LNWR/TfW Ticket Marked 'Northern'

[DynamicSpirit]

I quite often make use of the super-offpeak LNWR/TfW TOC-specific tickets to travel to the NorthWest, and did so last week to travel from London to Manchester (LNWR to Crewe then TfW to Manchester). When the guard on the TfW train came round to check for tickets, I got mine out, looked at it, and to my surprise realised the ticket actually said 'On West Midlands Trains and Northern only' with no mention of TfW. As far as I know, that ticket has never been valid on Northern. Has something changed recently in validity of the cheap LNWR off-peak tickets?

Luckily the TfW guard was fine with the ticket, as was the guard on the return journey.

 

[JonathanH]

I quite often make use of the super-offpeak LNWR/TfW TOC-specific tickets to travel to the NorthWest, and did so last week to travel from London to Manchester (LNWR to Crewe then TfW to Manchester). When the guard on the TfW train came round to check for tickets, I got mine out, looked at it, and to my surprise realised the ticket actually said 'On West Midlands Trains and Northern only' with no mention of TfW. As far as I know, that ticket has never been valid on Northern. Has something changed recently in validity of the cheap LNWR off-peak tickets?

Luckily the TfW guard was fine with the ticket, as was the guard on the return journey.

There are now separate WMR / LNR / TFW and WMT & Northern tickets for the flow.

[Screenshot from BRFares showing off-peak return and super off-peak return fares for Euston to Manchester Piccadilly with separate routeings.]
https://www.brfares.com/!fares?orig=EUS&dest=MAN&period=20240928

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

You were exceptionally lucky that you did not encounter TfW's revenue protection officers (Transport Investigations Limited!). You'd have been reported for prosecution, or more likely, an out of court settlement of some sort.

I assume you asked the conductor before boarding on the return journey, and didn't just get on and take a seat?!

I don't think the TfW fares will survive too much longer, but if they do, it's a bit soft that the pricing managers haven't just done a TfW/Northern/WMT ticket rather than making you pick an operator between Manchester and Crewe/Stoke.

 

[507020]

I don't think the TfW fares will survive too much longer, but if they do, it's a bit soft that the pricing managers haven't just done a TfW/Northern/WMT ticket rather than making you pick an operator between Manchester and Crewe/Stoke.

At this point why isn’t the ticket just NOT AVANTI instead of being so ridiculous, unless as you suspect the intention is to force people to use Northern in future and not TfW, but that’s a point that the new ticket is valid to change at Stoke-on-Trent instead of Crewe, but requiring an additional change at Stafford for Euston.

I’ve never used one of the tickets myself.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

At this point why isn’t the ticket just NOT AVANTI instead of being so ridiculous, unless as you suspect the intention is to force people to use Northern in future and not TfW, but that’s a point that the new ticket is valid to change at Stoke-on-Trent instead of Crewe, but requiring an additional change at Stafford for Euston.

I’ve never used one of the tickets myself.

You couldn't make it NOT AVANTI because it would be valid on XC/GWR via Birmingham/Reading into Paddington or Birmingham/High Wycombe into Marylebone.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There are now separate WMR / LNR / TFW and WMT & Northern tickets for the flow.
View attachment 166577
[Screenshot from BRFares showing off-peak return and super off-peak return fares for Euston to Manchester Piccadilly with separate routeings.]
https://www.brfares.com/!fares?orig=EUS&dest=MAN&period=20240928

Oh blimey! Thanks for that info. That is INCREDIBLY confusing. Not just the operator difference, but why is one ticket 'WMR/LNR' and the other 'WMT' - different names that I'm guessing actually mean the same thing? And the fact that they have the same price but different peak hour restrictions just adds to the complexity too. I'd imagine that causes a lot of people to be caught out travelling on trains they genuinely believe their ticket is valid on, but it isn't.

 

[Flying Snail]

I don't think the TfW fares will survive too much longer,

Why?

but if they do, it's a bit soft that the pricing managers haven't just done a TfW/Northern/WMT ticket rather than making you pick an operator between Manchester and Crewe/Stoke.

Presumably TfW and Northern each want their bit of their separate pie.

 

[A S Leib]

You couldn't make it NOT AVANTI because it would be valid on XC/GWR via Birmingham/Reading into Paddington or Birmingham/High Wycombe into Marylebone.

