if a ticket inspector says he is not allowing it,
> your position is indefensible.


Absolutely, but that's the same with any ticket dispute.  You can either 
  go down the argument/PF/BTP route or do what he says and argue it with 
his TOC afterwards.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:18:23 +0100, "Alan J. Flavell"
 wrote:


>I'd say that there is: the NCoC says that tickets have to be used in 
>accordance with their terms and conditions.  It goes on to say that 
>terminating short is in general permissible, except perhaps for 
>certain special offers subject to published restrictions, so we can 
>deduce that terminating short is indeed OK if nothing to the contrary 
>is published.  However, it says nothing about starting at other than 
>the starting station named on the ticket, so I can see no grounds for 
>concluding that starting at an intermediate point is permissible.


Not only that, but seasons explicitly permit validity at intermediate
stations.  The fact that they need to do this suggests that this might
not normally be the case.

However, on a ticket with break of journey permitted, it is totally
unenforceable, other than that you might find Chester booking office
refusing to sell a SVR from Shotton to London in the morning peak.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:12:09 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:


>However, on a ticket with break of journey permitted, it is totally
>unenforceable, other than that you might find Chester booking office
>refusing to sell a SVR from Shotton to London in the morning peak.


It's not unenforceable in all cases - for example, if the time of
issue printed on your ticket is sufficiently recent that it is
impossible for you to have bought the ticket, travelled from the
origin to the point where you are starting short, and broken your
journey.

Even where it is unenforceable, it would still require you to lie to
the RPI about having previously broken your journey there. If nothing
else, they may turn out to have CCTV footage (or whatever) that proves
you wrong.

Thanks to everyone who took the trouble to reply.

In the end we binned the idea of going to York and got a WY Metro Family 
Dayrover which gave the pair of us unlimited bus and rail travel withing 
West Yorks for 6.

This did highlight a couple of oddities though....

The 333's are totally wasted cruising up and down the Wharfedale line 
between Leeds / Bradford and Ilkley. These are fantastic modern trains and 
yet never seem to really get going - slight bit of acceleration and then 
tootle along at 50-ish. If these trains are available then every effort 
should be made to electrify the rest of the Metro area.

Conversely, who decided 144's were a good train for the inter-region 
Leeds-Morcambe via Lancaster "express"?
I call it an express because we went as far as Keighley and it only stopped 
at Shipley, missing out all the intermediate stations. I wouldn't have 
fancied being on that for the full 2hrs+ journey

Dave

asdf wrote:

> Even where it is unenforceable, it would still require you to lie to
> the RPI about having previously broken your journey there. If nothing
> else, they may turn out to have CCTV footage (or whatever) that proves
> you wrong.


The idea of that is rather amusing. I am trying to imagine it now "How
dare you only travel between Church Fenton and Garforth? You've paid to
go further but I have video evidence that you only travelled a shorter
distance. This is so unacceptable." Only on the railways, eh?

Of course there is nothing to stop you starting your journey short, and
should it go to Court the passenger would win every time, except
possibly with a Saver as that does not permit a Break of Journey on the
Outward portion.

The 333s cruise along at 90mph between Shipley and Leeds, you may not
realise the speed but they definitely get up to 90mph.

On 19 Aug 2005 14:37:08 -0700, "Yorkie"  wrote:


>> Even where it is unenforceable, it would still require you to lie to
>> the RPI about having previously broken your journey there. If nothing
>> else, they may turn out to have CCTV footage (or whatever) that proves
>> you wrong.
>
>The idea of that is rather amusing. I am trying to imagine it now "How
>dare you only travel between Church Fenton and Garforth? You've paid to
>go further but I have video evidence that you only travelled a shorter
>distance. This is so unacceptable." Only on the railways, eh?


I was thinking more along the lines of "how dare you lie to me and
claim you previously broke your journey here, I am sure you didn't and
I'll dig out the CCTV footage. See you in court"

Dave X wrote:

> The 333's are totally wasted cruising up and down the Wharfedale line 
> between Leeds / Bradford and Ilkley. These are fantastic modern trains and 
> yet never seem to really get going - slight bit of acceleration and then 
> tootle along at 50-ish. If these trains are available then every effort 
> should be made to electrify the rest of the Metro area.


It'd be great to have more 333s.  Sadly, one of the sticking points, I 
believe, to opening two new stations on the Airedale/Wharfedale line (at 
Apperley Bridge and Kirkstall) was that that SRA wouldn't allow the 
purchase of new 333s which were needed to maintain a good service pattern.

