I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way) and when I purchased
the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I was sold (which I didn't
notice until I got home later that day) was called a "STD Day Single".

The cost of a cheap day single is 9.50. According to National Rail
Enquiries Online the only other fares available for this journey are
Saver Single at 14.10 (not valid on first train), Standard Open Single
for 17.50 or First Open Single for 28.00

The cheap day return ticket is listed on this site as valid on all the
trains that run between Reading and Pewsey on weekdays (when I 
travelled). The ticket I was sold was priced 17.50 so is the same price
as a Standard Open Single but the ticket described itself as a STD Day
Single which doesn't even seem to exist.

I wrote to First Great Western requesting a refund of the difference
between the price of the Cheap Day Single and STD Day Single I was sold 
and pointed out that I did request a Cheap Day Single when purchasing
the ticket.

Their response is below (in full):-

"Thank you for contacting us. I was concerned to hear that your journey
was not as pleasant as it should have been as a result of a different 
ticket being issued than the one you ask for.

However I am unable to offer any compensation as the National 
Conditions of Carriage does specify it is the customers responsibility
to check that the correct tickets have been issued. The STD Day Single
ticket that you have purchased is also known as the Standard Open
Single which was quoted to you by National Rail Enquiries and is the
correct fare for the journey you made.

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention, and I am sorry I
cannot be of further assistance."

Obviously it seems now FGW have got my money there not going to give
it back and blame me for not checking the ticket.

This raises a few points:-

I was under the impression train companies were obliged to sell the
cheapest ticket for a journey. Since the Cheap Day Single is actually
valid on *every* train between Reading and Pewsey this would be the
cheapest ticket. However I cannot find any reference in the conditions 
of carriage that state this. Can anyone confirm if this is the case?

Why is there even such a fare as the Standard Open Single on this route
given that the Cheap Day Single offers the exact same validity as the
open ticket?

Is the Standard Open Single really the same as a "STD Day Single". If
so why the different names for an identical ticket?

Thanks for any help!

Jon.

> Thanks for any help!
>

Don't take NO for an answer... Most companies will bat it off first time, in 
the hope you go away.  Had you asked for a Standard single, then it is your 
problem- you got what you asked for, but if you asked for a cheap day 
single, then that's what you should get, perhaps after a question or two 
from the salesperson ( in case its not valid via route xyz or something).

Just how are you expected when standing at a ticket office window to check 
that you are issued with the correct ticket- carry a fares manual with you.. 
It is not practical or possible when purchasing a ticket which you only 
purchase occasionally, or perhaps as a one off, that it is indeed a cheap 
day single.....
Have another go at FGW, writing for the attention to the CE, whose name you 
find somewhere on their site- or google.

Jon Combe wrote/quoted:


> However I am unable to offer any compensation as the National 
> Conditions of Carriage does specify it is the customers responsibility
> to check that the correct tickets have been issued. 


   I had this a few years back with Virgin selling me a Saver rather 
than a CDR. I tried pointing out that as this was a one-off trip (and 
this was before prices were available online) there was no way for me to 
know which tickets were available got me nowhere so I'm afraid I think 
you are stuck.


>  Since the Cheap Day Single is actually
> valid on *every* train between Reading and Pewsey this would be the
> cheapest ticket.


   Cheap Day tickets tend to only be available after 9:30 but I believe 
there are local variations on this so I can't comment.


> Why is there even such a fare as the Standard Open Single on this route
> given that the Cheap Day Single offers the exact same validity as the
> open ticket?


   Standard Open tickets tended to be a sort of 'reference' and any 
discounted tickets were based on their cost. This no longer applies 
AFAIK as only certain ticket types are regulated.

> Don't take NO for an answer... Most companies will bat it off first time, in 
> the hope you go away.  Had you asked for a Standard single, then it is your 
> problem- you got what you asked for, but if you asked for a cheap day 
> single, then that's what you should get, perhaps after a question or two 
> from the salesperson ( in case its not valid via route xyz or something).


Well in this case all the trains that go to Pewsey also stop at Reading so
there are no other routes to take! Also the cheap day ticket is valid on
every train on that route so I can't see why they should *ever* sell the more
expensive ticket anyway (other than to make more profit of course!)


> 
> Just how are you expected when standing at a ticket office window to check 
> that you are issued with the correct ticket- carry a fares manual with you.. 
> It is not practical or possible when purchasing a ticket which you only 
> purchase occasionally, or perhaps as a one off, that it is indeed a cheap 
> day single.....
> Have another go at FGW, writing for the attention to the CE, whose name you 
> find somewhere on their site- or google. 


The Managaing Directory is Alison Forster, not sure if there is a CE (Cheif
Executive?) as well. However she has a written a piece at the front of the
timetable saying "You can contact me through our Customer Relations 
department" so not sure that would get a result. As an aside I'm not even
sure where they are based any more. The letter I got had a postmark of 
Plymouth but the letter head gives an address in Reading!

Jon.


> 
> 

"Jon Combe"  wrote in message
news:slrndgpjc1.3qd.joncombe@joncombe.com...

> I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way) and when I purchased
> the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I was sold (which I didn't
> notice until I got home later that day) was called a "STD Day Single".
>
> The cost of a cheap day single is 9.50. According to National Rail
> Enquiries Online the only other fares available for this journey are
> Saver Single at 14.10 (not valid on first train), Standard Open Single
> for 17.50 or First Open Single for 28.00
>
> The cheap day return ticket is listed on this site as valid on all the
> trains that run between Reading and Pewsey on weekdays (when I
> travelled). The ticket I was sold was priced 17.50 so is the same price
> as a Standard Open Single but the ticket described itself as a STD Day
> Single which doesn't even seem to exist.
>
> I wrote to First Great Western requesting a refund of the difference
> between the price of the Cheap Day Single and STD Day Single I was sold
> and pointed out that I did request a Cheap Day Single when purchasing
> the ticket.
>
> Their response is below (in full):-
>
> "Thank you for contacting us. I was concerned to hear that your journey
> was not as pleasant as it should have been as a result of a different
> ticket being issued than the one you ask for.
>
> However I am unable to offer any compensation as the National
> Conditions of Carriage does specify it is the customers responsibility
> to check that the correct tickets have been issued. The STD Day Single
> ticket that you have purchased is also known as the Standard Open
> Single which was quoted to you by National Rail Enquiries and is the
> correct fare for the journey you made.
>
> Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention, and I am sorry I
> cannot be of further assistance."
>

If you are sold the wrong ticket, the National Conditions of Carriage
require you either to draw the ticket clerk's attention to the error at the
time, or, when requesting a refund afterwards, to show to the TOC's
reasonable satisfaction that you were in fact sold the wrong ticket. The
TOC's passenger charter (I've checked the GNER one, as I can't find the FGW
one in a very quick look on their website) require ticket offices to give
impartial advice and to sell the most appropriate ticket for your journey.
It seems from what you say that the CDS was the most appropriate ticket,
that it was unreasonable for you to insist on holding up the queue while you
demanded to consult the fares manual, and that you can show to reasonable
satisfaction that you were sold the wrong ticket.
From this I would suggest that you should refer the matter back to FGW. You
might even suggest that, if they don't make the refund or give you a good
reason why they should not, you will refer the matter to the County Court
under the small claims procedure. My guess is that they'll give in, though
probably hedge it about with 'as a gesture of goodwill on this occasion'.

Peter

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:12:33 GMT, Stephen Hughes 
wrote:


>Jon Combe wrote/quoted:
>
>> However I am unable to offer any compensation as the National 
>> Conditions of Carriage does specify it is the customers responsibility
>> to check that the correct tickets have been issued. 
>
>   I had this a few years back with Virgin selling me a Saver rather 
>than a CDR. I tried pointing out that as this was a one-off trip (and 
>this was before prices were available online) there was no way for me to 
>know which tickets were available got me nowhere so I'm afraid I think 
>you are stuck.
>


Don't let yourself be fobbed off with the first reply. It usually
takes at least two attempts to get any company, whatever their
industry, to admit they made a mistake.

If after going back to FGW you are still not satisfied with their
reply take it up with the RPC. Full details of how to complain are on
their website http://www.railpassengers.org.uk/Council/Complaints


David Harby

"Jon Combe"  wrote in message 
news:slrndgploi.450.joncombe@joncombe.com...

>> Don't take NO for an answer... Most companies will bat it off first time, 
>> in
>> the hope you go away.  Had you asked for a Standard single, then it is 
>> your
>> problem- you got what you asked for, but if you asked for a cheap day
>> single, then that's what you should get, perhaps after a question or two
>> from the salesperson ( in case its not valid via route xyz or something).
>
> Well in this case all the trains that go to Pewsey also stop at Reading so
> there are no other routes to take! Also the cheap day ticket is valid on
> every train on that route so I can't see why they should *ever* sell the 
> more
> expensive ticket anyway (other than to make more profit of course!)


The Cheap Day Single is only valid on trains leaving Reading after 0900. As 
the first train from Reading to Pewsey is the 0905 the restriction doesn't 
make any difference. However I suspect that in the past there was probably a 
train to Pewsey that left before 0900 and although the train no longer runs 
noone has bothered to change the tickets available.

Peter Smyth

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Jon Combe wrote:


> I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way)


Don't know anything about those specific places, so this is pure 
theory...


> and when I purchased the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I 
> was sold (which I didn't notice until I got home later that day) was 
> called a "STD Day Single".


A pity you didn't pick this up at the time.  Now it's, at best, your 
word against theirs.


[...their answer, which appears, as usual, to be an answer to a 
question tangentially different from the one you asked, snipped...]


As you'll have presumably checked, the NCoC says:

19. Please check tickets and change at the time they are issued

When you buy a ticket, you should make sure that it is valid for the 
journey you want to make and that you have received the correct 
change. If possible, you should tell staff about any apparent errors 
        ^^^^^^^^^^^
at that time. If you do not, the Train Company or travel agent which 
sold you the ticket will only consider claims about any errors if you 
can show to its reasonable satisfaction that an error was made. 


....and in their answer, they've clearly picked this point up, and 
presumably intend to rely on it.

<barrack-room-lawyer> 
By buying a ticket, you accepted that condition, unfortunately, so 
unless a court can be persuaded that it was an unfair condition to be 
imposed on a retail customer, it seems you're now in a position where 
it's up to *you* to convince the *company* that an error was made when 
they failed to sell you the ticket which you asked for. 
</>


> I was under the impression train companies were obliged to sell the
> cheapest ticket for a journey. 


*But* you asked for a specific ticket, not for the cheapest.[1]  Don't
water down your claim by claiming for something that you didn't ask 
for!  If you've described the situation accurately here, then your 
claim seems to be that they purported to sell you what you asked for, 
but you only afterwards discovered that it was something else, that 
was significantly more expensive.

IANAL and this was not legal advice, but you asked for a specific 
ticket and they apparently, without comment, sold you something 
different, at a significantly higher price.  That's not acceptable.  
But at this remove, you're *still* stuck with your word against 
theirs, and additionally hampered by the fact that by accepting the 
ticket, you appear to have accepted the NCoC, including that dubious 
item 19.


Can you really be bothered?  They're of course relying on the fact 
that for 10 quid or so, you aren't prepared to invest as much of your 
time and effort to get restitution as will, in the end with several 
exchanges of email, probably be worth 100 or more of your time, 
knowing, as you do, that there will be essentially no chance of 
getting the incidental costs of your claim defrayed over and above a 
refund of the difference in the ticket price.  It's up to you to 
decide whether the principle is more important to you than making an 
even greater loss (in your time and effort) than you've already made.

<aside> 
A colleague once deliberately went to court, knowing that it would 
cost him over 1000 in fees and legal bills, even though the best 
outcome he could hope for was a mere 100 compensation.  But he did it 
for a principle, and after he had won the case - and lost the 1000 or 
so, plus his own time and effort - he still said it had been the right 
thing to do.  But not everyone is so sure.  (I don't know what it cost 
his loser in their court costs and legal support!).
</>

good luck.

