Refused zero-fare overdistance excess

[mumrar]

Hi all,

My sister-in-law has travelled from Redditch to University on an SDR today. She hit upon the idea of waking the canal to Birmingham to meet her husband from work and then catch the train Birmingham to Redditch. On my advice she sought a zero-fare overdistance excess at University booking office, but they've refused to sell it as it is a zero-fare. citing something about having to be at least 5p under a new working rule.

Surely this is nonsense?

 

[AlterEgo]

It is nonsense, as I'm sure you know yourself!

I have had a few nil excesses in the past.

 

[tony_mac]

and LM have penalty-fared people with tickets to University for not having a zero-fare excess.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=465436&postcount=1

 

[bb21]

They probably didn't want to bother with the paperwork.

I'm with the others. It is complete nonsense.

 

[mumrar]

They probably didn't want to bother with the paperwork.

I'm with the others. It is complete nonsense.

Yep, I've spoken to a good friend who works at a different LM booking office and he's blatantly trying to avoid some paperwork.

Suffice to say he'll now have more paper work to deal with, courtesy of his refusal to issue the ticket. My sister-in-law not only wants the frivolous ticket refunded, but as she sought my professional advice before going to the booking office, is also angry at being spun a pack of lies to boot.

 

[island]

I've had the same from SWT at Guildford in the past. Poor form.

 

[causton]

To be honest personally I wouldn't have minded if they would say 'just make it 5p, so we can all get it done quicker' - I don't know how long the paperwork for a zero-fare excess is but if it's quite long I don't blame them! But lying... *shakes head in disappointment*

 

[b0b]

To be honest personally I wouldn't have minded if they would say 'just make it 5p, so we can all get it done quicker' - I don't know how long the paperwork for a zero-fare excess is but if it's quite long I don't blame them! But lying... *shakes head in disappointment*

Too bad if its a long process, thats the system that the railway has set up, and its happy to PF you for not having the excess and costing them 0p in revenue.

 

[mallard]

Meh, it's probably best not to argue. Some railway staff seem to be quite adept at making up their own rules and covering themselves when asked. Of course, getting any sort of apology or refund is like getting blood out of a stone and getting them to change their ways is even less likely.

 

[TEW]

When FGW were issuing free tickets as part of an offer they were all priced at 5p to avoid the paperwork. Passengers simply did not pay the 5p.

 

[Greenback]

I don't recall the zero fare paperwork being arduous or long when I was at FGW. Mind you, things have probably changed a lot since APTIS was replaced. All you had to do IIRC was to note it in the machine log book. I don't remmeber ever being asked for more info than that. I certainly don't remember any particular paperwork like a ZF Form that had to be compelted.

There was, though, a sort of collective reluctance within the office to issue a ZF. Colleagues seemed to be concerned that it might lead to soem sort of investigation if they issued a certain amount. That may be right or it may have been hearsay, I never got to find out for definite either way!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Certainly that was the case as I knew it in Aptis days Greenback, to be honest I can't think of much paperwork involving zero fares now, there is a log, but I don't recall anything else atm, at least not in my office (you can tell I don't do many I think).

 

[AlterEgo]

When FGW were issuing free tickets as part of an offer they were all priced at 5p to avoid the paperwork. Passengers simply did not pay the 5p.

Indeed - that is the mechanism for "selling" complimentary tickets.

The negligible paper loss can then be written off at Accounts.

 

[Paul Kelly]

Is that also a legal thing (re the complimentary tickets) - legally, the train companies have not entered into a contract to carry the passenger unless there is a consideration involved (i.e. the nominal 5p)?

 

[AlterEgo]

Is that also a legal thing (re the complimentary tickets) - legally, the train companies have not entered into a contract to carry the passenger unless there is a consideration involved (i.e. the nominal 5p)?

I don't see how that could apply if the passenger does not actually part with any money, regardless of the face value of the ticket.

 

[island]

Maybe it can. Leases with a consideration of "one peppercorn per quarter, if demanded" have been found enforceable.

 

[blackfive460]

Is that also a legal thing (re the complimentary tickets) - legally, the train companies have not entered into a contract to carry the passenger unless there is a consideration involved (i.e. the nominal 5p)?

Not in the case of Virgin complementaries. There's no monetary value indicated on those.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not in the case of Virgin complementaries. There's no monetary value indicated on those.