Perhaps once the SRA disappears, it'll be easier to get funding?

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:58:04 +0100, Mark Morton wrote:


> I tend to believe if there are no laws or rules stopping me from doing 
> something then I'm allowed to do it.  If there's nothing in the NCoC or 
> the terms and conditions of my ticket to say I can't join at an 
> intermediate station, then I'm happy to accept that I can.


That's a reasonable position to take, provided that you verify that
there is no law that would stop you doing it. 

Merely assuming that there is no such restriction isn't good for
anything. Ignorantia legis neminem* excusat.

* = Not even Eminem. ;-)
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632886.html
(33 111 at Weymouth Town, May 1985)

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:18:23 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> I'd say that there is: the NCoC says that tickets have to be used in 
> accordance with their terms and conditions.  It goes on to say that 
> terminating short is in general permissible, except perhaps for 
> certain special offers subject to published restrictions, so we can 
> deduce that terminating short is indeed OK if nothing to the contrary 
> is published.  However, it says nothing about starting at other than 
> the starting station named on the ticket, so I can see no grounds for 
> concluding that starting at an intermediate point is permissible.


But yesterday, my wife and I bought tickets at Huddersfield and then had
to start our journey at Dewsbury, because there was no space in the
Huddersfield Station Car Park. Are you saying we did something wrong?
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9633098.html
(55 011 at Peterborough, 3 Sep 1979)

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:00:49 +0000 (UTC), Dave X wrote:

> Conversely, who decided 144's were a good train for the inter-region 
> Leeds-Morcambe via Lancaster "express"?

The Carnforth curve may be a factor. Pacers screech their way round it,
but it is tight, and I don't know if a 153/5/6/8 is allowed round. Have
you ever noticed how short a 144 coach looks when it's next to a 156?


> I call it an express because we went as far as Keighley and it only stopped 
> at Shipley, missing out all the intermediate stations.

Semi-fast might be a better term.


> I wouldn't have fancied being on that for the full 2hrs+ journey

Really? That gorgeous landscape really benefits from the big windows. 
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683675.html
(50064 (Class 116) at Tyseley, 1979)

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:


> But yesterday, my wife and I bought tickets at Huddersfield and then 
> had to start our journey at Dewsbury, because there was no space in 
> the Huddersfield Station Car Park. Are you saying we did something 
> wrong?


Hang on a mo.  I'm saying that I have never seen anything, in writing, 
to make clear that what you did is acceptable, and I've seen a number 
of things that suggest that it might not be acceptable if challenged.

But now you ask me if I, personally, was accusing you of doing 
something wrong?  That's a different question altogether, and has 
little or no relevance to whether you might land up in court if a 
railway jobsworth decided to throw the book at you.

I've never quite forgotten being thrown into detention for failing to 
wear my school cap.  This had been, theoretically, compulsory for the 
entirety of my (grammar) school career, but widely ignored above about 
the 3rd form, and almost never punished unless there was some 
exacerbating factor.  Then suddenly a string of senior pupils were 
thrown into detention, me included, for failing to comply.  You'll not 
be surprised to learn that the rule was abolished, a couple of weeks 
after that, demonstrating that they were just having a last fling 
throwing chaps into detention for it first, to prove a point.  I took 
it calmly, and it must have amused the staff room no end, but the 6th 
form common room turned the school badge upside down, as a mark of 
their respect for such nonsense.

>Mark Morton wrote:
>> I'd argue that there's nothing to say you can't start your journey 
>> short.
[...]
>> If A-B-C is a valid route and you get on at B with an A-C ticket 
>> then your ticket is valid


Alan J. Flavell wrote:

>"petitio principii".  Validity isn't something that you can assume.  
>You have to verify it against the terms and conditions.  And, based on 
>the fact that terminating short is permitted in so many words (and 
>knowing that there was a time when it was prohibited), I say that if 
>starting at an intermediate point was permissible then that, too, 
>would be stated explicitly: but it is not.


Let's try a different tack: I think we can agree that some tickets
exist where the conditions attached to those tickets are not valid for
'terminating short', since it says so in NCoC 15.

Indeed, if you hold such a ticket and terminate your journey short,
the penalty for doing so (the difference in fares, blah blah) is
written in that same condition.

However, if starting your journey short (you'd be starting it long,
shirley?) is also not permitted, there is no reference to it in the
conditions, and no penalty for doing so is written down.