[1]If you think[2] that you know the cheapest fare: in future, it 
might be advisable to say something like "I want the cheapest fare 
from A to B (giving any details of specific trains and times) and I 
think it's the cheap day single, isn't it?", and then taking careful 
note of the answer.  If you later discover that the answer was false, 
*then* you have what you'd need to tackle that NCoC section 19 which 
you have currently fallen foul of, since the error was clearly 
committed by them and not by you, and in such a case it really was not 
"possible" to tell the staff about their error at the time.

I repeat, IANAL and that was not legal advice.


[2] But if you know a cheaper fare which involves split tickets, then 
*you* have to take the risk of asking for those, since *they* are only 
supposed to advise customers about *end to end* tickets.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:41:53 +0100, Jon Combe 
wrote:


>I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way) and when I purchased
>the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I was sold (which I didn't
>notice until I got home later that day) was called a "STD Day Single".
>
>The cost of a cheap day single is 9.50. According to National Rail
>Enquiries Online the only other fares available for this journey are
>Saver Single at 14.10 (not valid on first train), Standard Open Single
>for 17.50 or First Open Single for 28.00
>
>
>Their response is below (in full):-
>
>"Thank you for contacting us. I was concerned to hear that your journey
>was not as pleasant as it should have been as a result of a different 
>ticket being issued than the one you ask for.
>
>However I am unable to offer any compensation as the National 
>Conditions of Carriage does specify it is the customers responsibility
>to check that the correct tickets have been issued. The STD Day Single
>ticket that you have purchased is also known as the Standard Open
>Single which was quoted to you by National Rail Enquiries and is the
>correct fare for the journey you made.
>
>
>Jon.


Speaking as someone who has worked in the retail side of the rail
industry for many years, this reply is totally wrong! Providing you
were travelling at a time when the CDS is valid for the journey, the
TOC is obliged to sell you the cheapest ticket  - you don't need to
know the conditions of each product before you ask for a ticket..! You
need to argue this one and you *will* get a refund.

This even applies if you weren't told of an available discount. Say,
for example, that you arrived at a ticket office and asked for a Saver
Return from Reading to Inverness, and were obviously under 26. If the
salesperson just sells you the ticket without suggesting buying a YP
Railcard, you would be entitled to claim a refund later because you
hadn't been given full information on the best deal available. Even if
you never used the YP Railcard again you save money on this journey
alone. (Of course, if you were offered the Railcard but couldn't
provide the necessary photo or ID, that would be down to you, but at
least it should be offered.)

Good luck and keep us informed!

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 21:52:08 +0100, "Peter Smyth"
 wrote:


>The Cheap Day Single is only valid on trains leaving Reading after 0900. As 
>the first train from Reading to Pewsey is the 0905 the restriction doesn't 
>make any difference. However I suspect that in the past there was probably a 
>train to Pewsey that left before 0900 and although the train no longer runs 
>noone has bothered to change the tickets available.
>


Also when the OP said the CDR valid on 'all trains', was that just
assuming that if it was valid on the first few it was valid all day? I
suspect that the more expensive fares are for the evening peak (during
which restrictions apply on most FGW routes down from Reading), and
also for morning trains from Pewsey to Reading.

David Harby wrote:


> Don't let yourself be fobbed off with the first reply. It usually
> takes at least two attempts to get any company, whatever their
> industry, to admit they made a mistake.


   IMEx you are lucky to get a reply to the second and subsequent 
attempts... Or if you do it's as useless as the first one was. Sad to 
say but most organisations seem to spend more time working out ways to 
fob off complainants than actually looking in to complaints and doing 
something about them.

>On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Jon Combe wrote:
>> I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way)
>> and when I purchased the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I 
>> was sold (which I didn't notice until I got home later that day) was 
>> called a "STD Day Single".


Alan J. Flavell wrote:

>A pity you didn't pick this up at the time.  Now it's, at best, your 
>word against theirs.
>
>As you'll have presumably checked, the NCoC says:
>
>19. Please check tickets and change at the time they are issued
>
>When you buy a ticket, you should make sure that it is valid for the 
>journey you want to make and that you have received the correct 
>change. If possible, you should tell staff about any apparent errors 
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^
>at that time. If you do not, the Train Company or travel agent which 
>sold you the ticket will only consider claims about any errors if you 
>can show to its reasonable satisfaction that an error was made. 
>
>...and in their answer, they've clearly picked this point up, and 
>presumably intend to rely on it.

><barrack-room-lawyer> 


<waves from the other end of the barracks> 

I'm not so sure that NCoC 19 applies in this case. As far as we can
tell from the information given the ticket was valid for the journey
(and I think it's safe to assume he received the correct change).

I'd argue that the error on the ticket was not apparent at the time -
he asked for a 'Cheap Day Single' and the words 'Day Single' were
printed on the ticket, and if Jon had known what the fare should have
been he would surely have queried it at the time the ticket was
issued!


>> I was under the impression train companies were obliged to sell the
>> cheapest ticket for a journey. 


Not exactly: they have to provide "accurate and impartial information"
- it says so on the second page of section A the fares manual 
<http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectiona-part1.pdf>


>Is the Standard Open Single really the same as a "STD Day Single". If
>so why the different names for an identical ticket?


Standard Day Singles (SDS) and Standard Open Singles (SOS) are
*different* ticket types - they're listed in part 2 of section A of
the fares manual. Trying to pretend that they are the same is somewhat
underhand, to put it mildly.
http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectiona-part2.pdf

Assuming that NRES are correct <cough>, then FGW appear to have sold
you an SDS when no SDS fare for the journey exists: that suggests, to
me at least, that they have failed the 'accurate' part of 'accurate
and impartial information'.

You might like to double-check the fares at a station, or with a
friendly guard with an Avantix machine: they should be able to list
all the fares for that journey for you. I'd try and check myself, but
the online journey planners are being 'maintained' tonight...

I'd suggest writing back to the person who wrote to you (there's no
point going further up the food chain: it just annoys them), and
asking them to reconsider their first answer.

You might also like to put them on spot by asking which set of
circumstances would have to apply to make an SOS more appropriate than
a CDS for that journey. :o)

If that fails to glean you any vouchers, contact the RPC:
<http://www.railpassengers.org.uk/Council/Complaints/AppealComplaints>


>Can you really be bothered?

If it was me, I would be! You may not get anywhere with this, but you
never know your luck: if you don't ask, you don't get.


>good luck.
</AOL>

>I repeat, IANAL and that was not legal advice.

Ditto.

Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Jeff Buckley - Last Goodbye (from the album 'Grace')

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:41:53 +0100, Jon Combe 
wrote:


>Why is there even such a fare as the Standard Open Single on this route
>given that the Cheap Day Single offers the exact same validity as the
>open ticket?


I *think* a SOS allows overnight break of journey (resuming before
noon the next day), whereas a CDS doesn't.

"Jon Combe"  wrote in message 
news:slrndgpjc1.3qd.joncombe@joncombe.com...

>I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way) and when I purchased
> the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I was sold (which I didn't
> notice until I got home later that day) was called a "STD Day Single".
>
> The cost of a cheap day single is 9.50. According to National Rail
> Enquiries Online the only other fares available for this journey are
> Saver Single at 14.10 (not valid on first train), Standard Open Single
> for 17.50 or First Open Single for 28.00


I've had this problem a few years ago. I asked for a Cheap Day Return from 
Peterborough to London Terminals. Upon inspecting the ticket after purchase 
I saw I had been sold a Business Saver Return.
I later found out that the Business Saver Return was significantly more 
expensive than the Cheap Day Return and that the CDR would have sufficed for 
the journey and journey times I required.
Unfortunately at the time I had more important issues than arguing about 
this so I didn't complain but from now on I check my tickets seconds after 
issue so if I have been mis-sold a ticket type I can debate it there and 
then.

Simon Lee wrote:


> from now on I check my tickets seconds after issue so if I have been
> mis-sold a ticket type I can debate it there and then.


FWIW, in most cases, I usually inform myself as to the fare beforehand
and proffer a suitable amount of cash. But since privatisation, I have
yet to experience anyone attempting to charge me the incorrect fare.

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683831.html
(158 775 at Manchester Victoria, 13 Oct 2000)

In message , at 23:28:13 on 
Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Neil Sunderland  
remarked:

>I'd argue that the error on the ticket was not apparent at the time -
>he asked for a 'Cheap Day Single' and the words 'Day Single' were
>printed on the ticket, and if Jon had known what the fare should have
>been he would surely have queried it at the time the ticket was
>issued!


I have another suggestion. Perhaps there is an error in the ticketing 
system used at Reading Station, as they've issued a mythical ticket 
which doesn't formally exist. (A "Day Single" at the same price as a 
"Standard Single").

So perhaps the machine at Reading has "Cheap Day Single", "Day Single" 
and "Standard Single" as options, and the clerk punched the middle one 
in error, perhaps without checking it was a different price to the CDS.

If this is what happened, then FGW should be grateful that the OP has 
given them a chance to correct this error in their database. I suggest 
someone goes to Reading Station and asks to see what fares are available 
on the screens for the two stations in question (a travel centre is an 
easier place to ask to see the display than the ticket office).
-- 
Roland Perry

Neil Sunderland wrote:


> Standard Day Singles (SDS) and Standard Open Singles (SOS) are
> *different* ticket types - they're listed in part 2 of section A of
> the fares manual. Trying to pretend that they are the same is somewhat
> underhand, to put it mildly.
> http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectiona-part2.pdf


Well, at last i've found somewhere which gives the names of all the
ticket types (Thanks Neil), but does anyone know what the difference is
between the two types above?

They both state they are only valid on date shown, so in what way is
the SOS more open than the SDS?

On 25 Aug 2005 06:44:35 -0700, zikkimalambo@connectfree.co.uk wrote:


>They both state they are only valid on date shown, so in what way is
>the SOS more open than the SDS?


SOS allows overnight break of journey, resuming before noon the next
day (and with no further BoJ allowed). SDS doesn't.

Chris Tolley wrote:


> FWIW, in most cases, I usually inform myself as to the fare beforehand
> and proffer a suitable amount of cash. But since privatisation, I have
> yet to experience anyone attempting to charge me the incorrect fare.


I often find that the ticket agent we use at work tries to overcharge
me (well, my employer, not me) - usually suggesting a BSR rather than
an SVR, or an SOR instead of a BSR.

I wonder what they'll say next time I want to book a ticket to London
and ask about split tickets (saves 50 in the peak period!)...

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

> If you are sold the wrong ticket, the National Conditions of Carriage
> require you either to draw the ticket clerk's attention to the error at the
> time, or, when requesting a refund afterwards, to show to the TOC's
> reasonable satisfaction that you were in fact sold the wrong ticket. The
> TOC's passenger charter (I've checked the GNER one, as I can't find the FGW
> one in a very quick look on their website) require ticket offices to give
> impartial advice and to sell the most appropriate ticket for your journey.


The First Great Western Link (I purchased the ticket from a FGWL operated 
station) states:-

At our ticket offices we aim to serve all customers in a professional and 
efficient way, and will provide the most appropriate ticket for your journey. 
We aim to serve you within five minutes at peak times, and within three 
minutes during other times. Peak times vary at different stations, and 
details will be published at each station.

As a Cheap Day Single would have been the most appropriate ticket I think
selling a Std Day Single as they did would be against this since it's not
the ticket I asked for and not the most appropriate ticket for the journey.
I see from another poster that there are in fact differences between a
Standard Open Single and a Std Day Single (I was sold the latter). Since
the latter is not in fact listed by National Rail Online as a possible
ticket for that journey I assume that would be sufficient to prove that
the TOC made a mistake since the ticket I was sold doesn't in fact exist.
So I guess that would clearly prove I was sold the wrong ticket!



