Flexibility of changing - Exeter or Plymouth?

[Zoe]

Is the time of the connecting train printed on the ticket? If not, then I can't see how it's 'booked'.

See HHF's points earlier in the thread. The ATOC rules for advance fares state that if the ticket doesn't say &Connections then you must only travel on booked trains. If you don't accept that every train you travel on is a booked train then the journey is impossible. In the case of Barking you are booked to transfer from London Underground to c2c via Tower Hill to Fenchurch Street. This is your booked route and it seems that staying on the London Underground to Barking would be going against that.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

See HHF's points earlier in the thread. The ATOC rules for advance fares state that if the ticket doesn't say &Connections then you must only travel on booked trains. If you don't accept that every train you travel on is a booked train then the journey is impossible....

Exactly.

 

[LexyBoy]

I've seen HHF's posts and I would say that that is one interpretation. I can see three interpretations of the rules:

1) Strict interpretation: Tickets are only valid on the date and train service(s) shown on the ticket(s). - therefore if only Exeter-Paddington is shown on the ticket, the ticket is only valid on this service.
Clearly, this is ridiculous, and I wouldn't stand if challenged in court (selling a Truro-London ticket which doesn't in fact allow travel).

2) "An itinerary is a booking" interpretation - HHF's statement that the itinerary given to the passenger constitutes a booking
I have several problems with this, notably that there's no record of it on the travel documents (ticket and reservation) and that various sources including the FGW T&Cs use 'booked' to mean a train with a reservation for it.

3) Something went awry somewhere along the line when fares were being changed about
In this case, the fare should have become a “&Connections” routeing, but was left as the old pre-simplification routeing. This combined with the wording of the Advance ticket T&Cs makes it nonsensical.

(Ignoring possibility 0 – that the ticket has the connection time printed on it, in which case there is no question that that train must be used).

I’m not sure where the third option leaves us, but I don’t agree with HHF’s invocation of the itinerary consitiuting a ‘booking’ – it seems like a kludge to make the ticket’s routeing fit with the rules to me.

If I were wishing to travel on a different train to connect with the train for which I have a reservation on my ticket, I would just write down the times of the trains I want to get, and claim that I wrote these down at the ticket office when I was sold my ticket. Who's to tell otherwise?

 

[Zoe]

If I were wishing to travel on a different train to connect with the train for which I have a reservation on my ticket, I would just write down the times of the trains I want to get, and claim that I wrote these down at the ticket office when I was sold my ticket. Who's to tell otherwise?

This gets complicated when your connecting train is reservable though as the guard would expect to see a reservation if you have a ticket that says booked train only.

 

[MikeWh]

It says that the ticket is valid on connecting services but doesn't say you can use any connecting service. By the ATOC terms and conditions of advance tickets it would seem that if not &Connections then the ticket is only valid on the booked connecting service.

So it seems that you are saying that the ATOC general terms and conditions for advance tickets trump the specific restriction code for the actual ticket? Surely this cannot be the case, or restrictions like not using HS1 in the peak hour could not be enforced. I'm sure that the ATOC general conditions refer also to specific conditions attached to each ticket, thus the fact that the route doesn't say &connections doesn't matter because the ticket restriction details do allow use of connecting services.

And is it really so hard to understand that "connecting services" means any services reasonable to get you from your origin to the start of your booked service(s) and/or from the end of your booked service(s) to your destination? Where there is a specific further restriction to that (the HS1 peak) it mentions that, otherwise it has to be any connecting service. Obviously you still have to adhere to any routeing restrictions for the overall journey and allow minimum connection times at any interchanges on the connections part of the journey.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I don't think the itinerary does constitute a booking at all. I have certainly never meant to imply that.

As I see it, there are two options.

1) The non-reservable service is not considered booked.

2) The non-reservable service is considered booked.

If we say number 1 is true then the op can't get from Truro to Exeter, it is not allowed and so it is a rather pointless ticket.

If we say number 2 is true, then by boarding the reservable service at Plymouth, instead of Exeter, the Op is changing his travel plans. This is made obvious by the fact he does not have a reservation for the reservable service between Plymouth and Exeter, and as changes to travel plans are not available on the train, there could be a hefty bill to pay.