"Not Avanti via Milton Keynes"? That's not really clearer than WMR + TfW / Northern though.

Similarly, I'd like to see a "not LNER" London – Doncaster fare, but the King's Cross – Doncaster super off-peak single is cheaper than the St. Pancras – Sheffield one. Excluding EMR entirely wouldn't work, as that would rule out going via Thameslink to Peterborough, Spalding and Lincoln. I don't think "via" fares normally require you to stop there, so "not LNER via Peterborough"?

 

[Haywain]

"Not Avanti via Milton Keynes" <snip> "not LNER via Peterborough"

Not very clear, is it? Can easily be read as not allowing travel via Milton Keynes/Peterborough.

 

[A S Leib]

Not very clear, is it? Can easily be read as not allowing travel via Milton Keynes/Peterborough.

"Via Milton Keynes not Avanti"?

 

[JonathanH]

"Via Milton Keynes not Avanti"?

It would need to exclude CrossCountry as well (and arguably London Overground)

 

[Bletchleyite]

WMR/LNR/TfW/Nrthn Only is clear enough if convoluted, I think that fits.

Using WMT is a bad idea as that's not a brand the TOC uses.

If these still exist under GBR, "Not InterCity" will probably do it! (That would allow Chiltern too, but no reason not to if it's all one big TOC!)

 

[A S Leib]

It would need to exclude CrossCountry as well (and arguably London Overground)

And TransPennine Express; I think Manchester Airport's a valid route as well. WMR/LNR/TfW/Northern probably is the least bad option.

 

[Haywain]

It would need to exclude CrossCountry as well.

And TransPennine and EMR.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You were exceptionally lucky that you did not encounter TfW's revenue protection officers (Transport Investigations Limited!). You'd have been reported for prosecution, or more likely, an out of court settlement of some sort.

Is that speculation on your part or are there instances of that actually happening/a reason to believe that TfW would do that? You're saying that TfW would report for prosecution a passenger who is clearly not deliberately fare evading, but rather who has a ticket that a reasonable person could easily plausibly, but mistakenly, believe is valid on the train they are on. To prosecute in those circumstances might be legally allowed, but would be totally, absurdly, over the top. If the passenger went to the press about it, TfW would be utterly pilloried over it and would probably suffer a loss of public confidence/revenue worth thousands of times what they might recover from that passenger. I'd be very surprised if TfW were that stupid.

 

[MrJeeves]

You're saying that TfW would report for prosecution a passenger who is clearly not deliberately fare evading, but rather who has a ticket that a reasonable person could easily plausibly, but mistakenly, believe is valid on the train they are on.

I don't see how anyone who reads "WMT & NTH ONLY" or "Valid only on West Midlands Trains and Northern services." would think their ticket is valid on Transport for Wales.

If the passenger didn't actually look to see what ticket they had purchased, I don't see how that is anyone's fault except the passenger.

 

[OscarH]

I don't see how anyone who reads "WMT & NTH ONLY" or "Valid only on West Midlands Trains and Northern services." would think their ticket is valid on Transport for Wales.

If the passenger didn't actually look to see what ticket they had purchased, I don't see how that is anyone's fault except the passenger.

Depends what they print on the ticket, the former is awful (I know why it's like that, but we should be avoiding exposing the useless forms to passengers)

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Is that speculation on your part or are there instances of that actually happening/a reason to believe that TfW would do that? You're saying that TfW would report for prosecution a passenger who is clearly not deliberately fare evading, but rather who has a ticket that a reasonable person could easily plausibly, but mistakenly, believe is valid on the train they are on. To prosecute in those circumstances might be legally allowed, but would be totally, absurdly, over the top. If the passenger went to the press about it, TfW would be utterly pilloried over it and would probably suffer a loss of public confidence/revenue worth thousands of times what they might recover from that passenger. I'd be very surprised if TfW were that stupid.

Yes, the passenger is simply travelling without a valid ticket, and given these tickets are printed in the new format with the route name spelled out in full length, or as an e-ticket, also with very clear restriction text, the operator restrictions are absolutely crystal clear. At the very least, a brand new, full fare ticket would be due. If it was TfW's contractor, you would almost inevitably be reported for prosecution.

This is not a situation that is unique to TfW, nor to Manchester.

