Merseyrail on e-ticket

[drueberflug]

I've come across this problem multiple times that our TrainSplit-powered ticket page tries to sell Merseyrail fares as e-tickets though it probably shouldn't.
I am aware that e-tickets should in theory still be accepted by Merseyrail etc. and that the option to opt for ToD exists, but I believe that this could lead to confusion and frustration with inexperienced people.

 

[Adam Williams]

I am aware that e-tickets should in theory still be accepted by Merseyrail

E-Tickets are accepted in practicality by Merseyrail, I've been to Liverpool and tried it myself. It's what passengers want; the sooner train operators understand this, the better.

I see no issue with this behaviour; the £14.20 Any Permitted ticket from Chester to Liverpool Stations is valid for the exactly the same journey on exactly the same operator, and explicitly enabled for E-Ticket fulfilment within RCS by the fare-setter (TfW).

 

[Haywain]

our TrainSplit-powered ticket page tries to sell Merseyrail fares as e-tickets though it probably shouldn't.

It should sell tickets in the formats that have been specified by the TOC that sets the fare - Avanti West Coast in this case. Whether that should include eTickets is a matter for that TOC, not the retailer. Merseyrail have no right to refuse to accept a ticket that has been correctly issued and is being used on a permitted route.

 

[drueberflug]

explicitly enabled for E-Ticket fulfilment within RCS by the fare-setter (TfW).

It should sell tickets in the formats that have been specified by the TOC that sets the fare - Avanti West Coast in this case.

I'd like to remind you both that the £9.25 fare from my screenshot (yes, this is a split ticket) is set by Merseyrail themselves, who officially refuse to enable any e-ticket flows at all, therefore, this ticket should not have been sold in this way in the first place.

SINGLE FARES
ANYTIME DAY S SDS​	Route .​	Validity ON DATE SHOWN​	Adult £14.20​	Child £7.10​	◊​
​ ​ Fare Setter: TRANSPORT FOR WALES RAIL​
ANYTIME DAY S SDS​	Route VIA WARRINGTON​	Validity ON DATE SHOWN​	Adult £14.00​	Child £7.00​	◊​
​ ​ Fare Setter: TRANSPORT FOR WALES RAIL​
ANYTIME DAY S SDS​	Route VIA BIRKENHEAD​	Validity ON DATE SHOWN​	Adult £9.25​	Child £4.60​	◊​
​ ​ Fare Setter: MERSEYRAIL​

 

[Adam Williams]

I'd like to remind you both that the £9.25 fare (yes, this is a split ticket) is set by Merseyrail themselves, who officially refuse to enable any e-ticket flows at all, therefore, this ticket should not have been sold in this way in the first place.

I didn't discuss that fare in my post.

Do you think it makes any sense at all that we should be retailing E-Tix for the Any Permitted fare, and not the cheaper fare - when it's exactly the same service that can be used with both tickets?

 

[Wallsendmag]

Neither should be sold as eTickets (well obviously they should be but that's another story)

 

[drueberflug]

Do you think it makes any sense at all that we should be retailing E-Tix for the Any Permitted fare, and not the cheaper fare - when it's exactly the same service that can be used with both tickets?

From a passenger perspective, it doesn't, at all, that is something I do agree with; and I would also agree with people who demand the installation of e-ticket scanners at Merseyrail gatelines.

However, in my opinion, tickets that are not officially* accepted as-is should not be issued to avoid confusion. (* official as in Merseyrail's position on the matter, not the NRCoT)

 

[Adam Williams]

Neither should be sold as eTickets

Then TfW need to change the data in RCS, don't they?

I would rather they didn't because we're now arguing in favour of a considerably worse passenger experience (for what benefit?), but that's the logical conclusion of the argument you're making here.

 

[drueberflug]

Then TfW need to change the data in RCS, don't they?

I'd like to add that the Trainline as well as associated booking pages (Northern, EMR) will look at the connection and if there are Merseyrail services in that specific connection, it will force ToD on the customer regardless of whether another service would accept the digital version of the same ticket.

For instance, SHF to LIV would be e-ticketable, SHF to LVC is not (tickets to both are issued to "Liverpool Stations") according to EMR's booking page.

 

[Adam Williams]

I'd like to add that the Trainline as well as associated booking pages (Northern, EMR) will look at the connection and if there are Merseyrail services in that specific connection, it will force ToD on the customer regardless of whether another service would accept the digital version of the same ticket.

And where's the requirement to do this in the spec?

For instance, SHF to LIV would be e-ticketable, SHF to LVC is not (tickets to both are issued to "Liverpool Stations") according to EMR's booking page.

Ah; yes, we do that check too. It's just about group members and the physical destination of the leg. Nothing to do with checking for that particular operator. It's not relevant here because the destination is Liverpool Lime St.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

As has been mentioned above, Merseyrail won't issue to eTickets themselves, but have little to no issue with actually accepting them in practice, so long as they are sure it's an actual eTicket and not something that should be collected from a ticket office in advance. They're pretty familiar with eTickets and PRT these days.

The biggest issue they have is customers using a third party retailer, and travelling on an uncollected collection reference.