> It seems from what you say that the CDS was the most appropriate ticket,
> that it was unreasonable for you to insist on holding up the queue while you
> demanded to consult the fares manual, and that you can show to reasonable
> satisfaction that you were sold the wrong ticket.
> From this I would suggest that you should refer the matter back to FGW. You
> might even suggest that, if they don't make the refund or give you a good
> reason why they should not, you will refer the matter to the County Court
> under the small claims procedure. My guess is that they'll give in, though
> probably hedge it about with 'as a gesture of goodwill on this occasion'.


As it is I've sent their response and my original letter to the Rail 
Passengers Council. The ticket would have been good evidence but sadly
FGWL have kept it so I've lost that now.

As an aside I also discovered this in the FGWL Passengers Charter:-

We aim to answer all written complaints from customers within five working 
days of receiving them. If it takes longer to make the necessary enquiries, 
we will acknowledge your complaints within 10 days. If we do not respond 
within 10 working days, we will send you a 5 National Rail travel voucher 
with our reply.

I sent the letter on 20/07. The reply was dated 22/08 (and I didn't get an
acknowledgment letter in between). So more than a month to reply and of
course I didn't get the promised 5 voucher. So I phoned them up today
and pointed this out and they have confirmed they got my letter on 21/07
and did not reply until 22/08 so have agreed to send a 5 voucher. So at
least I have managed to get something back so far!

Jon.

In article , David Harby wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:12:33 GMT, Stephen Hughes 
> wrote:
> 
> Don't let yourself be fobbed off with the first reply. It usually
> takes at least two attempts to get any company, whatever their
> industry, to admit they made a mistake.
> 
> If after going back to FGW you are still not satisfied with their
> reply take it up with the RPC. Full details of how to complain are on
> their website http://www.railpassengers.org.uk/Council/Complaints


Thanks David, I've sent a letter to the RPC. I think if what is said
here is true I would have a good case for a refund.

Jon.

In article , 1577+2260 wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 21:52:08 +0100, "Peter Smyth"
> wrote:
> 
>>The Cheap Day Single is only valid on trains leaving Reading after 0900. As 
>>the first train from Reading to Pewsey is the 0905 the restriction doesn't 
>>make any difference. However I suspect that in the past there was probably a 
>>train to Pewsey that left before 0900 and although the train no longer runs 
>>noone has bothered to change the tickets available.
>>
> 
> Also when the OP said the CDR valid on 'all trains', was that just
> assuming that if it was valid on the first few it was valid all day? I
> suspect that the more expensive fares are for the evening peak (during
> which restrictions apply on most FGW routes down from Reading), and
> also for morning trains from Pewsey to Reading.


Actually you are correct. Trains run at the following times (interesting
the service is hourly from 17:05 -> 21:05 but far less frequent before
then).

Reading        Pewsey
09:05          09:45
11:32          12:00
12:48          13:31
15:32          16:00
17:05          17:47
18:05          18:40
19:05          19:47
20:05          20:39
21:05          21:39

A Cheap Day Single is valid on all trains apart from the 17:05, 18:05 and
19:05. However I purchased the ticket at 08:20 and travelled on the 09:05
from Reading. So given that I purchased the ticket at the time in the morning
it would have been reasonble to assume a Cheap Day Single would have been
the cheapest fare.

Jon.

> I have another suggestion. Perhaps there is an error in the ticketing 
> system used at Reading Station, as they've issued a mythical ticket 
> which doesn't formally exist. (A "Day Single" at the same price as a 
> "Standard Single").


I actually purchased the ticket at North Camp (a FGWL station). There
are no machines their and the ticket clerk used the old style machines
(the ones that still print a full credit-card number on the slips :-( )
.. This was because I was travelling North Camp -> Reading, Reading ->
Pewsey then returning from Swindon. Hence I purchased a Std Day Return
North Camp -> Reading then singles between Reading and Pewsey and Swindon
and Reading (though I didn't purchase the latter until I arrived at
Swindon later in the day). 

As an aside I do get the impression that FGWL do not operate North Camp
station in a very professional manner. Not only was I sold a more 
expensive ticket than I asked for theyre they are also (IMHO) running 
a bit of a racket with the car park there. The following sign is 
displayed on the entrance to the car park (NSE lives on!)

http://www.combe.plus.com/NC_CarPark1.jpg

Notice that it says parking is free on Saturday & Sunday but also warns
that failure to display a ticket may result in a wheel clamp.

Now to the sign displayed on the (only) ticket machine in the car park

http://www.combe.plus.com/NC_CarPark2.jpg

Notice that it in fact lists a charge of 1.20 for parking on Saturday
and Sunday (the same as the weekday charge). A clear case of misleading
information I'd have thought. These photos were taken today and I pointed
this out to FGWL many months ago but they've not changed the sign.

The car park was in fact free in the days of Thames Trains at weekends
but almost as soon as First took over they put up the charges (they 
were 1) and introduced these charges at weekends, but obviously did 
not bother to change the sign on the road into the car park.

I assume issueing tickets or clamps for cars parked without tickets at
weekends is a nice little earner for them.

Jon.

> A pity you didn't pick this up at the time.  Now it's, at best, your 
> word against theirs.


Well sort of. Their response says "I was concerned to hear that your
jounrney was noi as pleasant as it should have been as a result of
a different ticket being issued then the one you asked for."

So I'd say that is an admission that what I said is true (and they
had my ticket as I sent it with the letter).


> [...their answer, which appears, as usual, to be an answer to a 
> question tangentially different from the one you asked, snipped...]
> 
> 
> As you'll have presumably checked, the NCoC says:
> 
> 19. Please check tickets and change at the time they are issued
> 
> When you buy a ticket, you should make sure that it is valid for the 
> journey you want to make and that you have received the correct 
> change. If possible, you should tell staff about any apparent errors 
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^
> at that time. If you do not, the Train Company or travel agent which 
> sold you the ticket will only consider claims about any errors if you 
> can show to its reasonable satisfaction that an error was made. 
> 
> 
> ...and in their answer, they've clearly picked this point up, and 
> presumably intend to rely on it.


It seems that way. The "If possible" is interesting, not sure how you'd
define possible!


> *But* you asked for a specific ticket, not for the cheapest.[1]  Don't
> water down your claim by claiming for something that you didn't ask 
> for!  If you've described the situation accurately here, then your 
> claim seems to be that they purported to sell you what you asked for, 
> but you only afterwards discovered that it was something else, that 
> was significantly more expensive.


That is true but in either case I'd have expected to have been sold
the cheapest ticket, which at the time I bought the ticket (8:20) would
have been a cheap day single.


> 
> IANAL and this was not legal advice, but you asked for a specific 
> ticket and they apparently, without comment, sold you something 
> different, at a significantly higher price.  That's not acceptable.  
> But at this remove, you're *still* stuck with your word against 
> theirs, and additionally hampered by the fact that by accepting the 
> ticket, you appear to have accepted the NCoC, including that dubious 
> item 19.


Yes that is what happened.


> 
> 
> Can you really be bothered?  They're of course relying on the fact 
> that for 10 quid or so, you aren't prepared to invest as much of your 
> time and effort to get restitution as will, in the end with several 
> exchanges of email, probably be worth 100 or more of your time, 
> knowing, as you do, that there will be essentially no chance of 
> getting the incidental costs of your claim defrayed over and above a 
> refund of the difference in the ticket price.  It's up to you to 
> decide whether the principle is more important to you than making an 
> even greater loss (in your time and effort) than you've already made.


No it's the principle here more than the money that is important to
me. It's clear (to me anyway), that I was ripped off. The TOC have
in my view accepeted they did not sell the ticket I asked for in their
letter but our saying they are not obliged to refund the difference 
since I didn't point it out at the time of purchase.

Jon.

> Standard Day Singles (SDS) and Standard Open Singles (SOS) are
> *different* ticket types - they're listed in part 2 of section A of
> the fares manual. Trying to pretend that they are the same is somewhat
> underhand, to put it mildly.
> http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectiona-part2.pdf
> 
> Assuming that NRES are correct <cough>, then FGW appear to have sold
> you an SDS when no SDS fare for the journey exists: that suggests, to
> me at least, that they have failed the 'accurate' part of 'accurate
> and impartial information'.


Thanks very much for pointing that out. That would seem to be the
case here.

So it's clear that FGWL have failed to issue the appropriate ticket
have in fact issued a ticket that doesn't exist on that route and
tried to claim it's validity is the same!


> 
> You might like to double-check the fares at a station, or with a
> friendly guard with an Avantix machine: they should be able to list
> all the fares for that journey for you. I'd try and check myself, but
> the online journey planners are being 'maintained' tonight...
> 
> I'd suggest writing back to the person who wrote to you (there's no
> point going further up the food chain: it just annoys them), and
> asking them to reconsider their first answer.


I've actually now sent it on to the RPC.


> 
> You might also like to put them on spot by asking which set of
> circumstances would have to apply to make an SOS more appropriate than
> a CDS for that journey. :o)
> 
> If that fails to glean you any vouchers, contact the RPC:
><http://www.railpassengers.org.uk/Council/Complaints/AppealComplaints>
> 
>>Can you really be bothered?
> If it was me, I would be! You may not get anywhere with this, but you
> never know your luck: if you don't ask, you don't get.


Ditto :-)

> almost as soon as First took over they put up the charges (they
> were £1) and introduced these charges at weekends, but obviously did
> not bother to change the sign on the road into the car park.


Ah, the £1.20 trick - done because a lot of people will not have the
right change and will pay £2 instead. Do the machines give change? I
bet they don't!

And, the sign error probably means that any ticket would be cancelled
without any hesitation, IF the victim complains. A lot of people will
simply pay to have an easy life, so it's quite a good gamble.

Jonathan

Going off the subject a bit, can you explain why I recently paid a
different amount to go from Farringdon -> Gatwick Airport as I did to
return?

I asked at Farringdon for a ticket extension from boundary zone 6 to
Gatwick Airport (Thameslink), which cost £3.05 (also with Gold Card
discount).

At Gatwick, I asked for a ticket to zone 6 on Thameslink (in case it
made a difference). I got a ticket to Coulsdon South (Route: Direct)
and was charged £3.50!

Obviously, I questioned this and couldn't understand her response at
all! Now, the ticket is obviously different so that probably explains
the price difference, but why can't I pay the same each way? I know
it's just 45p, but it's bugging me!

BTW, I didn't get a return because I didn't know if I would be using
the train to come back.

Jonathan

On 25 Aug 2005 17:04:36 -0700, "jonmorris" 
wrote:


>I asked at Farringdon for a ticket extension from boundary zone 6 to
>Gatwick Airport (Thameslink), which cost 3.05 (also with Gold Card
>discount).


I didn't even know you could get NR ticket extensions, or Gold Card
discounts, from LU ticket offices!

"Stevie D"  wrote in message
news:hh9sg1d7ufcbr34dj549eoghokte1c62rq@4ax.com...

> Chris Tolley wrote:
>
> > FWIW, in most cases, I usually inform myself as to the fare beforehand
> > and proffer a suitable amount of cash. But since privatisation, I have
> > yet to experience anyone attempting to charge me the incorrect fare.
>
> I often find that the ticket agent we use at work tries to overcharge
> me (well, my employer, not me) - usually suggesting a BSR rather than
> an SVR, or an SOR instead of a BSR.
>
> I wonder what they'll say next time I want to book a ticket to London
> and ask about split tickets (saves 50 in the peak period!)...
>

oh i did something similar, asked about such tickets and got a look of
complete puzzlement in reply. whats even more fun is if you ask why its
cheaper. heh.
cheers
james

In message , at 21:55:04 on Thu, 
25 Aug 2005, Jon Combe  remarked:

>The following sign is
>displayed on the entrance to the car park (NSE lives on!)
>
>http://www.combe.plus.com/NC_CarPark1.jpg
>
>Notice that it says parking is free on Saturday & Sunday but also warns
>that failure to display a ticket may result in a wheel clamp.