Plenty of people are "fined" or reported for prosecution for using TPE tickets on Northern, and Northern on TPE etc. And by plenty, hundreds per week, sometimes more.

 

[thedbdiboy]

"Not Avanti via Milton Keynes"? That's not really clearer than WMR + TfW / Northern though.

Similarly, I'd like to see a "not LNER" London – Doncaster fare, but the King's Cross – Doncaster super off-peak single is cheaper than the St. Pancras – Sheffield one. Excluding EMR entirely wouldn't work, as that would rule out going via Thameslink to Peterborough, Spalding and Lincoln. I don't think "via" fares normally require you to stop there, so "not LNER via Peterborough"?

"Via Milton Keynes not Avanti"?

You only have 15 characters to play with for a short route description (hence some of the ludicrously contorted abbreviations).

 

[MrJeeves]

Depends what they print on the ticket, the former is awful (I know why it's like that, but we should be avoiding exposing the useless forms to passengers)

It's definitely terrible, but I still think it gets the message across. I'd be a bit more concerned if you could get through an entire booking process only seeing the former, though, even if it's what is ultimately on the ticket.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don't see how anyone who reads "WMT & NTH ONLY" or "Valid only on West Midlands Trains and Northern services." would think their ticket is valid on Transport for Wales.

Well I thought it was valid on TfW - and with very good reason! I'd asked at the booking office for a LNWR ticket from London to Manchester - a ticket that for as long as I can remember, included TfW. I got sold a ticket which was exactly the price I expected to pay for it, and on a very quick inspection as soon as I was sold it, said London to Manchester super-offpeak. On all previous occasions when I'd checked the fares, there was no comparable ticket that wasn't valid on TfW (because it seems the LNWR/Northern ticket is a very recent thing and presumably didn't exist when I'd previously checked the fares). So without a very detailed look at the ticket, there was simply no reason to expect it not to be valid on TfW. Even when later on I did notice it said 'Northern', although I was a bit puzzled about it, my best-guess assumption was that perhaps that referred to the 'North' part of the LNWR name, or was some weirdness in how the ticket was printed - which wouldn't be totally unheard of. It was only really once I was back home after completing my return journey that I thought about it more, became more puzzled, and decided it was worth asking here.

Now consider that I'm far more knowledgeable than most members of the public about train services and ticketing, and imagine how it would be for a more typical member of the public who buys an 'LNWR' ticket and perhaps isn't really even aware of the names of the TOCs but has simply heard that the LNWR tickets are the cheapest...

So yes, I would say it's perfectly possible for someone to legitimately genuinely believe that ticket is valid on TfW. Having two tickets at exactly the same price, with the same main TOC for the bulk of the journey, but different secondary TOCs, and with one of the tickets having only recently come into existence so many people won't be aware of it even if they know about the other ticket, is just asking for this kind of confusion.

If the passenger didn't actually look to see what ticket they had purchased, I don't see how that is anyone's fault except the passenger.

So you expect every rail passenger to carefully look at and understand the detail of every bit of information that's printed on their ticket (not just the obvious information like the origin, destination and ticket type)? Maybe in your World, noone who isn't a complete expert in railway ticketing should be allowed to travel by train?

 

[185143]

You couldn't make it NOT AVANTI because it would be valid on XC/GWR via Birmingham/Reading into Paddington or Birmingham/High Wycombe into Marylebone.

With the destination of London Euston specifically, as I'm 99% sure these tickets have?

 

[yorkie]

Oh blimey! Thanks for that info. That is INCREDIBLY confusing. Not just the operator difference, but why is one ticket 'WMR/LNR' and the other 'WMT' - different names that I'm guessing actually mean the same thing?

WMT is a train company which operates trains under the brands LNR (often erroneously referred to as LNWR or LNW!) and WMR.

It's confusing but this is the modern railway.

And the fact that they have the same price but different peak hour restrictions just adds to the complexity too. I'd imagine that causes a lot of people to be caught out travelling on trains they genuinely believe their ticket is valid on, but it isn't.

Sadly there are train companies who are so keen to run people off rail that they consider this a good opportunity to prosecute. And some employees are vindictive enough to actually follow such vile instructions.

Yes, that's how bad the situation has become. Seriously.

