As Roger Perkins seems to be the FCC expert on the validity of season tickets I have just sent him the following by email;
Dear Mr Perkins
Having seen your recent statements about the validity of certain season tickets I wonder if you could answer a quick question for me.
I live in St Albans and work in Borehamwood. I want to buy an annual season ticket to Elstree and Borehamwood valid via Thameslink services from St Albans City. After arriving at work in Borehamwood I often have to make other journeys around the London area by bus, tube and overground rail services. I notice that the cheapest ticket available which covers my requirements is the Watford North to Elstree and Borehamwood season with an added Zone 1 to 6 Travelcard for £3200. This ticket is helpfully suggested as an option by your online season ticket site.
I know that there has been publicity recently about a St Albans commuter travelling to London who bought the same Watford North ticket which First Capital Connect claim was invalid. However, your online season ticket site makes it clear that this ticket is perfectly valid for travel on trains from St Albans City to Elstree and Borehamwood, which makes sense as it is the obvious route from North Watford.
I understand the Travelcard element of the ticket is not regulated by First Capital Connect. But, before buying my season I just wanted your reassurance that I would not be prevented from using the North Watford ticket by your staff on my initial journey from St Albans City to Elstree and Borehamwood.
I hope you can give me your reassurance and look forward to travelling on First Capital Connect Thameslink services.
Regards.......
And for the cynics among you: I DO live in St Albans, DO work in Borehamwood and DO have to make journeys around London during the day!
Why bother? they will just say "no". They issued a memo to staff saying to refuse to accept tickets.
Just book it online. It's a valid route and the journey planner will offer it. Get an annual, you have evidence of a contract.
No need to take them to court - they would have to take you to Court if they want to stop you, and they are unlikely to do that, as you would have evidence in the form of a previous court ruling as well as a valid itinerary.
Why do you assume that FCC are wrong and the DfT are right?
In this case the DfT press office erroneously assumed that the DfT had to approve the change. They didn't, as it is an error correction, not a change to a historically permitted route. This route would never have been deemed 'reasonable' in BR days. So, to use your emotive language, it was the DfT that were lying.
It is a historically permitted route, and someone else at ATOC has already defined the permitted routes from origin to BZ6 as:
ATOC said:
Valid on all permitted routes (that do not pass through Zones 1-6 intermediately) to/from any outermost station in Zone 6; from the outer boundary of Zone 6 to/from the Origin/Destination
So, what are the permitted routes from Watford North to Elstree & Borehamwood? That includes via St Albans, doesn't it?
If ATOC backtrack on this, we'll be considering our options very carefully indeed....
Is it an error or an unforeseen consequence?
To the TOCs, and unforeseen consequence IS an error. And they often throw a complete wobbler. If you're lucky they will 'only' collude with other TOCs and make demands of the DfT (who will usually - though not always - cave in). If you're unlucky you could be detained against your will or chucked off the train, or told that "I don't care what the Routeing Guide says" or "this is my train, bla bla you've not paid enough bla bla", threatened with BTP, reported to BTP as carrying a gun, or goodness knows what else (and no, none of the examples are made up!)
I know senior people in the industry are reading this and my plea to those reasonable ones among you is: work with us, not against us.
It certainly isn't the shortest route if you are going from Watford North to anywhere in zone 1. Also St Albans - St Albans Abbey isn't a direct interchange so the strict 'shortest route' interpretation doesn't necessarily count even for Elstree
It's a recognised interchange, and even if you say it's not the shortest route entirely by rail, as it's a valid interchange then the route does have a mileage, and if that's shorter than the shortest route entirely by rail, then arguably it's valid.
In any case the rules are that you take permitted routes from Watford North to Elstree & Borehamwood, and it's a mapped route via St Albans anyway.
So it's doubly valid based on mapped routes and, arguably (shorter than the) shortest route.
In BR days you would have been judged solely on whether your route choice was reasonable for the actual journey being undertaken.
Good job we did away with that then - with a legally binding contract, which the TOCs won't duck out of... oh, wait... bugger, they just change the rules to suit!
Does that somehow override the routeing guide? And has this change been approved by the DfT?
It does not. But FCC RPIs will no doubt bully people, as after all, who is going to afford a solicitor? They assume that people will not defend themselves in Court, and for 99% of cases, they are right, people won't! There's no ombudsman to make them stick to the rules. It's not like the banks, who have to act correctly. They can do what they want, and they
do do what they want!
(And I struggle to see how anyone could claim successfully that the spur to Watford Junction appeared on map LB in error.)
Claim successfully? Who to? the DfT? (!) They will believe (almost) anything the TOCs tell them when it comes to "errors"
If anything, the error is in the way permitted routes for out-boundary Travelcards are derived from the permitted routes to boundary zone stations, rather than to London Terminals.
Not an error. It's intentional (though the consequence
in this case may not be!).
Of course if the argument is that it's valid as it's the shortest route the instructions at the start of the routeing guide tell you there's no requirement to use the routeing guide so you'd never see that "easement".
Agreed. The shortest route to Elstree & Borehamwood is absolutely valid in the NRCoC with no need to consult the RG. The only caveat to this is anyone from St Albans using this would be best using a stopping train. On arrival at Elstree & Borehamwood, they can then start a fresh journey which they are permitted to do on their Season ticket. I am not saying non-stop trains aren't valid - I believe they are - but it's harder for FCC to argue against stoppers.
Absolutely ridiculous how this has changed. The easement is barring a very reasonable route, in my opinion. Instead of one change (walk) at St Albans, customers are now made to change at Watford Junction, Willesden Junction, and West Hampstead to get to St Pancras.
It's not enforceable though. You can get an itinerary - which is evidence of a contract, and if you get a stopper your journey can be to/from Elstree & Borehamwood anyway, which is not affected by a "easement" as it's the shortest route!
I would suggest that tickets purchased prior to the changes to the Routeing Guide SHOULD still be honoured as if the changes hadn't happened, in the same way that passengers purchasing tickets more than four weeks prior to a fares change that results in a change to restrictions SHOULD have the less restrictive conditions applied.
Whether that would happen in reality, of course, remains to be seen...
Totally agree, and additionally while shown in booking engines too.