Having a ticket on display, even if Free, would show that you'd arrived 
there on the Saturday, and not the Friday, if they did a check on the 
Saturday.
-- 
Roland Perry

Jon Combe wrote:

> Trains run at the following times
> Reading        Pewsey
> 09:05          09:45 ... 
> A Cheap Day Single is valid on all trains apart from the 17:05, 18:05 and
> 19:05. However I purchased the ticket at 08:20 and travelled on the 09:05
> from Reading. So given that I purchased the ticket at the time in the morning
> it would have been reasonble to assume a Cheap Day Single would have been
> the cheapest fare.


Elsewhere you say you bought the ticket from *North Camp*. So what it
boils down to is that you expect the person at North Camp to know when
issuing a ticket at 08.20 that there was no train on from *Reading*
before 09.00 (when most Cheap Day fares start). Did you tell the person
selling the ticket that you were intending to catch a train from Reading
after 9am?

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, jonmorris  wrote:

>I asked at Farringdon for a ticket extension from boundary zone 6 to
>Gatwick Airport (Thameslink), which cost 3.05 (also with Gold Card
>discount).
>
>At Gatwick, I asked for a ticket to zone 6 on Thameslink (in case it
>made a difference). I got a ticket to Coulsdon South (Route: Direct)
>and was charged 3.50!


I had almost the same situation at Guildford recently. I asked for a one 
day WAGN only travelcard from Peterborough and a cheap day single to 
Bdry Zone 6 (because that appears to give the cheapest single fare from 
Guildford to Peterborough), but was sold a ticket to iirc Surbiton. When 
I complained that this wasn't what I'd asked for, the ticket clerk 
offered to give me 5p which was I think the difference :-)
-- 
Howard

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:10:18 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>Having a ticket on display, even if Free, would show that you'd arrived 
>there on the Saturday, and not the Friday, if they did a check on the 
>Saturday.


One of the car parks in Ormskirk does that - you can have an hour
free, but you need to get a free ticket for that.  Means they have to
check less often.

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, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley  wrote:

>Jon Combe wrote:
>> Trains run at the following times
>> Reading        Pewsey
>> 09:05          09:45 ...
>> A Cheap Day Single is valid on all trains apart from the 17:05, 18:05 and
>> 19:05. However I purchased the ticket at 08:20 and travelled on the 09:05
>> from Reading. So given that I purchased the ticket at the time in the morning
>> it would have been reasonble to assume a Cheap Day Single would have been
>> the cheapest fare.
>
>Elsewhere you say you bought the ticket from *North Camp*. So what it
>boils down to is that you expect the person at North Camp to know when
>issuing a ticket at 08.20 that there was no train on from *Reading*
>before 09.00 (when most Cheap Day fares start). Did you tell the person
>selling the ticket that you were intending to catch a train from Reading
>after 9am?


As this complexity is forced upon us fare paying passengers by the 
railway system, it seems to me not unreasonable for the representatives 
of the railway system to understand the complexity. But it's safest, 
though not always easy, to check in advance.

-- 
Howard

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Howard Fisher wrote:


> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, jonmorris  wrote:
> > I asked at Farringdon for a ticket extension from boundary zone 6 to
> > Gatwick Airport (Thameslink), which cost 3.05 (also with Gold Card
> > discount).
> > 
> > At Gatwick, I asked for a ticket to zone 6 on Thameslink (in case it
> > made a difference). I got a ticket to Coulsdon South (Route: Direct)
> > and was charged 3.50!


I think I know this one!  Tickets can only be issued /from/ a BZ (i.e 
when travelling outwards from London holding a travelcard) - you can't 
buy a ticket /to/ a BZ.  There's no exact equivalent for travelling 
inwards: either you buy a composite travelcard ticket, which includes 
one return journey from/to your starting point plus travelcard 
facilities in the intervening time interval; or if, for some reason, 
you insist on combining tickets, you're sold a ticket to the first 
station inside the applicable Zone.


> I had almost the same situation at Guildford recently. I asked for a 
> one day WAGN only travelcard from Peterborough and a cheap day 
> single to Bdry Zone 6 (because that appears to give the cheapest 
> single fare from Guildford to Peterborough),


Seems to me to fall under the same rule: one can't book /to/ a BZ.

Presumably, if travelling in the reverse direction, one would buy the
WAGN travelcard in the regular fashion, and then be able to buy a BZ6 
to Guildford fare in the normal way.  Strange though that a return 
ticket was a cheaper way of getting a single fare...


Anyway, I'm not saying whether the rule makes sense one way or the 
other - just that it's a rule that I've seen repeated often enough to 
be aware of it.

ttfn

In message , at 
18:51:52 on Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Alan J. Flavell  
remarked:

>> I had almost the same situation at Guildford recently. I asked for a
>> one day WAGN only travelcard from Peterborough and a cheap day
>> single to Bdry Zone 6 (because that appears to give the cheapest
>> single fare from Guildford to Peterborough),
>
>Seems to me to fall under the same rule: one can't book /to/ a BZ.
>
>Presumably, if travelling in the reverse direction, one would buy the
>WAGN travelcard in the regular fashion, and then be able to buy a BZ6
>to Guildford fare in the normal way.  Strange though that a return
>ticket was a cheaper way of getting a single fare...


In the past it has been alleged that there is some rule which prevents 
that kind of NR-Travelcard from being used "in reverse". I don't think 
I've ever seen it in print though. One problem, however, is that if the 
station concerned has barriers it will probably swallow the ticket, 
making the second half of the reverse round trip somewhat difficult.
-- 
Roland Perry

Howard Fisher wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley  wrote:

>> Elsewhere you say you bought the ticket from *North Camp*. Did you
>> tell the person selling the ticket that you were intending to catch
>> a train from Reading after 9am?

> As this complexity is forced upon us fare paying passengers by the 
> railway system, it seems to me not unreasonable for the representatives 
> of the railway system to understand the complexity. 


Not unreasonable? How much of the national timetable do you believe it
is reasonable for ticket-issuing employees (or by your comment, do you
mean all rail employees?) to carry around in their heads?

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 18:23:45 GMT, Chris Tolley 
wrote:


>> As this complexity is forced upon us fare paying passengers by the 
>> railway system, it seems to me not unreasonable for the representatives 
>> of the railway system to understand the complexity. 
>
>Not unreasonable? How much of the national timetable do you believe it
>is reasonable for ticket-issuing employees (or by your comment, do you
>mean all rail employees?) to carry around in their heads? 


It seems to me that in some ways the staff suffer more from the
complexity than the passengers. At least when travelling from A to B I
just need to know (if I am able to find them!) the restrictions for my
particular ticket; the staff need to be able to sell the right ticket
for any jouorney that the passenger requests, make sure they know
enough about the journey options to sell the right ticket, ensure that
the restrictions are explained correctly etc! They probably know the
basic restrictions for their area, but when a more unusual journey
comes up it must be difficult, especially if they're under pressure to
sell the ticket and continue to serve the rest of the queue!

To a great extent I can understand the need for various rules. But I'm
sure the rules could be simplified - e.g. instead of a rule for each
TOC's Saver restrictions out of London, have one rule applying to all
'InterCity'[1] services out of London, one set of time rules for Saver
on all these routes. Obviously there will need to be easements, but
I'd expect them to be covered in less space than is currently used i
nthe NFM (perhaps with a simple map page to show routes covered by
easements etc so we don't need to look up the individual route and its
code?).

[1] Another thing I advocate: bring back the IC brand!

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Roland Perry wrote, quoting me:


> > Strange though that a return
> > ticket was a cheaper way of getting a single fare...
> 
> In the past it has been alleged that there is some rule which 
> prevents that kind of NR-Travelcard from being used "in reverse".


As I understood the posting: the hon. Usenaut proposed to discard the 
outward trip, and use only the travelcard element and the return 
portion, since only a single fare was needed.  Which is why I posted 
"...a cheaper way of getting a single fare", which you quoted but 
apparently didn't take on board.

I'm not aware of any rule which requires the outbound journey to be 
taken at all, in order to somehow validate the return portion of a 
return ticket.  Maybe the passenger found another way to undertake the 
outbound trip and couldn't be bothered to try to get the ticket 
changed, while nevertheless needing to return by train.  But I'd take 
it for granted (unless otherwise stated) that trying to undertake the 
outbound journey /after/ the return element has been taken is, at 
least, irregular, probably even forbidden, and likely to lead to 
nastiness.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 23:28:13 GMT, Neil Sunderland
 wrote:


>>On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Jon Combe wrote:

>>Is the Standard Open Single really the same as a "STD Day Single". If
>>so why the different names for an identical ticket?
>
>Standard Day Singles (SDS) and Standard Open Singles (SOS) are
>*different* ticket types - they're listed in part 2 of section A of
>the fares manual. Trying to pretend that they are the same is somewhat
>underhand, to put it mildly.
>http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectiona-part2.pdf
>
>Assuming that NRES are correct <cough>, then FGW appear to have sold
>you an SDS when no SDS fare for the journey exists: that suggests, to
>me at least, that they have failed the 'accurate' part of 'accurate
>and impartial information'.
>

Note that APTIS (and possibly SPORTIS, I can't remember) uses the same
button (labelled STS) for both Standard Day and Standard Open Singles,
and defaults to printing Day Single.

For the journey in question, QJump lists the following Singles:

    Cheap Day:  9.50
        Saver: 14.10
Standard Open: 17.50
   First Open: 28.00

Cheers,

Barry

-- 
Barry Salter, barry at southie dot me dot uk
Read uk.* newsgroups? Read uk.net.news.announce!

"Alan J. Flavell"  wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0508262001430.29483@ppepc56.ph.gla.ac.uk...

> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Roland Perry wrote, quoting me:
>
> > > Strange though that a return
> > > ticket was a cheaper way of getting a single fare...
> >
> > In the past it has been alleged that there is some rule which
> > prevents that kind of NR-Travelcard from being used "in reverse".
>
> As I understood the posting: the hon. Usenaut proposed to discard the
> outward trip, and use only the travelcard element and the return
> portion, since only a single fare was needed.  Which is why I posted
> "...a cheaper way of getting a single fare", which you quoted but
> apparently didn't take on board.
>
> I'm not aware of any rule which requires the outbound journey to be
> taken at all, in order to somehow validate the return portion of a
> return ticket.  Maybe the passenger found another way to undertake the
> outbound trip and couldn't be bothered to try to get the ticket
> changed, while nevertheless needing to return by train.  But I'd take
> it for granted (unless otherwise stated) that trying to undertake the
> outbound journey /after/ the return element has been taken is, at
> least, irregular, probably even forbidden, and likely to lead to
> nastiness.


Isn't it the case (I think it's been discussed here before) that
out-boundary one-day travelcards can only be issued *from* the out-boundary
station *to* Zones 1-6, even if the journey is to be undertaken the other
way?  I was once issued a Peak ODTC *from* Caterham *to* Zones 1-6 at London
Charing Cross, when I wished to travel from London to Caterham and back
before 0930 and then continue to use the Travelcard.  Is that allowed, i.e.
use of the Travelcard after the out-boundary return trip is complete?

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:34:14 GMT, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:


>On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:10:18 +0100, Roland Perry 
>wrote:
>
>>Having a ticket on display, even if Free, would show that you'd arrived 
>>there on the Saturday, and not the Friday, if they did a check on the 
>>Saturday.
>
>One of the car parks in Ormskirk does that - you can have an hour
>free, but you need to get a free ticket for that.  Means they have to
>check less often.


Taunton does the same, but you only get 20 minutes.
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On 25 Aug 2005 17:04:36 -0700, "jonmorris" 
wrote:


>Going off the subject a bit, can you explain why I recently paid a
>different amount to go from Farringdon -> Gatwick Airport as I did to
>return?
>
>I asked at Farringdon for a ticket extension from boundary zone 6 to
>Gatwick Airport (Thameslink), which cost 3.05 (also with Gold Card
>discount).
>
>At Gatwick, I asked for a ticket to zone 6 on Thameslink (in case it
>made a difference). I got a ticket to Coulsdon South (Route: Direct)
>and was charged 3.50!