In other words, whilst you can't assume that it's permitted, if you do
do it and they catch you doing it there doesn't appear to be a damn
thing they can do about it.

<Cyril Fletcher> Unless, of course, you know different </mode>


>Treat this as barrack-room-lawyer mode if you will: I am not a lawyer 
>and that was not legal advice, merely my interpretation of the NCoC.


Ditto, in spades :o)

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Neil Sunderland wrote:


> However, if starting your journey short (you'd be starting it long,
> shirley?)


....which is why I've been taking care to say "starting at an 
intermediate point"...


> is also not permitted, there is no reference to it in the
> conditions, and no penalty for doing so is written down.
> 
> In other words, whilst you can't assume that it's permitted, if you do
> do it and they catch you doing it there doesn't appear to be a damn
> thing they can do about it.


I'm not so sure. If the ticket from A to C via B is deemed invalid for 
starting from B, then on presenting it for the trip from B to C you 
might be doomed to have to purchase a full price open ticket instead, 
not merely paying the difference. If the invalid ticket counts as not 
having been used, then maybe one could reclaim its fare afterwards, 
minus an admin charge - but the flip side is, one runs the risk of 
being charged with fraud for presenting a ticket which was invalid for 
the trip being undertaken.

All of this is of course hypothetical and ignoring the fact that
"they'd never be able to prove you hadn't started at A" after 
joining the train at B.


> >Treat this as barrack-room-lawyer mode if you will: I am not a lawyer 
> >and that was not legal advice, merely my interpretation of the NCoC.

"Chris Tolley"  wrote in message 
news:14m5pmkb8bl5b$.1x4t0e8d3fpj9.dlg@40tude.net...

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:00:49 +0000 (UTC), Dave X wrote:
>> Conversely, who decided 144's were a good train for the inter-region
>> Leeds-Morcambe via Lancaster "express"?
> The Carnforth curve may be a factor. Pacers screech their way round it,
> but it is tight, and I don't know if a 153/5/6/8 is allowed round. Have
> you ever noticed how short a 144 coach looks when it's next to a 156?
>
>> I call it an express because we went as far as Keighley and it only 
>> stopped
>> at Shipley, missing out all the intermediate stations.
> Semi-fast might be a better term.
>
>> I wouldn't have fancied being on that for the full 2hrs+ journey
> Really? That gorgeous landscape really benefits from the big windows.


It's always been a 142 when I've been on it.. once Lancaster - Leeds and 
once the full Morcambe - Leeds. When you have done that try a 142 or 153 
down the Cumbrian coast, about ten minutes less than four hours and two crew 
changes for Carlisle - Lancaster.  Another Great Journey of the Northwest.

KW

Neil Sunderland wrote:

> However, if starting your journey short (you'd be starting it long,
> shirley?) is also not permitted, there is no reference to it in the
> conditions, and no penalty for doing so is written down.
> 
> In other words, whilst you can't assume that it's permitted, if you do
> do it and they catch you doing it there doesn't appear to be a damn
> thing they can do about it.


Absolutely.  If starting your journey at an intermediate point was 
invalid, it should be in the NCoC or some other rules/T&C.

The fact that I don't know of any rules stopping me from standing on one 
leg outside my flat and singing 'Jerusalem' would lead me to believe 
it's permitted (but, as with anything in life, you run the risk of 
finding out later that it's not).


>>Treat this as barrack-room-lawyer mode if you will: I am not a lawyer 
>>and that was not legal advice, merely my interpretation of the NCoC.
> 
> Ditto, in spades :o)


Dittoed again.

>On Fri, 19 Aug 2005

'Twas Saturday, wasn't it?


>Neil Sunderland wrote:

[On starting at an intermediate station, with reference to the rules
on terminating short which I haven't quoted this time]

>> However, if starting your journey short (you'd be starting it long,
>> shirley?)


Alan J. Flavell wrote:

>...which is why I've been taking care to say "starting at an 
>intermediate point"...


I was quoting Mark Morton. Any suggestion that I didn't read your post
properly is a slur, by the way. </Jamesie Cotter>


>Neil Sunderland again:
>> is also not permitted, there is no reference to it in the
>> conditions, and no penalty for doing so is written down.
>> 
>> In other words, whilst you can't assume that it's permitted, if you do
>> do it and they catch you doing it there doesn't appear to be a damn
>> thing they can do about it.