If we say number 2 is true and the Op joined a different non-reservable service at Plymouth, but still made his reserved service at Exeter, it would be against the wording of the rules, but it may never be noticed!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So it seems that you are saying that the ATOC general terms and conditions for advance tickets trump the specific restriction code for the actual ticket?....

Perhaps you could entertain the fact that BOTH conditions apply.

 

[Zoe]

If we say number 2 is true and the Op joined a different non-reservable service at Plymouth, but still made his reserved service at Exeter, it would be against the wording of the rules, but it may never be noticed!

But most certainly would be if they tried to join the reservable service at Plymouth and it seems that's what person that started the thread wanted to do.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

But most certainly would be if they tried to join the reservable service at Plymouth and it seems that's what person that started the thread wanted to do.

Exactly.

 

[MikeWh]

Perhaps you could entertain the fact that BOTH conditions apply.

How can both conditions apply when they are mutually exclusive?

 

[LexyBoy]

I don't think the itinerary does constitute a booking at all. I have certainly never meant to imply that.

As I see it, there are two options.

1) The non-reservable service is not considered booked.

2) The non-reservable service is considered booked.

Sorry if I have misunderstood you, but if the itinerary given at the time of buying the ticket does not constitute a booking, then where does a booking come from?

If we say number 1 is true then the op can't get from Truro to Exeter, it is not allowed and so it is a rather pointless ticket.

Indeed.

If we say number 2 is true, then by boarding the reservable service at Plymouth, instead of Exeter, the Op is changing his travel plans. This is made obvious by the fact he does not have a reservation for the reservable service between Plymouth and Exeter, and as changes to travel plans are not available on the train, there could be a hefty bill to pay.

Yes, it could be spotted that OP isn't adhering to his original travel plans. Could it be proven though that they weren't originally 'booked' on that train, but for whatever reason not given a reservation (I don't know - I guess a reservation would be given automatically). I believe that neither 1 nor 2 are true, and that what is allowed is effectively not defined.

Realistically I would expect a guard to accept it (especially if approached before, preferably whilst in time to get a local train to Exeter!). Personally, I would just go with the original plan to avoid trouble!

If we say number 2 is true and the Op joined a different non-reservable service at Plymouth, but still made his reserved service at Exeter, it would be against the wording of the rules, but it may never be noticed!

If there is no record of the passenger being booked on these trains, and no system to determine which train is to be used for connecting with a certain other train, then the passenger can simply say to themselves "Hmm, I think I'll book myself on the 1423" and it would mean about as much as any other 'booking'.

My reasoning for my option 3 is essentially:
-- Option 1 is clearly wrong
-- Option 2 requires the term 'booking' to mean something different to what it usually is, and requires additional documentation to be carried, without any mention of it on the ticket.
-- Therefore something is wrong! If the ticket restrictions don't make sense within the rules, there must be a mistake in one or the other. I'm of the opinion that these routeings should be changed to "FGW & Connections" to make sense - or alternatively, the connecting train should be shown on the reservation coupon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It says that the ticket is valid on connecting services but doesn't say you can use any connecting service. By the ATOC terms and conditions of advance tickets it would seem that if not &Connections then the ticket is only valid on the booked connecting service.

Actually, according to the quote from FRPP posted by HHF, the bolded part isn't exactly what it says:

Tickets are only valid on the date and train service(s) shown on the ticket(s).

Customers must travel in the class of accomodation and, where shown, in the reserved seat(s) shown on the ticket(s).

Ticket(s) are only valid on the train services of the train company (or geographic route where applicable) shown next to 'route' on the ticket.

If the 'Route' states 'and connections', travel is allowed on appropriate connecting trains where shown on the ticket(s) or other valid travel itinerary.

So if it doesn't have the connecting train on the ticket, or say "& Connections", then it isn't valid on any train other than those on the ticket. Simples!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

How can both conditions apply when they are mutually exclusive?

They are not though, you're thinking black and white, chalk and cheese, little and large. Try thinking grey....

If the ticket is valid for SWT and connecting services it surely means that the c2c service is a connecting service. I'm pretty sure we can agree there.

If it is not valid on connecting services it is a useless ticket as SWT do not serve Barking. I'm sure we can also agree there.

If it is 'booked' for a specific c2c service, it MUST be valid on a connecting service because a c2c service is a connecting service! (See above)

Therefore it can be both 'booked' and valid on a connecting service.