Is that speculation on your part or are there instances of that actually happening/a reason to believe that TfW would do that? You're saying that TfW would report for prosecution a passenger who is clearly not deliberately fare evading, but rather who has a ticket that a reasonable person could easily plausibly, but mistakenly, believe is valid on the train they are on. To prosecute in those circumstances might be legally allowed, but would be totally, absurdly, over the top. If the passenger went to the press about it, TfW would be utterly pilloried over it and would probably suffer a loss of public confidence/revenue worth thousands of times what they might recover from that passenger. I'd be very surprised if TfW were that stupid.

TfW are actually that bad, yes.

You couldn't make it NOT AVANTI because it would be valid on XC/GWR via Birmingham/Reading into Paddington or Birmingham/High Wycombe into Marylebone.

The tickets are only available to Euston specifically.

I doubt many people would be interested in detouring via Birmingham.

WMT, Northern and TfW should be possible and that would make the tickets more useable and less confusing than having to choose the connecting leg.

 

[CyrusWuff]

I don't see how anyone who reads "WMT & NTH ONLY" or "Valid only on West Midlands Trains and Northern services." would think their ticket is valid on Transport for Wales.

If the passenger didn't actually look to see what ticket they had purchased, I don't see how that is anyone's fault except the passenger.

Part of the issue here is that both sets of fares are the same price. This is how that looks on Worldline WebTIS until you hover over or choose a specific fare:


Not exactly helpful for the customer! It does display the TOC restriction when selected and when you continue to the next step in the purchase flow, however, but having a price differential would also help.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

With the destination of London Euston specifically, as I'm 99% sure these tickets have?

You end up with a lot of admin with that sort of fare - e.g. during engineering works, adding/removing easements etc.

The GWR services are diverting into Euston soon etc. regardless of pick up/set down only, it's arguements not worth getting into between staff and passengers.

WMT are a bit of an outlier with their comparatively cheap leisure fares, as most other TOCs would simply only offer this sort of journey as a fixed Advance, resolving all of this and better controlling demand.

I'm surprised at Yorkie though - I thought you'd be arguing that these tickets are already valid on Avanti and that you're supporting a civil claim against another railway company. Can't have West Midlands Trains creating cheap, brand specific tickets can we?! You allegedly can't legitimately segregate routes by brand after all....

 

[D6700]

Looking at the BR Fares site, it would appear the additional "Northern" versions have only existed since the 15th of September. It is, therefore, completely understandable that the OP fell into the trap.

Having used such a ticket myself, which was valid on TfW and not Northern, this is useful info.

 

[DelW]

Yes, the passenger is simply travelling without a valid ticket, and given these tickets are printed in the new format with the route name spelled out in full length, or as an e-ticket, also with very clear restriction text, the operator restrictions are absolutely crystal clear. At the very least, a brand new, full fare ticket would be due. If it was TfW's contractor, you would almost inevitably be reported for prosecution.

At a time when fare evasion is rife on some routes due to a complete lack of enforcement, that would seem to be a very poor use of resources. Since both tickets cost exactly the same, "the railway" collectively hasn't lost any revenue at all; at worst there's a misallocation of revenue between TfW and DfT. Is that really important enough to be worth spending money on lawyers to prosecute the passenger? Especially when this alternative ticket/operator option was only invented a couple of weeks ago.

I'm fully in favour of punishing fare evaders. But prosecuting a passenger who has willingly paid the correct price for their journey, but has accidentally travelled with the "wrong" train operator, smacks of petty vindictiveness.

I would hope that if GBR ever happens, they sweep away these pointless and confusing stupidities.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would hope that if GBR ever happens, they sweep away these pointless and confusing stupidities.

If this sort of ticket is retained post-GBR for purposes of market segmentation (and isn't just done as Advances), I expect it'd just be something like "Not InterCity".

 

[JonathanH]

If this sort of ticket is retained post-GBR for purposes of market segmentation (and isn't just done as Advances), I expect it'd just be something like "Not InterCity".

That will be really confusing if the Intercity branding isn't used.

There are incidentally some South Wales to West Yorkshire advances routed TFW GWR NT & TPE. Routeing those "Not Intercity" would be even more confusing.

 

[Kite159]

At some point, I wouldn't be surprised if the LNR+TfW fares either disappear or get increased to make them less good value for money (probably to such a degree that it will be marginally cheaper to buy a LNR only London - Crewe and a separate Crewe - Manchester ticket.