Alan J. Flavell:

>I'm not so sure. If the ticket from A to C via B is deemed invalid for 
>starting from B, then on presenting it for the trip from B to C you 
>might be doomed to have to purchase a full price open ticket instead, 
>not merely paying the difference.


The rules used to clearly state that you could not terminate your
journey short, but (if previous postings are to be believed) those
rules had to be changed when:

On Jun 18 2004, Tim Rogers wrote:
[On terminating short]

>I believe this was challenged in court within the last 10 years. There was
>some case where someone bought a ticket for London to Destination C and
>always got off at B because London to C was cheaper than London to B (cannot
>remember the stations involved). The Railway (or TOC)Tried to take the
>person to court for fare evasion but the case was thrown out. 


If a court finds that the published rules are unfair and should be
changed, it's not altogether unreasonable that they are going to
consider unpublished rules of a broadly similar nature equally unfair.

The only way to resolve this properly, of course, is to persuade
muggins^W someone to undertake a journey with a theoretically invalid
ticket, and for them to insist on being prosecuted so that the rules
can be properly scrutinised by a body with the authority to change
them.

If you keep telling everyone that their ticket might not be valid,
that ain't gonna happen ;-)


>All of this is of course hypothetical 


A-B via Hypothetical is fine provided it's the shortest route. The
Routeing Guide is silent on whether a journey via Spurious is valid,
unfortunately.

Anyone know how much the excess would be if I returned via Raving
Bonkers?


>>>Treat this as barrack-room-lawyer mode if you will: I am not a lawyer 
>>>and that was not legal advice, merely my interpretation of the NCoC.


It might be easier to put that in our sigs :o)

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

"Chris Tolley"  wrote


> The Carnforth curve may be a factor. Pacers screech their way round it,
> but it is tight, and I don't know if a 153/5/6/8 is allowed round.


Does anyone know of a line which is passed for 14x but barred to 23m 15x
stock because clearance is deemed unaffordable? In the West of England the
reverse is the case - 14x stock (there named Skippers) were barred from
several of the branches because they couldn't cope with the curves, and 153s
are now used.

Peter

"Peter Masson"  wrote in message 
news:de6ufq$lpu$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

> "Chris Tolley"  wrote
>
>> The Carnforth curve may be a factor. Pacers screech their way round it,
>> but it is tight, and I don't know if a 153/5/6/8 is allowed round.
>
> Does anyone know of a line which is passed for 14x but barred to 23m 15x
> stock because clearance is deemed unaffordable? In the West of England the
> reverse is the case - 14x stock (there named Skippers) were barred from
> several of the branches because they couldn't cope with the curves, and 
> 153s
> are now used.


Staying completely OT....

        I have never seen a 14x on the Bolton- Blackburn line. Anyone know 
if they are NOT allowed on this track?

KW.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:58:06 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:
>> My wife and I bought tickets at Huddersfield and then had to start
>> our journey at Dewsbury, because there was no space in the Hudd
>> Station Car Park. Are you saying we did something wrong?
> Hang on a mo.  I'm saying that I have never seen anything, in writing, 
> to make clear that what you did is acceptable, and I've seen a number 
> of things that suggest that it might not be acceptable if challenged.
> But now you ask me if I, personally, was accusing you of doing 
> something wrong?  That's a different question altogether


Can't see why. Tickets don't make their way around the railway on their
own - people carry them. The fact that my question lets you identify the
two people and the location doesn't change the substance of the issue at
all. I wasn't intending to sue for libel on the basis of the answer!
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13309738.html
(47 365 at Birmingham New Street, 15 Sep 1979)

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Neil Sunderland wrote:


> >On Fri, 19 Aug 2005
> 'Twas Saturday, wasn't it?


Cross-checking with Google Groups, it seems you posted at

  Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:52:50 GMT

also known as Local: Sat, Aug 20 2005 12:52 am

It appears that my newsreader used the GMT/UTC date for the purpose - 
I can't say that I'd ever noticed that detail before.


> >> However, if starting your journey short (you'd be starting it long,
> >> shirley?)
> 
> Alan J. Flavell wrote:
> >...which is why I've been taking care to say "starting at an 
> >intermediate point"...
> 
> I was quoting Mark Morton. Any suggestion that I didn't read your post
> properly is a slur, by the way. 


I hadn't intended any such suggestion to be expressed or implied.  


> If a court finds that the published rules are unfair and should be 
> changed, it's not altogether unreasonable that they are going to 
> consider unpublished rules of a broadly similar nature equally 
> unfair.