There are three different levels of fare from Gatwick towards London,
Gatwick Express, which costs the most, Thameslink which is the next
highest and Southern, which is the lowest AFAIAA.

From further out, Thameslink-only tickets after 10.00 am are 20%
cheaper than "not GEX" tickets.
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:10:14 +0100, "Alan J. Flavell"
 wrote:


>I'm not aware of any rule which requires the outbound journey to be 
>taken at all, in order to somehow validate the return portion of a 
>return ticket.  


A CDR from Milton Keynes Central to London route Silverlink Only is
cheaper than a CDS in the other direction.  I haven't had cause to try
and buy the former at London Euston to use the return half only, but I
don't think it would be sold gracefully.

(The reason for it is to discourage commuters from buying SDS out and
CDS back).

Of course the trick could be to book it on Trainline and pick it up at
the Euston FastTicket, but that's no good if you aren't planning in
advance...

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, 26 Aug 2005 19:48:42 +0000 (UTC), "John Salmon"
 wrote:


> Is that allowed, i.e.
>use of the Travelcard after the out-boundary return trip is complete?


No - the Travelcard is only valid until commencement of the return
trip, AIUI.

The correct issue for your trip would be a 1-6 Travelcard plus a CDR
BZ6-destination, which should cost roughly the same (until you get
into things like operator-specific tickets) as the through Travelcard
in the opposite direction.

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.

1577+2260 wrote:

> To a great extent I can understand the need for various rules. But I'm
> sure the rules could be simplified - e.g. instead of a rule for each
> TOC's Saver restrictions out of London, have one rule applying to all
> 'InterCity' services out of London. Obviously there will need to be
> easements, but I'd expect them to be covered in less space than is
> currently used i nthe NFM (perhaps with a simple map page to show
> routes covered by easements etc so we don't need to look up the
> individual route and its code?).


But the problem is that demand is not even on all routes and the arcane
rules are frequently an attempt to use the ticket prices to regulate
demand. So the problem remains that if the fares structure is simplified
as you suggest, some other way of regulating demand is required (either
that, or increase capacity by building new tracks). Please forgive the
last comment. I know it's not remotely realistic.

In article , Chris Tolley wrote:

> Jon Combe wrote:
>> Trains run at the following times
>> Reading        Pewsey
>> 09:05          09:45 ... 
>> A Cheap Day Single is valid on all trains apart from the 17:05, 18:05 and
>> 19:05. However I purchased the ticket at 08:20 and travelled on the 09:05
>> from Reading. So given that I purchased the ticket at the time in the morning
>> it would have been reasonble to assume a Cheap Day Single would have been
>> the cheapest fare.
> 
> Elsewhere you say you bought the ticket from *North Camp*. So what it
> boils down to is that you expect the person at North Camp to know when
> issuing a ticket at 08.20 that there was no train on from *Reading*
> before 09.00 (when most Cheap Day fares start). Did you tell the person
> selling the ticket that you were intending to catch a train from Reading
> after 9am?


The first train of the day is not until after 9 (from Reading) so I wouldn't 
have been able to travel from Reading before then anyway! As I said I 
requested a cheap day single anyway so it shouldn't have been an issue.

In article <YiKNWTmq5sDDFA$d@donald.internetpolicynews.co.uk>, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message , at 21:55:04 on Thu, 
> 25 Aug 2005, Jon Combe  remarked:
>>The following sign is
>>displayed on the entrance to the car park (NSE lives on!)
>>
>>http://www.combe.plus.com/NC_CarPark1.jpg
>>
>>Notice that it says parking is free on Saturday & Sunday but also warns
>>that failure to display a ticket may result in a wheel clamp.
> 
> Having a ticket on display, even if Free, would show that you'd arrived 
> there on the Saturday, and not the Friday, if they did a check on the 
> Saturday.


No it wasn't the requirement to display a ticket I was querying it's
the fact the sign on the approach to the car park says parking is
free, but the (very much smaller) sign next to the parking ticket 
machine says the same charge applies at weekends.

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 22:12:41 GMT, Chris Tolley 
wrote:


>But the problem is that demand is not even on all routes and the arcane
>rules are frequently an attempt to use the ticket prices to regulate
>demand. So the problem remains that if the fares structure is simplified
>as you suggest, some other way of regulating demand is required (either
>that, or increase capacity by building new tracks). Please forgive the
>last comment. I know it's not remotely realistic.


My suggested simplification isn't all that  simple really. I'd have
thought that routes could still be 'categorised' a lot more than now.
Most restrictions do follow some sort of pattern, so it would be a
case of standardising this a bit, I suppose.

E.g. restrictions for Savers *from* London:
On all IC services, not valid before zzzz, and from xxxx to yyyy
inclusive (see red routes on map).
Resstrictions do not apply to longer journeys with destinations on
green routes, even if via red routes.

So rather than having to look up indiviual routes and codes, there is
a degree of standardisation, albeit with still some complexity. Time
differences in peak periods do exist though...

But then that is just hiding rather than removing the complexity.

Jon Combe wrote:

> The first train of the day is not until after 9 (from Reading) so I wouldn't 
> have been able to travel from Reading before then anyway! 

Why do you expect the booking clerk at a station nearly 20 miles away to
know that? 


> As I said I requested a cheap day single anyway so it shouldn't have
> been an issue.

Fine, but you bought the ticket at a time of day when the clerk would
not expect to be selling such tickets. No doubt the clerk has to deal
with people who ask for all kinds of tickets with a not-quite-right name
and has to interpret the requests. No doubt many people ask for cheap
day tickets at a time when they are not valid, and no doubt the booking
clerk issues the most appropriate ticket in what the circumstances are
perceived to be. If you did not explicitly mention that you intended to
use the ticket after 9am, then if I were this booking clerk, I would
find your comments about unprofessionalism to be somewhat unfair.

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:21:41 +0100, Terry Harper
 wrote:


>There are three different levels of fare from Gatwick towards London,


There are actually 4. In increasing order of price:

Southern Only
Thameslink Only
Not Gatwick Express
Gatwick Express Only

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 18:20:02 +0100, Howard Fisher
 wrote:


>I had almost the same situation at Guildford recently. I asked for a one 
>day WAGN only travelcard from Peterborough and a cheap day single to 
>Bdry Zone 6 (because that appears to give the cheapest single fare from 
>Guildford to Peterborough),


Is it possible to buy an all-zones Travelcard plus a WAGN-only CDS
from BZ6 to Peterborough? If it's available I'd have thought that
would be cheaper (though possibly only by 10p or so).


>but was sold a ticket to iirc Surbiton. When 
>I complained that this wasn't what I'd asked for, the ticket clerk 
>offered to give me 5p which was I think the difference :-)


That's not the only difference - the ticket you asked for is valid on
faster trains that don't stop at Surbiton, or for travel via Epsom,
whereas the ticket you were sold is not.

In message <1rwqf7wasq61p.lo3j8h7fm5zy$.dlg@40tude.net>, at 18:23:45 on 
Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley  remarked:

>> As this complexity is forced upon us fare paying passengers by the
>> railway system, it seems to me not unreasonable for the representatives
>> of the railway system to understand the complexity.
>
>Not unreasonable? How much of the national timetable do you believe it
>is reasonable for ticket-issuing employees (or by your comment, do you
>mean all rail employees?) to carry around in their heads?


Assuming the original ticket vendor wasn't simply deaf, when a customer 
asks for a "Cheap Day" ticket suspiciously early in the day, I'd expect 
him to reply "You realise this won't be valid until <foo>", at which 
point the better informed customer can reply "No, it's not as simple as 
that, I think you'll find the ticket is OK for <bar>", and for the 
vendor to then look it up. He shouldn't just issue a higher priced 
ticket.

If the customer had asked for a "single", then the ticket vendor should 
really ask when it's going to be used, and check yo make sure it would 
be OK, perhaps saying "it's fine, but it won't be valid on XXX trains", 
having looked it up if he wasn't 100% familiar with that particular 
route.
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 19:59:48 on Fri, 
26 Aug 2005, Jon Combe  remarked:

>> Having a ticket on display, even if Free, would show that you'd arrived
>> there on the Saturday, and not the Friday, if they did a check on the
>> Saturday.
>
>No it wasn't the requirement to display a ticket I was querying it's
>the fact the sign on the approach to the car park says parking is
>free, but the (very much smaller) sign next to the parking ticket
>machine says the same charge applies at weekends.


I know that, and I thought I'd phrased my reply to make that clear 
<sigh>.
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 
20:10:14 on Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Alan J. Flavell  
remarked:

>On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Roland Perry wrote, quoting me:
>
>> > Strange though that a return
>> > ticket was a cheaper way of getting a single fare...
>>
>> In the past it has been alleged that there is some rule which
>> prevents that kind of NR-Travelcard from being used "in reverse".
>
>As I understood the posting: the hon. Usenaut proposed to discard the
>outward trip, and use only the travelcard element and the return
>portion, since only a single fare was needed.  Which is why I posted
>"...a cheaper way of getting a single fare", which you quoted but
>apparently didn't take on board.


I did, but was taking the discussion on a stage, to a more general 
discussion of using NR-Travelcards in reverse.


>I'm not aware of any rule which requires the outbound journey to be
>taken at all, in order to somehow validate the return portion of a
>return ticket.


That's not my question, which was about using both "halves", but in 
reverse.


>But I'd take it for granted (unless otherwise stated) that trying to 
>undertake the outbound journey /after/ the return element has been 
>taken is, at least, irregular, probably even forbidden, and likely to 
>lead to nastiness.


Indeed, but where is this "forbidden-ness" written down?
-- 
Roland Perry

In message <denrmp$5qf$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>, at 
19:48:42 on Fri, 26 Aug 2005, John Salmon 
 remarked:


>Isn't it the case (I think it's been discussed here before) that
>out-boundary one-day travelcards can only be issued *from* the out-boundary
>station *to* Zones 1-6, even if the journey is to be undertaken the other
>way?


They are indeed only issued as tickets *from* the out-boundary station 
(but ought to be purchasable *at* any station, just like any other 
ticket).


> I was once issued a Peak ODTC *from* Caterham *to* Zones 1-6 at London
>Charing Cross, when I wished to travel from London to Caterham and back
>before 0930 and then continue to use the Travelcard.  Is that allowed, i.e.
>use of the Travelcard after the out-boundary return trip is complete?


This is exactly my question. I have a feeling that the entire card is 
supposed to expire after the outward trip has been completed, but what 
is the precise rule, and does it actually say that the ticket is good 
for one outbound leg and one inbound leg, but neglects to specify in 
which order?
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 21:14:36 on Fri, 26 Aug 
2005, Neil Williams  remarked:

>> Is that allowed, i.e.
>>use of the Travelcard after the out-boundary return trip is complete?
>
>No - the Travelcard is only valid until commencement of the return
>trip, AIUI.


Where is this rule written down? (so that passengers can do their 
research and buy the most appropriate ticket).
-- 
Roland Perry

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 08:41:37 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>This is exactly my question. I have a feeling that the entire card is 
>supposed to expire after the outward trip has been completed, but what 
>is the precise rule, and does it actually say that the ticket is good 
>for one outbound leg and one inbound leg, but neglects to specify in 
>which order?


Says the fares manual[1]: 

"Out-Boundary Day Travelcards
Out-boundary Day Travelcards must be issued to Zones
R1256 only (All Zones). They include one return rail journey
to the first station within Zone 6 of the Travelcard area on
the line of route for which the ticket is issued. For example, a
Day Travelcard from Bedford to R1256 is valid for one return
journey from Bedford to Elstree & Borehamwood, and
unlimited travel on participating operators services within all
6 zones.
Note: Ticket holders may, upon request, retain their tickets
for travel on permitted London bus services that operate
outside the Travelcard area."