Sorry if I have misunderstood you, but if the itinerary given at the time of buying the ticket does not constitute a booking, then where does a booking come from?...

If the ticket is only valid on booked trains, a non-reservable service must be considered booked, or the ticket is useless! (option 1 or option 2)

....Yes, it could be spotted that OP isn't adhering to his original travel plans. Could it be proven though that they weren't originally 'booked' on that train, but for whatever reason not given a reservation (I don't know - I guess a reservation would be given automatically). I believe that neither 1 nor 2 are true, and that what is allowed is effectively not defined....

Well, I think the chances of the coupon not printing and a ticket saying that it should not have printed are pretty slim. The ticket does show how many couppons are issued and all must be present for the ticket to be valid, but even if it did happen, in this particular case, the op would have no reservation coupon at all as the reservation would be from Plymouth to London, not from Plymouth to Exeter and Exeter to London.

....Realistically I would expect a guard to accept it (especially if approached before, preferably whilst in time to get a local train to Exeter!). Personally, I would just go with the original plan to avoid trouble!....

But that is upto the guard and cannot be guarranteed before leaving the non-reservable service, it is not a right the passenger has and should never be advised as such. What do you suppose happens if the guard says no?.....

....If there is no record of the passenger being booked on these trains, and no system to determine which train is to be used for connecting with a certain other train, then the passenger can simply say to themselves "Hmm, I think I'll book myself on the 1423" and it would mean about as much as any other 'booking'....

And if they chose another non-reservable service it would never get noticed, but when you buy the ticket, you are agreeing to use a particular set of services, if you chose a reservable service, you get a reservation coupon. So if you 'book' a non-reservable service and travel on a reservable one, it's an obvious change of travel plans.

....My reasoning for my option 3 is essentially:
-- Option 1 is clearly wrong....

I agree.

....
-- Option 2 requires the term 'booking' to mean something different to what it usually is, and requires additional documentation to be carried, without any mention of it on the ticket....

You agree to use particular services, this is explained to you when you buy the ticket, I'm not sure where that fits into your 'not making any bookings' reasoning.

....
-- Therefore something is wrong! If the ticket restrictions don't make sense within the rules, there must be a mistake in one or the other. I'm of the opinion that these routeings should be changed to "FGW & Connections" to make sense - or alternatively, the connecting train should be shown on the reservation coupon....

They don't make sense because you don't want them to. There is a perfect line of reasoning being presented and because it doesn't fit into your own particular definition of the word 'booked', you think it is wrong.

I do however agree that with the current rules, one of those options seems to be a good idea.

....Actually, according to the quote from FRPP posted by HHF, the bolded part isn't exactly what it says:....

I thought we were getting somewhere, clearly not. Back to option 1 or option 2 we go.....

....So if it doesn't have the connecting train on the ticket, or say "& Connections", then it isn't valid on any train other than those on the ticket. Simples!

Which brings us neatly back round to option 1 or option 2.

 

[MikeWh]

They are not though, you're thinking black and white, chalk and cheese, little and large. Try thinking grey....

Actually I was refering to whether both the general Advance terms and the specific ticket restriction description could apply. One says that to be valid on connecting services the ticket must say &connections, which it doesn't, while the other says that it is valid on connections. Those two scenarios are mutually exclusive.

If the ticket is valid for SWT and connecting services it surely means that the c2c service is a connecting service. I'm pretty sure we can agree there.

We can ...

If it is not valid on connecting services it is a useless ticket as SWT do not serve Barking. I'm sure we can also agree there.

We can ...

If it is 'booked' for a specific c2c service, it MUST be valid on a connecting service because a c2c service is a connecting service! (See above)

Therefore it can be both 'booked' and valid on a connecting service.

But we come back to whether services can be booked without being mentioned on the ticket. The C2C service is not mentioned on the ticket. Even worse, to get from Paddington to Fenchurch Street you have to make use of the Underground. Except for lower frequency services in the outer suburbs and first and last trains, LU do not make train times available for the public, so you would have absolutely no idea whether you were on your booked train or not. Furthermore, travel itineries usually claim that you leave the first NR station at the same time as you arrive and arrive at the second NR station at the same time as your suggested connection leaves. So even the suggested connecting services don't extend to the Underground, so you can't even be booked on an Underground train even by your definition. And if you can't be booked on an Underground train, that means you can't use one because the ticket doesn't say &connections; so you have to walk from Paddington to Fenchurch Street?