Fair comment.


> If you keep telling everyone that their ticket might not be valid,
> that ain't gonna happen ;-)


Likewise.

I'll express one more set of personal opinions, then I'll leave it.

1.  If one uses a ticket from A to C via B, and tries to start the 
journey from B, then I think it's on the cards that some "authorised 
person" *might* declare the ticket invalid for the journey, and act 
accordingly.  (I think that's more likely to happen if the ticket from 
A to C cost less than one from B to C, but that's by the by.)

2. If that were to happen, I'd expect the railway to uphold the 
decision in the event of a complaint, and there's nothing explicit in 
the NCoC to contradict them.

3. I doubt that the decision, once taken, would be reversed without a 
laborious court case - maybe even an appeal.


> >>>Treat this as barrack-room-lawyer mode if you will: I am not a lawyer 
> >>>and that was not legal advice, 

> It might be easier to put that in our sigs :o)


;-) - but I must investigate "roles", as I could hardly risk that kind 
of sig getting into my "day job" postings or mails!

cheers

"Alan J. Flavell"  wrote

>
> I'll express one more set of personal opinions, then I'll leave it.
>
> 1.  If one uses a ticket from A to C via B, and tries to start the
> journey from B, then I think it's on the cards that some "authorised
> person" *might* declare the ticket invalid for the journey, and act
> accordingly.  (I think that's more likely to happen if the ticket from
> A to C cost less than one from B to C, but that's by the by.)
>
> 2. If that were to happen, I'd expect the railway to uphold the
> decision in the event of a complaint, and there's nothing explicit in
> the NCoC to contradict them.
>
> 3. I doubt that the decision, once taken, would be reversed without a
> laborious court case - maybe even an appeal.
>

I suspect that, if the passenger followed this up with a County Court small
claim (the only court case realistically available), the railway wouldn't
challenge the claim - it would be too expensive to do so (legal costs are
not recoverable) and a County Court judgment is not a legally binding
precedent. Then, in short order, the A to C fare would be increased to equal
the B to C fare, unless there are good reasons for continuing the anomaly
(as with the Shotton/Chester - London Saver conditions).

Peter

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 09:51:54 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
 wrote:


>Does anyone know of a line which is passed for 14x but barred to 23m 15x
>stock because clearance is deemed unaffordable? In the West of England the
>reverse is the case - 14x stock (there named Skippers) were barred from
>several of the branches because they couldn't cope with the curves, and 153s
>are now used.


153s do work the line, but a 142 is better for the views it affords.

Do the line while you can; I wouldn't be surprised if it (or at least
Barrow-Whitehaven) is quite high up the closure list, especially once
Sellafield is done with.  It's Permitted on most walk-on tickets that
involve the WCML via Lancaster and Carlisle, AFAICT[1], but you will
get laughs from traincrew wondering why you're taking a 4-hour journey
instead of a 1-hour one.

Once, during weekend drags, I did Preston-Carlisle-Preston on a normal
ticket, out via S&C and back via the Coast.  What a contrast.  Both
beautiful lines, but in utterly different ways.

[1] The maps in the Routeing Guide showing the WCML between Lancaster
and Carlisle generally show a loop going to the left.  Whether that is
supposed to be the Carnforth line or the Coast I'm not sure, but
because no stations are shown on it I see no reason why it couldn't be
interpreted to be either.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Neil Williams wrote:


> Once, during weekend drags, I did Preston-Carlisle-Preston on a normal
> ticket, out via S&C and back via the Coast.  What a contrast.  Both
> beautiful lines, but in utterly different ways.


Boring, un-enterprising BR would sell you a special cheap
'round-robin' ticket for this type of trip. I remember well
that my very first day out with Joanna back in 1981 was a
Round Robin ticket Manchester - Sheffield - Leeds - Carlisle -
Barrow - Lancaster - Manchester. And _still_ she married me!

Charlie

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:37:36 GMT, Charlie Hulme
 wrote:


>Boring, un-enterprising BR would sell you a special cheap
>'round-robin' ticket for this type of trip. I remember well
>that my very first day out with Joanna back in 1981 was a
>Round Robin ticket Manchester - Sheffield - Leeds - Carlisle -
>Barrow - Lancaster - Manchester. And _still_ she married me!


A North West 3-in-7 Rover would cover it (and a lot more) for not all
that much more than a return from Preston, or certainly Manchester, to
Carlisle, I reckon.