[1] http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectionk-part1.pdf

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:


> Howard Fisher wrote:
> 
> > As this complexity is forced upon us fare paying passengers by the 
> > railway system, it seems to me not unreasonable for the 
> > representatives of the railway system to understand the 
> > complexity.
> 
> Not unreasonable? How much of the national timetable do you believe 
> it is reasonable for ticket-issuing employees (or by your comment, 
> do you mean all rail employees?) to carry around in their heads?


Isn't it evident that ticket sellers *need* to be provided with an 
information system that is, at least, adequate to the complexity of 
the fare structure which has been set up by their employers?  They 
aren't expected (not by me, anyway) to keep the whole fares manual in 
their head, but if it's impractical for them to use it at all, then 
they need it in some other form, that can be referenced in seconds in 
accordance with the customer's requirements.

I'd say Howard F has over-stated the case in asking for the staff to 
"understand" the complex rules, but at least they do need the 
facilities to operate them in a practical way, without needing 20mins 
of research to issue an individual ticket.

(I have in mind that, in the event which provoked this discussion, if 
the poster was honest about what they asked for - although they 
weren't initially candid with us about the circumstances - then they 
asked clearly for a specific ticket, but were, without comment, sold 
something different and more expensive.  It's not as if they e.g asked 
for complex advice about a range of options.)

It's not the passenger's fault that the fare manual is so complex, but 
as long as it's complex and has loopholes, I don't see why we 
passengers shouldn't take advantage of any savings that we can find.  
If the railway can't operate those rules because they are too complex, 
then the solution is in their own hands - no-one else's.

One thing I *would* say: those who sell the tickets (assisted by any 
necessary information systems) need to be *at least* as well informed 
as the wandering ticket examiners, if the passenger is not to fall 
into the trap of being sold a ticket in good faith for a journey which 
they have clearly and honestly described, but which is then 
dishonoured by a ticket examiner.  That's unacceptable (not only in 
the real world but also in contract law, IMHO - IANAL).

best regards

Roland Perry wrote:

> Assuming the original ticket vendor wasn't simply deaf, when a customer 
> asks for a "Cheap Day" ticket suspiciously early in the day, I'd expect 
> him to reply "You realise this won't be valid until <foo>", at which 
> point the better informed customer can reply "No, it's not as simple as 
> that, I think you'll find the ticket is OK for <bar>", and for the 
> vendor to then look it up. He shouldn't just issue a higher priced 
> ticket.


I agree, in principle. I don't much care whether it would be the seller
or buyer who mentioned it. But if the seller didn't, then it was up to
the buyer (caveat emptor is after all a very old principle). 

What's irking me about this thread is that the OP has made some very
pointed comments about the service received, but does not seem to have
done as much as he might have to increase the chances of getting the
service he believes he merits. Blame rarely lies 100% in one place.

Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> Isn't it evident that ticket sellers *need* to be provided with an 
> information system that is, at least, adequate to the complexity of 
> the fare structure which has been set up by their employers?

Yes, without any doubt at all.


> They need it in some form that can be referenced in seconds

Agreed, in principle - but seconds would be inadequate to deal with:


> the event which provoked this discussion...

.... since, in that event, the nub of the issue appears to be that the
booking clerk did not know about the departure times from an entirely
different station. FWIW, even though I realise that Pewsey isn't a great
metropolis, I'm surprised that the first train off Rg isn't until 0905,
especially as there's one to Bedwyn at an unearthly 05xx.

"1577+2260" <someone@somewhere.x> wrote in message
news:us6vg11j40o0oe2cr175i7qmmgfnvcq2se@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 22:12:41 GMT, Chris Tolley 
> wrote:
>
> >But the problem is that demand is not even on all routes and the arcane
> >rules are frequently an attempt to use the ticket prices to regulate
> >demand. So the problem remains that if the fares structure is simplified
> >as you suggest, some other way of regulating demand is required (either
> >that, or increase capacity by building new tracks). Please forgive the
> >last comment. I know it's not remotely realistic.
>
> My suggested simplification isn't all that  simple really. I'd have
> thought that routes could still be 'categorised' a lot more than now.
> Most restrictions do follow some sort of pattern, so it would be a
> case of standardising this a bit, I suppose.
>
> E.g. restrictions for Savers *from* London:
> On all IC services, not valid before zzzz, and from xxxx to yyyy
> inclusive (see red routes on map).
> Resstrictions do not apply to longer journeys with destinations on
> green routes, even if via red routes.
>
> So rather than having to look up indiviual routes and codes, there is
> a degree of standardisation, albeit with still some complexity. Time
> differences in peak periods do exist though...
>

TOCs want to maximise revenue, but they don't want overcrowded trains
because that deters passengers from future travel. So I predict more of a
shift towards AP tickets, i.e. instead of selling Savers for
shoulder-of-peak trains, which then often become overcrowded, restrict
Savers to truly off-peak trains, and fill, but not overcrowd, the
shoulder-of-peak trains using AP tickets, not at bargain basement rates, but
at fares similar to Saver fares.

Peter

Peter Masson wrote:


> TOCs want to maximise revenue, but they don't want overcrowded trains
> because that deters passengers from future travel. So I predict more of a
> shift towards AP tickets


Exactly what I, like many people, don't want to see.

I want to be able to do what a car driver would do - wake up
on a fine day and go for a trip. If forced to choose, I'd
rather see a general fares increase to allow walk-on
fares to continue.

Charlie

In message , at 08:50:49 on 
Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley  remarked:

>> Assuming the original ticket vendor wasn't simply deaf, when a customer
>> asks for a "Cheap Day" ticket suspiciously early in the day, I'd expect
>> him to reply "You realise this won't be valid until <foo>", at which
>> point the better informed customer can reply "No, it's not as simple as
>> that, I think you'll find the ticket is OK for <bar>", and for the
>> vendor to then look it up. He shouldn't just issue a higher priced
>> ticket.
>
>I agree, in principle. I don't much care whether it would be the seller
>or buyer who mentioned it. But if the seller didn't, then it was up to
>the buyer (caveat emptor is after all a very old principle).
>
>What's irking me about this thread is that the OP has made some very
>pointed comments about the service received, but does not seem to have
>done as much as he might have to increase the chances of getting the
>service he believes he merits. Blame rarely lies 100% in one place.


He claims he asked for a "Cheap Day Single", and was sold something 
twice the price (albeit with the mythical "Day Single" in the name).

Do you think he should have researched the fare in advance, and then 
tackled the ticket seller at the time? If the ticket he was sold had 
said "Standard Open" on it, he would have stood a better chance of 
noticing it at the time.
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 09:40:11 on 
Sat, 27 Aug 2005, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid> remarked:

>>This is exactly my question. I have a feeling that the entire card is
>>supposed to expire after the outward trip has been completed, but what
>>is the precise rule, and does it actually say that the ticket is good
>>for one outbound leg and one inbound leg, but neglects to specify in
>>which order?
>
>Says the fares manual[1]:
>
>"‘Out-Boundary’ Day Travelcards
>‘Out-boundary’ Day Travelcards must be issued to Zones
>R1256 only (All Zones). They include one return rail journey
>to the first station within Zone 6 of the Travelcard area on
>the line of route for which the ticket is issued.


So you need to combine that rule with another one that says you have to 
use returns in the right order?


>For example, a
>Day Travelcard from Bedford to R1256 is valid for one return
>journey from Bedford to Elstree & Borehamwood, and
>unlimited travel on participating operators services within all
>6 zones.
>Note: Ticket holders may, upon request, retain their tickets


There's a missing "only", here, perhaps?


>for travel on permitted London bus services that operate
>outside the Travelcard area."

>[1] http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectionk-part1.pdf


-- 
Roland Perry

"Chris Tolley"  wrote


> even though I realise that Pewsey isn't a great
> metropolis, I'm surprised that the first train off Rg isn't until 0905,


That's early. Time was when the first train from Reading to Pewsey was at
1742. If you missed it, there was another at 1850, but on that one you hasd
to change at Newbury.

Peter

Roland Perry wrote:

> Do you think he should have researched the fare in advance, and then 
> tackled the ticket seller at the time? If the ticket he was sold had 
> said "Standard Open" on it, he would have stood a better chance of 
> noticing it at the time.

I take the fact that the OP asked for a cheap ticket to indicate that he
had already done some research. I just think that it would have been
helpful for the OP to mention the time of the train he was buying the
ticket for. But yes, checking the ticket at the time would have enabled
the situation to be corrected there and then.

It's reasonable to be able to buy an only-after-$time ticket before
$time when the first train from that station is after $time. I'd expect
a booking clerk to know such information for his/her own station if it
is somewhere as small as North Camp (but not somewhere with many more
journey possibilities, e.g. Crewe). My beef with the OP is expecting
that the booking clerk should know details for trains not only from that
station but also from a much bigger station nearly 20 miles away.

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 09:21:35 GMT, Chris Tolley 
wrote:

>... since, in that event, the nub of the issue appears to be that the
>booking clerk did not know about the departure times from an entirely
>different station. FWIW, even though I realise that Pewsey isn't a great
>metropolis, I'm surprised that the first train off Rg isn't until 0905,
>especially as there's one to Bedwyn at an unearthly 05xx.


Perhaps if/when FGWL Bedwyn trains are extended to Westbury (as SRA
IIRC has suggested) there will be a natural opportunity to make the
first train earlier.

The only FGW train to the South West before that is the 07xx which
goes via Bristol (or at least did in the old timetable). Pewsey
suffers most from this because Newbury has FGWL and Westbury has some
sort of service via Salisbury.

1577+2260 wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 09:21:35 GMT, Chris Tolley 
> wrote:
>>... since, in that event, the nub of the issue appears to be that the
>>booking clerk did not know about the departure times from an entirely
>>different station. FWIW, even though I realise that Pewsey isn't a great
>>metropolis, I'm surprised that the first train off Rg isn't until 0905,
>>especially as there's one to Bedwyn at an unearthly 05xx.
> 
> Perhaps if/when FGWL Bedwyn trains are extended to Westbury (as SRA
> IIRC has suggested) there will be a natural opportunity to make the
> first train earlier.


That's it! It's because I was aware of that idea being in the air that I
was surprised the first train was so late. ;-)
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p10589935.html
(08 610 at Tyseley, 4 Oct 1987)

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Barry Salter wrote:


> Note that APTIS (and possibly SPORTIS, I can't remember) uses the 
> same button (labelled STS) for both Standard Day and Standard Open 
> Singles, and defaults to printing Day Single.


OK, this may be slightly tangential, but...

Perusing the cited 
http://atoc.org/traveltrade/manuals/nfm/sectionk-part1.pdf , I learn 
that an off-peak travelcard cannot normally be sold M-F before 09:30, 
although the very ticket could have been purchased in advance, for 
example, in the evening on the previous day.

It makes no exception for buying one at station A for use from station 
B.  So it seems that someone buying, on the day, e.g a single from A 
to B plus an off-peak outboundary travelcard from B, could not 
normally buy the combination till 09:30 - probably giving them no 
chance to use the first available off-peak train from B.

The passenger would need to have prepared themselves by buying the 
travelcard on a previous day (but not before 09:30 M-F), making it 
clear which date it was intended for.

Is there also some analogous problem with CDRs, then?