All of which leads us back to the post by collybs, which people seem to be ignoring, that allows use of connecting services to get to and from the booked train. This is the sensible explanation.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Actually I was refering to whether both the general Advance terms and the specific ticket restriction description could apply. One says that to be valid on connecting services the ticket must say &connections, which it doesn't, while the other says that it is valid on connections. Those two scenarios are mutually exclusive....

The FRPP says "If the 'Route' states 'and connections', travel is allowed on appropriate connecting trains where shown on the ticket(s) or other valid travel itinerary".

It does not say "It is only valid on connecting services if the route states 'and connections' ".

....But we come back to whether services can be booked without being mentioned on the ticket. The C2C service is not mentioned on the ticket. Even worse, to get from Paddington to Fenchurch Street you have to make use of the Underground. Except for lower frequency services in the outer suburbs and first and last trains, LU do not make train times available for the public, so you would have absolutely no idea whether you were on your booked train or not. Furthermore, travel itineries usually claim that you leave the first NR station at the same time as you arrive and arrive at the second NR station at the same time as your suggested connection leaves. So even the suggested connecting services don't extend to the Underground, so you can't even be booked on an Underground train even by your definition. And if you can't be booked on an Underground train, that means you can't use one because the ticket doesn't say &connections; so you have to walk from Paddington to Fenchurch Street?

All of which leads us back to the post by collybs, which people seem to be ignoring, that allows use of connecting services to get to and from the booked train. This is the sensible explanation.

So we are back to option 1 and option 2 basically.

 

[LexyBoy]

They don't make sense because you don't want them to. There is a perfect line of reasoning being presented and because it doesn't fit into your own particular definition of the word 'booked', you think it is wrong.

I do however agree that with the current rules, one of those options seems to be a good idea.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. Your reasoning does indeed make sense if we're happy to have quite a broad definition of 'booked', and it is certainly a more productive approach than my interpretation of the rules (i.e. that they don't make sense!), since it does give a commonsense answer to the original question.

Personally I don't find it a satisfying explanation because the rules concerned don't talk about connections being booked (unless they are reserved and appear on the ticket), and only ever specify that you must travel on the train(s) shown on the ticket.

I appreciate that with an Advance ticket one is agreeing to travel on certain trains, but the terms don't say that ALL trains are restricted.

 

[TEW]

On a similar related note. Tickets from Truro to London Zone U1256, which allows a single tube journey as well as the journey to London are also routed FGW Only.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

In the case of 'U' zone tickets, the Underground bit is really only an add-on to the London Terminals fare.

 

[TEW]

The routing is still misleading though. A ticket which includes tube travel shouldn't be routed valid via a specific operator only.

 

[Zoe]

The routing is still misleading though. A ticket which includes tube travel shouldn't be routed valid via a specific operator only.

The tube travel is simply cross-london. The booked entry station to the tube is Paddington and the booked exit station is Tower Hill. By HHFs argument, staying on the tube all the way to Barking is breaking the terms and conditions of the ticket.

 

[bb21]

I've been watching on the sidelines with a lot of interest in the last few days as the topic developed and now wish to offer my understanding on this subject.

Firstly it appears to me that no one has mentioned the fact whether "& Connections" appears on the ticket and whether "Booked Trains Only" is a condition are not mutually exclusive. My understanding is that "Booked Trains Only" is not a condition that is only attached to tickets that are routed without "& Connections". I have a Newcastle - Sheffield AP ticket to hand which says in the Route field "AP TPE & CONNECT" yet in the Validity field it also states "BOOKEDTRAINONLY". I also have a Morecambe - Leicester AP ticket which is routed "VWC & CONNECTNS" and "BOOKDTRAINONLY". While the Newcastle ticket came with two mandatory reservation coupons covering the whole journey, the only coupon that came with the Morecambe ticket is between Preston and Nuneaton.

There are two ways the condition "Booked Trains Only" can be interpreted.