Shame the Day Ranger no longer exists for this area.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Charlie Hulme  wrote:

>
>Boring, un-enterprising BR would sell you a special cheap
>'round-robin' ticket for this type of trip. I remember well
>that my very first day out with Joanna back in 1981 was a
>Round Robin ticket Manchester - Sheffield - Leeds - Carlisle -
>Barrow - Lancaster - Manchester. And _still_ she married me!



Hmmm.  "First date on a railway" normally equals "last date".

You're a very lucky man.  But I suspect you knew that already.

;-)

"Alan J. Flavell"  writes:


> It goes on to say that 
> terminating short is in general permissible, except perhaps for 
> certain special offers subject to published restrictions, so we can 
> deduce that terminating short is indeed OK if nothing to the contrary 
> is published.  However, it says nothing about starting at other than 
> the starting station named on the ticket, so I can see no grounds for 
> concluding that starting at an intermediate point is permissible.


On a number of occasions I have purchased a return ticket, for
immediate travel, valid from 2 stations prior to the one at which I
purchased it and boarded the train. On the return journey I have
travelled to the station named on the ticket.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:49:06 +0100, Graham Murray
 wrote:


>On a number of occasions I have purchased a return ticket, for
>immediate travel, valid from 2 stations prior to the one at which I
>purchased it and boarded the train. On the return journey I have
>travelled to the station named on the ticket.


As have I.

I do wonder what would happen to someone intending to do either of the
following in the peak, by way of a Saver Return:-
1. Travel from Shotton to Chester, then Chester to London, then back
to Chester but not on to Shotton;
2. Travel from Chester to London, then back to Chester, then on to
Shotton.

#2 is clearly permitted.  Why shouldn't #1 be?

Let's take #1 further.  The ticket is purchased at Chester very early
in the morning by a shift worker, who needs to return home to Shotton
by car before then travelling by train to Chester, then on to London.
Other than by following him from the ticket office to the train, how
do they prove he actually does go back to Shotton then board the train
there?

Mind you, I personally do not understand why the North Wales Coast
should be spared peak-time fares, and in particular why Chester (with
a frequent, quick service to Crewe with connections) should also be
spared it, while Aughton Park (with a frequent, quick service to
Liverpool with connections) should not, for example.  I think the
sensible way to plug the gap would be to make the Coast SO-only in the
peak as well.  And, yes, I would also extend that to Edinburgh and the
likes.  We are, after all, talking about the same actual trains.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:53:41 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:


>#2 is clearly permitted.  Why shouldn't #1 be?


Which should of course have read "#1 is clearly permitted, why
shouldn't #2 be?"

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

John Turner wrote:


> I had to do an evening in York last week and because my departure was 
> after the evening closure of the park & ride system it meant I had to 
> use a city centre car park.


The Askham Bar P&R site (Tadcaster Road) is open til late, Monday to
Saturday, with buses leaving the city every half hour until midnight.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

"Yorkie"  writes:


> The idea of that is rather amusing. I am trying to imagine it now "How
> dare you only travel between Church Fenton and Garforth? You've paid to
> go further but I have video evidence that you only travelled a shorter
> distance. This is so unacceptable." Only on the railways, eh?


At least some traditional airlines do actually do something like that.
If you try to use an A-B-C-B-A ticket B-C-B (or even A-B-C-B) and that
ticket is considerably cheaper than a B-C-B ticket of the same type
(usually due to A and B being in considerably different markets for
the company), the airline can request that the passenger pay the price
difference (or simply not allow that at all). This is of course much
easier to enforce if the passenger has luggage to check.

"Charlie Hulme"  wrote in message 
news:4CENe.10779$6i5.9300@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...

> Neil Williams wrote:
>
>> Once, during weekend drags, I did Preston-Carlisle-Preston on a normal
>> ticket, out via S&C and back via the Coast.  What a contrast.  Both
>> beautiful lines, but in utterly different ways.
>
> Boring, un-enterprising BR would sell you a special cheap
> 'round-robin' ticket for this type of trip. I remember well
> that my very first day out with Joanna back in 1981 was a
> Round Robin ticket Manchester - Sheffield - Leeds - Carlisle -
> Barrow - Lancaster - Manchester. And _still_ she married me!



I took a Manchester "Round Robin" to experience the new 125mph. HST's.
Manchester - Bristol - Paddington -(tube) -  Euston - Manchester.

Can't remember the fare, but it must have been a bargain!


KW.

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:43071802.10841779@news.tesco.net...

> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:37:36 GMT, Charlie Hulme
>  wrote:
>
>>Boring, un-enterprising BR would sell you a special cheap
>>'round-robin' ticket for this type of trip. I remember well
>>that my very first day out with Joanna back in 1981 was a
>>Round Robin ticket Manchester - Sheffield - Leeds - Carlisle -
>>Barrow - Lancaster - Manchester. And _still_ she married me!
>
> A North West 3-in-7 Rover would cover it (and a lot more) for not all
> that much more than a return from Preston, or certainly Manchester, to
> Carlisle, I reckon.
>
> Shame the Day Ranger no longer exists for this area.


A "Northern Rail" Day Ranger would be great, and I would pay a couple of 
quid extra for TPX and Virgin within the area.
If only!

KW

Alan J. Flavell wrote:

>I'll express one more set of personal opinions, then I'll leave it.
>
>1.  If one uses a ticket from A to C via B, and tries to start the 
>journey from B, then I think it's on the cards that some "authorised 
>person" *might* declare the ticket invalid for the journey, and act 
>accordingly.  (I think that's more likely to happen if the ticket from 
>A to C cost less than one from B to C, but that's by the by.)
>
>2. If that were to happen, I'd expect the railway to uphold the 
>decision in the event of a complaint, and there's nothing explicit in 
>the NCoC to contradict them.
>
>3. I doubt that the decision, once taken, would be reversed without a 
>laborious court case - maybe even an appeal.


Can't argue with any of that!

Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon

NP: J. Strauss - Trish-trash Polka

Ken Ward wrote:


> 
> I took a Manchester "Round Robin" to experience the new 125mph. HST's.
> Manchester - Bristol - Paddington -(tube) -  Euston - Manchester.
> 
> Can't remember the fare, but it must have been a bargain!
> 


And then there were the once-a-year _free_ day returns to anywhere
on BR for 'Journey Club' members (Annual Season Ticket Holders)
and their nominated partners. ISTR we travelled from Manchester
to Arrochar & Tarbet and back one year (paying for a ticket to Wigan
to get past midnight) and Manchester - Exeter - Waterloo - Euston
- Manchester the next ...

Charlie

On 20 Aug 2005 21:19:47 +0300, Otto-Ville.Ronkainen@ling.helsinki.fi
(O-V R:nen) wrote:


>"Yorkie"  writes:
>
>> The idea of that is rather amusing. I am trying to imagine it now "How
>> dare you only travel between Church Fenton and Garforth? You've paid to
>> go further but I have video evidence that you only travelled a shorter
>> distance. This is so unacceptable." Only on the railways, eh?
>
>At least some traditional airlines do actually do something like that.
>If you try to use an A-B-C-B-A ticket B-C-B (or even A-B-C-B) and that
>ticket is considerably cheaper than a B-C-B ticket of the same type
>(usually due to A and B being in considerably different markets for
>the company), the airline can request that the passenger pay the price
>difference (or simply not allow that at all). This is of course much
>easier to enforce if the passenger has luggage to check.


There is your standard full fare ticket, which has a nominal mileage
allowance between origin and destination. As long as you don't exceed
this mileage, and don't double back, you can have unlimited
intermediate points. You can also use any IATA airline as well.

What you have in this case is a special ticket, usually limited to one
airline, intended to encourage travel via its main hub. I knew a man
who used to travel Frankfurt-Heathrow-Seoul by BA, as the cost was
about 1/3rd of the Lufthansa fare for a direct flight.
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:53:41 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:


>I do wonder what would happen to someone intending to do either of the
>following in the peak, by way of a Saver Return:-
>1. Travel from Shotton to Chester, then Chester to London, then back
>to Chester but not on to Shotton;
>2. Travel from Chester to London, then back to Chester, then on to
>Shotton.
>
>#1 is clearly permitted.  Why shouldn't #2 be?


The ability to abandon your journey short of your destination is
important - not being able to do so could almost be considered false
imprisonment. If you become ill, or receive a phone call requiring
your urgent presence elsewhere, or for any other reason, you should
not be forced to continue your journey to the destination on your
ticket. (Obviously this is particularly relevant if the ticket does
not allow BoJ.)

This is clearly different from "starting short", which is something
you'd normally only do to avoid paying a higher fare.

It's a bit like using tickets from A to B and B to C on a train from A
to C via B, that doesn't stop at B - common sense says you've paid for
the entire journey so it ought to be allowed, and yet it isn't,
because (I've always assumed) normally the only reason to do it would
be to avoid paying a higher fare.