"1577+2260" <someone@somewhere.x> wrote

>
> Perhaps if/when FGWL Bedwyn trains are extended to Westbury (as SRA
> IIRC has suggested) there will be a natural opportunity to make the
> first train earlier.
>
> The only FGW train to the South West before that is the 07xx which
> goes via Bristol (or at least did in the old timetable). Pewsey
> suffers most from this because Newbury has FGWL and Westbury has some
> sort of service via Salisbury.
>

In the Beeching era the local service Bedwyn - Westbury (including the route
via Devizes) was withdrawn, but Pewsey was reprieved, though for many years
only had an up morning peak and down evening paek service (plus a Sunday
evening up train). With Sectorisation NSE took on the Reading - Newbury -
Bedwyn service (and after a time lost its remaining Westbury service), with
Pewsey going to InterCity - so we ended up with the nonsense that there are
no passenger trains between the adjoining stations of Bedwyn and Pewsey. The
barricades are at last being broken, with trains which call at both
Hungerford and Pewsey.

Peter

In message <2ehs0cahxfx1.d1uiubxlv0ih$.dlg@40tude.net>, at 11:54:36 on 
Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley  remarked:

>Roland Perry wrote:
>> Do you think he should have researched the fare in advance, and then
>> tackled the ticket seller at the time? If the ticket he was sold had
>> said "Standard Open" on it, he would have stood a better chance of
>> noticing it at the time.
>I take the fact that the OP asked for a cheap ticket to indicate that he
>had already done some research.


To the extent that he knew that a Cheap Day Single was what he wanted, 
but not perhaps the price.


> I just think that it would have been
>helpful for the OP to mention the time of the train he was buying the
>ticket for.


He asked for the right ticket.


> But yes, checking the ticket at the time would have enabled
>the situation to be corrected there and then.


I think we are overlooking the fact that the ticket bore the bogus name 
"Std Day Single", which some people might think was a shorthand for 
"Cheap Day Single".


>It's reasonable to be able to buy an only-after-$time ticket before
>$time when the first train from that station is after $time. I'd expect
>a booking clerk to know such information for his/her own station if it
>is somewhere as small as North Camp (but not somewhere with many more
>journey possibilities, e.g. Crewe). My beef with the OP is expecting
>that the booking clerk should know details for trains not only from that
>station but also from a much bigger station nearly 20 miles away.


We don't know that the reason he was sold the more expensive ticket was 
because the clerk was second-guessing the timings. I think there should 
have been a conversation about the type of ticket, if the clerk thought 
he "knew better". On the other hand, isn't it possible that the clerk 
simply issued what he did because he didn't really know what he was 
doing?
-- 
Roland Perry

In message , at 
14:04:09 on Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Alan J. Flavell  
remarked:

>I learn
>that an off-peak travelcard cannot normally be sold M-F before 09:30,

[snip]

>Is there also some analogous problem with CDRs, then?


Only if you can persuade me that there's a country-wide restriction on 
early morning CDRs.
-- 
Roland Perry

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Roland Perry  wrote:

>In message <denrmp$5qf$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>, at 
>19:48:42 on Fri, 26 Aug 2005, John Salmon 
> remarked:
>
>>Isn't it the case (I think it's been discussed here before) that
>>out-boundary one-day travelcards can only be issued *from* the out-boundary
>>station *to* Zones 1-6, even if the journey is to be undertaken the other
>>way?
>
>They are indeed only issued as tickets *from* the out-boundary station 
>(but ought to be purchasable *at* any station, just like any other 
>ticket).


 From memory (I've had a quick scan but can't find it) there's a rule 
that says that out-boundary one-day-travelcards are only available from 
stations outside the travelcard area. This is horribly ambiguous and can 
mean that some ticket clerks will refuse to sell such a ticket, say 
"from Peterborough" at Waterloo. I have in the past both won and lost 
the argument.

-- 
Howard

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Alan J. Flavell  wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:
>
>> Howard Fisher wrote:
>>
>> > As this complexity is forced upon us fare paying passengers by the
>> > railway system, it seems to me not unreasonable for the
>> > representatives of the railway system to understand the
>> > complexity.
>>
>> Not unreasonable? How much of the national timetable do you believe
>> it is reasonable for ticket-issuing employees (or by your comment,
>> do you mean all rail employees?) to carry around in their heads?
>
>Isn't it evident that ticket sellers *need* to be provided with an
>information system that is, at least, adequate to the complexity of
>the fare structure which has been set up by their employers?  They
>aren't expected (not by me, anyway) to keep the whole fares manual in
>their head, but if it's impractical for them to use it at all, then
>they need it in some other form, that can be referenced in seconds in
>accordance with the customer's requirements.
>
>I'd say Howard F has over-stated the case in asking for the staff to
>"understand" the complex rules, but at least they do need the
>facilities to operate them in a practical way, without needing 20mins
>of research to issue an individual ticket.


Yes, this is indeed what I meant, but failed to say. For example, I was 
travelling from (iirc) Worcester to Peterborough and the cheapest fair 
was two Central Trains special day tickets. It was only through 
perseverence in advance that I found this out and I needed to prompt the 
ticket clerk to sell them, rather than the alternative at I believe 
something over twice the price.
-- 
Howard

"Howard Fisher"  wrote

>
> Yes, this is indeed what I meant, but failed to say. For example, I was
> travelling from (iirc) Worcester to Peterborough and the cheapest fair
> was two Central Trains special day tickets. It was only through
> perseverence in advance that I found this out and I needed to prompt the
> ticket clerk to sell them, rather than the alternative at I believe
> something over twice the price.


We've discussed on many occasions the possibility of saving money by
splitting a journey into two or more tickets. I think it's generally
accepted here that in these circumstances it's up to the passenger to do the
research in advance and ask for the tickets he wants, not for the ticket
clerk to know how to split a journey and offer this alternative to the
passenger. What is unacceptable is for a ticket clerk to refuse to sell a
ticket from a distant station because he can't be bothered to look up the
fare in the manual.

Peter

In message <deq29o$du9$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>, at 
15:53:29 on Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Peter Masson  
remarked:

>We've discussed on many occasions the possibility of saving money by
>splitting a journey into two or more tickets. I think it's generally
>accepted here that in these circumstances it's up to the passenger to do the
>research in advance and ask for the tickets he wants, not for the ticket
>clerk to know how to split a journey and offer this alternative to the
>passenger.


In the general case, I think that's true. But there must be a few well 
trodden routes (eg Nottingham/Cambridge on Central) where it must be 
well known by all the ticket sellers at Nottingham and Cambridge that a 
split ticket (2 x CDR) at somewhere like Peterborough (where all trains 
conveniently stop) is likely to be cheaper.

The question is: under what circumstances should the consumer protection 
element of selling the cheapest ticket over-ride the ToC's inherent 
desire to make the most money? And when are split tickets an 
"undesirable" loop-hole, rather then the consumer's inherent right to 
buy the most appropriate tickets?
-- 
Roland Perry

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:27:47 +0100, in article
, Barry Salter
 wrote in uk.railway: 


>Note that APTIS (and possibly SPORTIS, I can't remember) uses the same
>button (labelled STS) for both Standard Day and Standard Open Singles,
>and defaults to printing Day Single.


SPORTIS has seperate buttons for Day and Open singles.

Cheers,
Chris Pemberton, Pendleton, Salford, Lancs.
-- 
This post contains my personal opinion only. If I am in a position to
speak for somebody I'll say so.

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:08:16 GMT, in article
, Chris Tolley
 wrote in uk.railway: 


>Fine, but you bought the ticket at a time of day when the clerk would
>not expect to be selling such tickets. No doubt the clerk has to deal
>with people who ask for all kinds of tickets with a not-quite-right name
>and has to interpret the requests.


The same thing happens on trains. Many people ask for an Open return
when they mean Saver. There were, until recently, relatively few Open
returns that one would need to issue on the local network. They would be
for longer-distance journeys that would involve an operator other than
Northern.

In January, all this changed as TPE introduced Open Returns (as well as
retaining Day Returns on certain routes - and in some cases in one
direction only. The key station system has meant that there are TPE
restrictions from a good number of stations that TPE cannot serve, some
on a route that TPE cannot even use on a diversion. In fact in one
example, TPE set *the* fare (and therefore the restrictions,) for a
combined total of four routes where they have just one train per hour,
whilst another operator runs three, maybe four trains per hour between
the two locations on two routes, and up to nine, possibly ten trains per
hour on the permitted routes between the two locations while a third
operator runs the same service frequency as TPE.


>No doubt many people ask for cheap
>day tickets at a time when they are not valid, and no doubt the booking
>clerk issues the most appropriate ticket in what the circumstances are
>perceived to be.


You get people asking for all sorts of tickets that are not valid at the
time they ask for them - even on a local network. I wonder how many
variations there are elsewhere in the country.

Booking office clerks are static at a specific location, so their
mindset will be what happens on their route from their station. They
will in most cases know virtually everything that happens from their
station. Operational knowledge comes from experience. As a guard, I
carry a hell of a lot of operational knowledge for all the routes I
work. Some knowledge is supplemented from personal experience, I use
trains more than some others, I tend to remember each trip, and I once
did a step-by-step journey plan for somebody going to Kent right in
front of a passenger entirely from memory including a bit of local
knowledge trickery, only because I had made exactly the same trip 7 days
earlier and I was once local there. That dosen't make the 123 others in
my depot any less professional because they didn't know which station
would be best in a city 250 miles away.


> If you did not explicitly mention that you intended to
>use the ticket after 9am, then if I were this booking clerk, I would
>find your comments about unprofessionalism to be somewhat unfair. 


I entirely agree with this sentiment. We are not mind-readers. We do our
best with the very limited resources available to us. I do not know of
any person who I have had the pleasure to work with who would
deliberately overcharge a passenger, and I am sure that the same
standards apply elsewhere. People can make mistakes. Absolutely nobody
is perfect.

That seems to be what's happened here - and it dosen't deserve the
amount of bile vented by the original poster.

Cheers,
Chris Pemberton, Pendleton, Salford, Lancs.
-- 
This post contains my personal opinion only. If I am in a position to
speak for somebody I'll say so.

Chris Pemberton wrote:

>That seems to be what's happened here - and it dosen't deserve the
>amount of bile vented by the original poster.


Am I missing some posts from this thread? I can't see anything from
Jon that could be classed as 'bile'!

Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Green Day - Christie Road (from the album 'Kerplunk')

In message , at 18:06:25 on 
Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Chris Pemberton  
remarked:

>People can make mistakes. Absolutely nobody is perfect.
>
>That seems to be what's happened here - and it dosen't deserve the
>amount of bile vented by the original poster.


A shame then, that the answer to the letter of complaint was so 
dismissive. Do you think the sorry saga would even have been raised here 
if they'd said "oops, sorry, here is a refund" ?
-- 
Roland Perry

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:14:22 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>A shame then, that the answer to the letter of complaint was so 
>dismissive. Do you think the sorry saga would even have been raised here 
>if they'd said "oops, sorry, here is a refund" ?


Quite.

I judge companies, rail and otherwise, not by whether they make
mistakes (because everyone does), but by how they deal with them when
they do.

fGW appear to have achieved 0/10 in this case.

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, 27 Aug 2005 01:58:35 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:


>There are actually 4. In increasing order of price:
>
>Southern Only
>Thameslink Only
>Not Gatwick Express
>Gatwick Express Only


How utterly ridiculous.  There should be one, or at most two if you
consider GatEx a premium service.

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, 27 Aug 2005 08:44:12 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>In message , at 21:14:36 on Fri, 26 Aug 
>2005, Neil Williams  remarked:
>>> Is that allowed, i.e.
>>>use of the Travelcard after the out-boundary return trip is complete?
>>
>>No - the Travelcard is only valid until commencement of the return
>>trip, AIUI.
>
>Where is this rule written down? (so that passengers can do their 
>research and buy the most appropriate ticket).


I've never seen it written down, but I have heard it from several
sources.  The bit another poster quoted about outboundary bus services
is interesting...

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:

> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 01:58:35 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>There are actually 4. In increasing order of price:
>>
>>Southern Only
>>Thameslink Only
>>Not Gatwick Express
>>Gatwick Express Only
> 
> 
> How utterly ridiculous.  There should be one, or at most two if you
> consider GatEx a premium service.
> 


But that means each TOC has to get a smaller slice of the settlement pie .