1) The condition applies to all legs in the intended itinerary, ie. all trains, reservable or not, are treated as booked. This, however, cannot be the case as someone has correctly pointed out that those services used to have the keyword "suggested" printed next to them. How can something that cannot be reserved, and indeed, suggested be booked?

2) The condition applies only to those legs that come with a reservation coupon. This then means that those other sections that do not come with a coupon are free choices for the passenger. How is an average punter going to know whether the train he/she intends to catch for the unreserved part of this journey is reservable or not? It cannot be a meaningful condition that travelling without a reservation on a reservable train is invalid as it is not enforceable.

If "Booked Trains Only" indeed means that the passenger is only allowed to use trains that he/she has a reservation on, then in the case of the Morecambe ticket, I would have neither been able to travel from my origin, nor been able to arrive at my destination as the reservation is only for a section in the middle of the journey. This would simply be absurd as people have pointed out.

Back to the OP. There are only three types of routes for Truro - London: GREAT WESTN ONLY, AP SLOUGH and FGW SLEEPR &CONX. If he boards the FGW service early at Plymouth, he cannot be breaking the terms for any of the route described above. Although he does run the risk of missing his train should it start short at Exeter, I would leave the question of whether he should be allowed to travel on a later train in that particular case for another time.

So my conclusion is that logically he cannot be gripped for travelling from Plymouth on the train he is booked from Exeter.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The tube travel is simply cross-london. The booked entry station to the tube is Paddington and the booked exit station is Tower Hill. By HHFs argument, staying on the tube all the way to Barking is breaking the terms and conditions of the ticket.

In the case being refered to, the ticket is destined for a tube station destination. In those cases it is impossible to limit the Underground usage to just cross London journeys.

I've been watching on the sidelines with a lot of interest in the last few days as the topic developed and now wish to offer my understanding on this subject.

Firstly it appears to me that no one has mentioned the fact whether "& Connections" appears on the ticket and whether "Booked Trains Only" is a condition are not mutually exclusive....

Think of the '& connections' issue as an easement within the contract/conditions.

 

[Zoe]

In the case being refered to, the ticket is destined for a tube station destination. In those cases it is impossible to limit the Underground usage to just cross London journeys.

Well the destination is an NR station also served by the tube. By your logic that all trains are booked trains though, wouldn't you be booked to arrive at Barking by c2c and not any other way?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Right, okay, time to clarify.

If you book a ticket to Barking on c2c services you should use the c2c services as that is what you agreed to (by the book), but if you booked to Zone U1234, you can use tube services as the destination is on the Underground.

 

[yorkie]

In the case being refered to, the ticket is destined for a tube station destination. In those cases it is impossible to limit the Underground usage to just cross London journeys.

And if it was to West Horndon and "booked" (not a term I agree with for non-reservable trains) from Fenchurch St? The ticket is then no longer destined for a LU destination...

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Could you eloborate as to how you think that is different to getting a ticket to Barking? Because I think we have been there a few times already.

 

[yorkie]

I don't think that it is, but I thought your post suggested it is different to get a ticket to Barking than West Horndon because in the Barking example, "the ticket is destined for a tube station destination" and I am asking for clarification over what that means.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Oh I see.

By an Underground destination I mean to a U zone or similar. (for example Zone U1234)

If refered to as an NR station the ticket would (normally) be by a TOC service rather than Underground services. So to West Horndon would be 'booked' as train from Fenchurch Street.

 

[Zoe]

If refered to as an NR station the ticket would (normally) be by a TOC service rather than Underground services. So to West Horndon would be 'booked' as train from Fenchurch Street.

So if the ticket said "Barking" on it then you would be booked on a c2c train? This is ludicrous as if you were to ask a member of London Underground staff at Paddingotn they would most likely tell you just to get the Hammersmith & City line all the way to Barking.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Going by the rules (and given that Fastis (and probably other TIS) give routes only via NR where possible) it would have to be a booked train.

In reality, given you wouldn't actually have a reservation (and given few Underground staff would realise which way you had gone anyway, nevermind realise the conditions of an NR ticket!) I don't think it would actually matter which route you choose to take to get there on dual availability routes.

 

[Zoe]

given few Underground staff would realise which way you had gone anyway

Barking station is managed by c2c.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Well, maybe, I honestly can't say I had checked, the last time I was there was back when LO was Silverlink! but don't they use the same barriers?