 

[Adam Williams]

As has been mentioned above, Merseyrail won't issue to eTickets themselves, but have little to no issue with actually accepting them in practice, so long as they are sure it's an actual eTicket and not something that should be collected from a ticket office in advance. They're pretty familiar with eTickets and PRT these days.

The biggest issue they have is customers using a third party retailer, and travelling on an uncollected collection reference.

Agree; and this mirrors my (and colleagues') experience when we were in Liverpool.
The main issue that they have with online purchases definitely seems to be with uncollected ToD only.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do they now have the ability to scan e-tickets e.g. on mobile phones, or do they just trust what you show them to be genuine? That seems a big gap if the latter...

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Do they now have the ability to scan e-tickets e.g. on mobile phones, or do they just trust what you show them to be genuine? That seems a big gap if the latter...

Merseyrail hasn't had an RSP/ RDG accredited mobile TIS solution since the SPORTIS days. Whilst there is industry standalone scanning software available for Android devices, most of it is integrated into a mobile TIS via APIs.

Like most things on Merseyrail, this isn't really a Merseyrail issue, given most expenditure/investment comes from Merseytravel / Liverpool City Region or whatever fancy name they're currently calling themselves.

There is also the ever present issue with the ticket offices, and the concern that more public and formal acceptance/adoption of eTickets etc inevitably leads to the ticket offices becoming even more loss making than they already are. They're going to have to deal with that issue when PAYG appears, which again, because of interference from local government, is even more delayed.

 

[Edvid]

On Trainsplit-powered sites there's a similar issue for some (TfL-related) cross-London journeys too.

Example: Luton Airport Parkway - Gatwick Airport is correctly identified as not e-ticketable if you force an Underground connection in the itinerary (e.g. via London Victoria), but e-tickets are available for default through ticket itineraries, i.e. direct Thameslink journeys or those with a change in the core. Not a problem in normal service but when the core has major problems and you need to use the Underground then arguing the toss with LU gateline staff is additional hassle you don't want.

 

[OscarH]

On Trainsplit-powered sites there's a similar issue for some (TfL-related) cross-London journeys too.

Example: Luton Airport Parkway - Gatwick Airport is correctly identified as not e-ticketable if you force an Underground connection in the itinerary (e.g. via London Victoria), but e-tickets are available for default through ticket itineraries, i.e. direct Thameslink journeys or those with a change in the core. Not a problem in normal service but when the core has major problems and you need to use the Underground then arguing the toss with LU gateline staff is additional hassle you don't want.

View attachment 178150

View attachment 178151

This is what GTR have chosen to allow, rather than us, you'll find all retailers will do the same (ignoring Trainline based ones as they just ignore all the rules and do what they like). Disallowing it when the itinerary involves the tube is actually an explicit action on our part to avoid our customers being hassled when they turn up at the tube gateline, and most (but not necessarily all) retailers have the same bodge - if you follow the data exactly you'd still offer an eTicket for the one with the tube!

Taking off the work hat, while there is a risk during disruption, I will say as someone that lives on the GTR route and does journeys like this, I'd much rather have an eTicket despite the risk, because the convenience for the 99% of the time where there isn't issues is worth it.

 

[Edvid]

Thanks for the explanation. Interesting to hear that GTR have enabled cross-London eTickets in the RCS, such is their unique position among non-TfL TOCs that serve the capital.

 

[nwales58]

Yet Blaenau Ffestiniog-Hamilton Square, TfW-priced, destination group only includes Merseyrail stations (unlike central Liverpool), offers E-ticket and no ToD possibility at the origin.

 

[yorkie]

Merseyrail are required to accept e-tickets, whether they like it or not.

....when the core has major problems and you need to use the Underground then arguing the toss with LU gateline staff is additional hassle you don't want...

LU are required to accept tickets for inter-available flows, whether they like it or not. If ticket acceptance is in place, then they have to lump that too.

The Government really should grow a backbone and tell Merseyrail, TfL et al. to behave.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Merseyrail are required to accept e-tickets, whether they like it or not.


LU are required to accept tickets for inter-available flows, whether they like it or not. If ticket acceptance is in place, then they have to lump that too.

The Government really should grow a backbone and tell Merseyrail, TfL et al. to behave.

You appear to have completely ignored both myself and an experienced forum member informing everyone that eTickets on Merseyrail are not at all problematic, and they are accepted without an issue.

Merseyrail correctly penalises customers who travel on a booking reference without collecting their tickets from the ticket office.

You can argue that Merseyrail should do more to adopt eTickets, but there is no issue with them accepting any that are issued and valid on their part of the network.

 

[Trainbike46]

Merseyrail are required to accept e-tickets, whether they like it or not.


LU are required to accept tickets for inter-available flows, whether they like it or not. If ticket acceptance is in place, then they have to lump that too.

The Government really should grow a backbone and tell Merseyrail, TfL et al. to behave.

If reporting by others in this thread is accurate, Merseyrail is in fact accepting these eTickets, and most problems are around uncollected ToD tickets.

You appear to have completely ignored both myself and an experienced forum member informing everyone that eTickets on Merseyrail are not at all problematic, and they are accepted without an issue.

Merseyrail correctly penalises customers who travel on a booking reference without collecting their tickets from the ticket office.

They have done some unhelpful communication around this issue, which was then "corrected" by others (e.g. community notes on twitter) in an even more unhelpful manner.