There is - unless the ones you've seen or had have been the "old" handwritten ones, in which case no value is displayed. ToD is now the preferred method for dispensing complimentary tickets, and a value of £0.05 or £0.10 is displayed.

 

[Flamingo]

A zero fares excess takes no longer to issue than any other kind of excess (it's a bit quicker if anything as there is no cash/card to change hands). It does have to be filled in on the sheet/log at the end of the day, and zero-fares do get audited.

 

[RJ]

and LM have penalty-fared people with tickets to University for not having a zero-fare excess.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=465436&postcount=1

You appear to be mistaken (or deliberately stirring for some unknown reason). That person was Penalty Fared for travelling overdistance without an appropriate ticket, having had the chance to get one.

 

[yorkie]

You appear to be mistaken (or deliberately stirring for some unknown reason). That person was Penalty Fared for travelling overdistance without an appropriate ticket, having had the chance to get one.

I don't think that accusation is fair, and what tony_mac says is factually correct (and the appeal was unsuccessful, so the PF was paid!). You just worded it differently and omitted the price. The appropriate ticket was an excess fare costing £0.00.

The person concerned was issued a PF for travelling overdistance on a ticket to University, where the appropriate excess to their destination was a zero-fare excess.

 

[tony_mac]

The point is that if they don't issue the excess, then you can't just travel anyway as they are obviously willing to issue a penalty-fare even if you have paid the correct fare, but have not obtained a zero-fare excess.

The RPI won't know if you asked for one and were refused or just didn't ask for one.
I didn't think it was a particularly controversial observation - which was more centred on the fact that the same company and station was involved.

 

[RJ]

I don't think that accusation is fair, and what tony_mac says is factually correct (and the appeal was unsuccessful, so the PF was paid!). You just worded it differently and omitted the price. The appropriate ticket was an excess fare costing £0.00.

The person concerned was issued a PF for travelling overdistance on a ticket to University, where the appropriate excess to their destination was a zero-fare excess.

They were penalty fared for not having an appropriate ticket when the opportunity was available to do so - surely that is a more neutral perspective of the event? The person was not PF'd for not having a zero excess - had they held a single from University to Selly Oak, or any appropriate ticket, they would not have been in the wrong.

The context in which the message was posted was clearly intended to make the TOC look harsh - one could easily interpret that as the TOC punishing someone for having the wrong type of ticket.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The point is that if they don't issue the excess, then you can't just travel anyway as they are obviously willing to issue a penalty-fare even if you have paid the correct fare, but have not obtained a zero-fare excess.

The RPI won't know if you asked for one and were refused or just didn't ask for one.
I didn't think it was a particularly controversial observation - which was more centred on the fact that the same company and station was involved.

A fare consists of two components - cost and validity. How can somebody have paid the correct fare if the ticket(s) held don't cover the entire journey?

 

[MikeWh]

A fare consists of two components - cost and validity. How can somebody have paid the correct fare if the ticket(s) held don't cover the entire journey?

Simple. They can have paid the fare that they needed where it is the same as the fare that they paid. IIRC the issue here was one where the outward journey was one stop shorter than the required return journey. It would be so much simpler in this sort of situation if TVMs could issue tickets valid at each station where fares are the same.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I think there is a subtle difference between "paying the same fare" and "paying the correct fare".

 

[island]

By that logic, should a ticket from Kidbrooke to Eltham (£2.30) be valid to travel to New Cross, because Kidbrooke to New Cross is also £2.30?

 

[adc82140]

I had no idea that a zero-fare excess existed. Does that mean that if I want to excess my annual season ticket (Guildford-Farnborough North, route "any permitted") to travel Guildford to Farnborough Main via Woking (same price) I have to ask for one of these?

(I've checked a copy of the ATOC fares manual, Farnborough North and Farnborough Main are considered to be the same destination)

 

[b0b]

By that logic, should a ticket from Kidbrooke to Eltham (£2.30) be valid to travel to New Cross, because Kidbrooke to New Cross is also £2.30?

if the excess is a zero-fare excess, yes.

 

[Flamingo]

Pad-Cardiff and Pad Pontycluin are the same fare, but the ATW guard would not be impressed if you got on his train at Cardiff with a Pad-Cardiff ticket to travel on to Pontycluin (as an example)

I presume that doing the zero-fares excess ensures that ATW get a cut out of the ticket.

 

[island]

if the excess is a zero-fare excess, yes.

But they're in opposite directions!