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 22:50:26 GMT, Andrew Bell  wrote:


>But that means each TOC has to get a smaller slice of the settlement pie .


No, it doesn't, or not in this specific case.  Think about it.

If there was only an Any Permitted ticket, revenue for the flow would
be distributed based on the number of services operated and average
loadings on those services, just like it is elsewhere.  This would
result in roughly the same split overall as if you just had
operator-specific tickets.

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.

Roland Perry wrote:


> On the other hand, isn't it possible that the clerk simply issued what
> he did because he didn't really know what he was doing?


Anything's possible, of course, including this option. That's one
important reason why your suggestion about checking the tickets at the
time is relevant. The OP says the tickets were bought at 0820. His train
was presumably the 0828, so he had time to at least glance at them.

I do, btw, fully understand the OP's plan to buy both tickets at North
Camp - the 0828 only allows a 7 min connection at Reading if running to
time, and only the most optimistic of travellers would think that was
enough leeway to buy a ticket at Reading.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p10589961.html
(47 545 at Birmingham International, 1979)

In message , at 23:33:56 on Sat, 27 Aug 
2005, Neil Williams  remarked:

>If there was only an Any Permitted ticket, revenue for the flow would
>be distributed based on the number of services operated and average
>loadings on those services, just like it is elsewhere.  This would
>result in roughly the same split overall as if you just had
>operator-specific tickets.


Not if you believe that Southern is successfully targeting the 
penny-pinchers with its cheaper ticket.
-- 
Roland Perry

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 08:19:25 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>Not if you believe that Southern is successfully targeting the 
>penny-pinchers with its cheaper ticket.


True.

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.

Just a couple of thoughts:


>>>I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way)
>>>and when I purchased the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I 
>>>was sold (which I didn't notice until I got home later that day) was 
>>>called a "STD Day Single".


Whilst I don't have the range of fares to hand for this particular 
journey, Cheap Day Singles are only available for journeys where the 
Standard Day Single costs more than the Cheap Day Return.


> Standard Day Singles (SDS) and Standard Open Singles (SOS) are
> *different* ticket types - they're listed in part 2 of section A of
> the fares manual. Trying to pretend that they are the same is somewhat
> underhand, to put it mildly.


Not at all. Have you ever used APTIS?

Again whilst it doesn't apply in this case, the APTIS machine would 
issue *all* remote-origin Standard Open Singles as Standard Day Singles 
as there wasn't an option to issue remote-origin SOS tickets.

I think FGWL are heading down the Fujitsu STAR route these days, though.

However it is probably just a simple case of 'the clerk pressed the 
wrong button'. It happens.

Finally, why not just apply for a refund at a FGWL station? It's usually 
a lot easier than dealing with Customer Services...

-- 
Rob
http://www.uicstock.org.uk/
To reply, remove zudo

Howard Fisher wrote:


> I had almost the same situation at Guildford recently. I asked for a one 
> day WAGN only travelcard from Peterborough and a cheap day single to 
> Bdry Zone 6 (because that appears to give the cheapest single fare from 
> Guildford to Peterborough), but was sold a ticket to iirc Surbiton. When 
> I complained that this wasn't what I'd asked for, the ticket clerk 
> offered to give me 5p which was I think the difference :-)


You were sold the correct ticket. When travelling into London, you would 
be issued with a ticket to the first station inside the Travelcard zone.

This may not always be the same as a Boundary Zone ticket in the reverse 
direction.

:-)
-- 
Rob
http://www.uicstock.org.uk/
To reply, remove zudo

Stevie D wrote:


> I often find that the ticket agent we use at work tries to overcharge
> me (well, my employer, not me) - usually suggesting a BSR rather than
> an SVR, or an SOR instead of a BSR.


A BSR is much cheaper than an SVR. I think you mean a BVR :-)

-- 
Rob
http://www.uicstock.org.uk/
To reply, remove zudo

> However it is probably just a simple case of 'the clerk pressed the 
> wrong button'. It happens.
> 
> Finally, why not just apply for a refund at a FGWL station? It's usually 
> a lot easier than dealing with Customer Services...


I don't have the ticket any more. I sent it to the customer relations
who did not return it with their reply.

The Doctor wrote:

>Just a couple of thoughts:
>
>>>>I was travelling from Reading to Pewsey (one-way)
>>>>and when I purchased the ticket I requested a cheap day single. I 
>>>>was sold (which I didn't notice until I got home later that day) was 
>>>>called a "STD Day Single".
>
>Whilst I don't have the range of fares to hand for this particular 
>journey, Cheap Day Singles are only available for journeys where the 
>Standard Day Single costs more than the Cheap Day Return.


That's irrelevant in this case: he asked for a Cheap Day Single for a
journey where (according to the National Rail website) a CDS fare
exists and would have been valid for the train he wanted to use.

He would have been able to challenge the ticket at the time it was
issued if he had known what the fare was for that journey beforehand
(that's a mistake he's probably unlikely to repeat anytime soon...),
but that doesn't give fGW the right to issue a ticket that was
different to the one he asked for without first explaining why they
were issuing a different one, nor should they be allowed to refuse to
give him a refund of the difference when he found out what they'd
done.


>> Standard Day Singles (SDS) and Standard Open Singles (SOS) are
>> *different* ticket types - they're listed in part 2 of section A of
>> the fares manual. Trying to pretend that they are the same is somewhat
>> underhand, to put it mildly.
>
>Not at all. Have you ever used APTIS?


The fares system is complicated enough without having to take into
consideration which make of ticket machine is being used! 

In any case, if the OP had been issued with a ticket that said STD
OPEN on it, he might have queried it at the time.

<evil thought>
One could argue that if the ticket machines being used can't show the
correct ticket type and instead issue tickets that could mislead
passengers into thinking they have been sold a different ticket type
which would have attrracted a lower fare, then maybe the company
concerned should be prosecuted for fraud?
</et>


>However it is probably just a simple case of 'the clerk pressed the 
>wrong button'. It happens.


I don't think the OP was overly bothered what happened or who's fault
it may or may not have been: he just wanted a refund when thought he'd
been overcharged. If I was in his position, I'd be pretty cheesed off
if I'd got that reply from fGW.


>Finally, why not just apply for a refund at a FGWL station? It's usually 
>a lot easier than dealing with Customer Services...


Now you tell us :)


Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Reef - Good Feeling

The Doctor wrote:


> Stevie D wrote:
> 
>> I often find that the ticket agent we use at work tries to overcharge
>> me (well, my employer, not me) - usually suggesting a BSR rather than
>> an SVR, or an SOR instead of a BSR.
> 
> A BSR is much cheaper than an SVR. I think you mean a BVR :-)


In that case, you're probably right. What is a BSR then?

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

Stevie D wrote:

> The Doctor wrote:
> 
>>Stevie D wrote:
>>
>>>I often find that the ticket agent we use at work tries to overcharge
>>>me (well, my employer, not me) - usually suggesting a BSR rather than
>>>an SVR, or an SOR instead of a BSR.
>>
>>A BSR is much cheaper than an SVR. I think you mean a BVR :-)
> 
> In that case, you're probably right. What is a BSR then?


Standard Class Off Peak 2 Return.

(Not sure where they get the abbreviation from!).

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 22:39:01 GMT, Neil Williams wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 01:58:35 +0100, asdf <invalid@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
> >There are actually 4. In increasing order of price:
> >
> >Southern Only
> >Thameslink Only
> >Not Gatwick Express
> >Gatwick Express Only
> 
> How utterly ridiculous.  There should be one, or at most two if you
> consider GatEx a premium service.


Yes, well. That flow is what the entire country would have had if
privatisation had happened the way it was originally intended. 

The London - Gatwick/v.v. flow was the BR "testbed" for a
privatised-operator-specific fares system. That it wasn't really
workable for a national system is evident in the fact that it wasn't
adopted for the rest of the system.

I'm amazed it's lasted this long, but the power of inertia should
never be underestimated.

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:41:00 GMT, The Doctor
 wrote:


>You were sold the correct ticket. When travelling into London, you would 
>be issued with a ticket to the first station inside the Travelcard zone.
>
>This may not always be the same as a Boundary Zone ticket in the reverse 
>direction.


And I think that (unlike the other way round) the train must stop
there.

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.

Mark Morton wrote:


>>> A BSR is much cheaper than an SVR. I think you mean a BVR :-)
>>
>> In that case, you're probably right. What is a BSR then?
> 
> Standard Class Off Peak 2 Return.
> 
> (Not sure where they get the abbreviation from!).


It used to stand for "Bargain Standard Return" before GNER renamed it a 
year or two ago.

On a related subject there will be another overhaul of GNER, Midland 
Mainline and Virgin Trains advance purchase fares on 25/09/05.

The current Virgin Values will remain as three types but be bookable up 
to a day in advance, subject to availability.

I think I'm right in saying MML are introducing in excess of ten new 
advance purchase single ticket types, and I believe GNER are taking the 
'single' route as well.

And people wonder why booking clerks sometimes issue the wrong tickets!

:-)
-- 
Rob
http://www.uicstock.org.uk/
To reply, remove zudo

In message , at 22:31:48 on Wed, 31 Aug 
2005, Neil Williams  remarked:

>>When travelling into London, you would
>>be issued with a ticket to the first station inside the Travelcard zone.
>>
>>This may not always be the same as a Boundary Zone ticket in the reverse
>>direction.
>
>And I think that (unlike the other way round) the train must stop
>there.


How many trains stop at BZ, rather than the station just inside the BZ ?
-- 
Roland Perry

In message <dhqRe.41562$WN5.9704@fe02.news.easynews.com>, at 22:35:54 on 
Wed, 31 Aug 2005, The Doctor  remarked:


>I think I'm right in saying MML are introducing in excess of ten new 
>advance purchase single ticket types,


But withdrawing even more existing ticket types.


>and I believe GNER are taking the 'single' route as well.
>
>And people wonder why booking clerks sometimes issue the wrong tickets!


The new MML tickets should be easier, as for any given train only the 
cheapest (whose quota is still available) needs to be considered. 
Previously there would have been a much wider set of criteria to 
consider before deciding the most appropriate ticket.

-- 
Roland Perry

On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 08:00:22 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>The new MML tickets should be easier, as for any given train only the 
>cheapest (whose quota is still available) needs to be considered. 


True, but that doesn't apply to GNER, who ridiculously allow YP
discount on only one level.

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:


>>This may not always be the same as a Boundary Zone ticket in the reverse 
>>direction.
> 
> And I think that (unlike the other way round) the train must stop
> there.


Only if the zonal ticket is not a season ticket. If it is a season then 
you may travel on a 'through' train.

-- 
Rob
http://www.uicstock.org.uk/
To reply, remove zudo

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:38:26 GMT, The Doctor
 wrote:


>>>This may not always be the same as a Boundary Zone ticket in the reverse 
>>>direction.
>> 
>> And I think that (unlike the other way round) the train must stop
>> there.
>
>Only if the zonal ticket is not a season ticket. If it is a season then 
>you may travel on a 'through' train.


So why is it that, e.g., if you hold an all zones ODTC and want to
travel out to Guildford, you get issued with a BZ ticket allowing
travel on a non-stop train, but if instead you want to add on a
journey from Guildford into London, you get issued with a ticket to
the first station in zone 6, requiring you to travel on a train that
stops there?

asdf wrote:


> So why is it that, e.g., if you hold an all zones ODTC and want to
> travel out to Guildford, you get issued with a BZ ticket allowing
> travel on a non-stop train, but if instead you want to add on a
> journey from Guildford into London, you get issued with a ticket to
> the first station in zone 6, requiring you to travel on a train that
> stops there?


A difficult one to answer.

I suppose it's appropriate to say that sort of rule is not normally 
enforced. Next time I have a moment in work, I'll check out the exact 
wording of the various rules and report back :)

-- 
Rob
http://www.uicstock.org.uk/
To reply, remove zudo