>Let's take #1 further.  The ticket is purchased at Chester very early
>in the morning by a shift worker, who needs to return home to Shotton
>by car before then travelling by train to Chester, then on to London.
>Other than by following him from the ticket office to the train, how
>do they prove he actually does go back to Shotton then board the train
>there?


I don't see why they'd want to prove he does. If they want to prove he
doesn't, they could ask him - if he says he didn't, they've got him.
Otherwise, it'd be easy if there was insufficient time between the
time of purchase of the ticket (printed on the ticket) and the time of
departure of the train to London for him to have gone to Shotton. If
not, and if they really wanted to make an example of him, they could
always check CCTV footage.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:41:27 +0100, "Alan J. Flavell"
 wrote:


>I'll express one more set of personal opinions, then I'll leave it.
>
>1.  If one uses a ticket from A to C via B, and tries to start the 
>journey from B, then I think it's on the cards that some "authorised 
>person" *might* declare the ticket invalid for the journey, and act 
>accordingly.  (I think that's more likely to happen if the ticket from 
>A to C cost less than one from B to C, but that's by the by.)
>
>2. If that were to happen, I'd expect the railway to uphold the 
>decision in the event of a complaint, and there's nothing explicit in 
>the NCoC to contradict them.
>
>3. I doubt that the decision, once taken, would be reversed without a 
>laborious court case - maybe even an appeal.


I hate to do a "me too" post, but I wholeheartedly agree with this
conclusion.

asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid> writes:


> This is clearly different from "starting short", which is something
> you'd normally only do to avoid paying a higher fare.


There are other reasons as well. I have done this many times for 2
reasons,

1) Where station A and B are both close to where I live, but B is much
   closer than A but many services do not stop at B but do stop at A.

2) When my work is near station A and I live near station B and have
   to visit C before going to work (eg a hospital appointment at C)

The message <14m5pmkb8bl5b$.1x4t0e8d3fpj9.dlg@40tude.net>
from Chris Tolley  contains these words:


> The Carnforth curve may be a factor. Pacers screech their way round it,
> but it is tight, and I don't know if a 153/5/6/8 is allowed round. Have
> you ever noticed how short a 144 coach looks when it's next to a 156?


Carnforth - Leeds behind 46229 in a train of Mk.1s didn't seem to be a
problem.  There was some squealing (IIRC, I can't find the recording
ATM), but DoH was accelerating all the way round the curve.
[OT. That was a crackin' trip, with 3 photographic run-pasts at
Wennington (DoH) and two at Hellifield (Leander)]

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

"Stevie D"  wrote


> The Askham Bar P&R site (Tadcaster Road) is open til late, Monday to
> Saturday, with buses leaving the city every half hour until midnight.


I think you'll find that Hull is on exactly the opposite side of York to 
Tadcaster Road, and I've already said its use would have increased my return 
journey time by at least 30 minutes.

For Park & Ride systems to work they have to be convenient to the users. 
Askham Bar wouldn't pass this test for those living to the east of York.

John.

In article <dek04u$t40$1@newsreaderg1.core.theplanet.net>,
   John Turner <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > The Askham Bar P&R site (Tadcaster Road) is open til late, Monday to
> > Saturday, with buses leaving the city every half hour until midnight.

> I think you'll find that Hull is on exactly the opposite side of York to
> Tadcaster Road, and I've already said its use would have increased my
> return journey time by at least 30 minutes.

> For Park & Ride systems to work they have to be convenient to the users. 
> Askham Bar wouldn't pass this test for those living to the east of York.


There is another Park & Ride where the Hull Road joins that from
Bridlington.

-- 
David Wild using RISC OS on broadband

John Turner wrote:


> I think you'll find that Hull is on exactly the opposite side of York 
> to Tadcaster Road, and I've already said its use would have increased 
> my return journey time by at least 30 minutes.


Yes, I'd written my reply before I read your second message saying
where you lived...

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

David H Wild wrote:


> There is another Park & Ride where the Hull Road joins that from
> Bridlington.


Which closes at 8pm - the OP was staying later than that.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

"David H Wild"  wrote


> There is another Park & Ride where the Hull Road joins that from
> Bridlington.


I've used that several times, but never been overly impressed by the length 
of time taken to actually get on a bus and get into the city.  It's still 
much quicker to drive into York although the parking charges are a killer.

John.