Manter
Lunch Mob
So if I buy a ticket from London paddington to reading, and get off the train at Slough, I am violating some rule?
I Got Banged In The Arse By SW Trains For £32
- Thread starter Fingers
- Start date
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
IIRC, the reason for these stringent conditions (and for the cheap tickets) is that they're used to "manage" the figures by which various funding formulas are worked out, so if the train line in question (whoever sells the ticket) can show passenger traffic of X volume from station A to station Z, they can secure Y amount of subsidy for next year.
In other words, it's all a bag of arse.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It'll depend entirely on the type of ticket you buy.
ChrisFilter
Like a boss.
Bungle must find the world a very confusing, very frustrating place. Poor sod.
MrSki
Who am I to say you're wrong
I asked you to explain the logic not re-quote the previous answer that lacks logic.
Zippy's mate should remember that some guards could not use the "We were only following orders" excuse.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
That would seem to imply that all T & Cs are legally-reviewed by the state. They're not, they're reviewed by lawyers employed or retained by the company setting the T & Cs, so really the only time you can say "the law considers them reasonable" is when they've been reviewed by the state or independently-reviewed, and have been found to be reasonable.
Manter
Lunch Mob
I don't see how he has breached the contract. If I am travelling from London to reading and only do the London to Slough bit, how have I breached a contract? Does the seat get lonely without a bum on it? Is there too much oxygen in the carriage because one less person was breathing the air? Were they modelling the wear on ticket gates so precisely that the one unexpected barrier movement at a different station has tipped them from profit to loss?
Similarly something like a package holiday, if I buy one, get on the flight and then when I get there don't go to the hotel, or go to the hotel and not get involved in the games by the pool, or don't eat at the all you can eat inclusive buffet, have I broken a contract with someone? Or bought a service and only availed myself of the portion of that service that met my requirements?
The railways still seem to regard themselves as a branch of government. They are not: they are service providers. The OP is a customer who bought a service and only used part of that service. He didn't demand a different service, or a customised service. He simply choose to use one part of the service he had purchased. To be charged extra for that is batshit. On that basis I should go to the station with all the return portions of tickets I didn't end up using and pay a fine for having the temerity not to use their trains
Manter
Lunch Mob
Haha, yes. QuiteSo by bungle logic if you hadn't got on the train at all you should've been charged than normal fare. Even though you stayed at home.
Genius
mauvais
on reddit or something
Alternatively, perhaps Mr. Fingers is significantly heavier than a normal passenger, the platforms at Dorchester are infamously weak and the platforms at Weymouth are notoriously hardy, and thus the unexpected, unprepared for wear and tear that he inflicted upon the fragile infrastructure amounted to £32 worth of a grossly fat man's clumsy, hateful, structurally unsympathetic stomping.
neonwilderness
What would Badgers do?
Great thread
I suspect the guard has spotted Fingers misusing a lens hood which upset him and caused him to enforce the rules
In reality the entire fares system needs to be overhauled and simplified so you don't need to study the T&C to make sure you're not breaking some rule or have taken an invalid route or something.
I suspect the guard has spotted Fingers misusing a lens hood which upset him and caused him to enforce the rules
In reality the entire fares system needs to be overhauled and simplified so you don't need to study the T&C to make sure you're not breaking some rule or have taken an invalid route or something.
Lo Siento.
Second As Farce
The other day I got on a train with a young person railcard ticket (despite being old, I'm a full-time student and thus entitled to one). Ticket inspectors come round looks at my ticket, evidently about to move on but he sees me getting out my YP card and hangs around to inspect it. He briefly inspects it and says "have you got a valid one". I take a look and sure enough it had expired a month ago. "Shit, I hadn't noticed that". Inspector then says, "I'm afraid I'll have to charge you the difference, sir... technically, I should make you pay a whole new ticket".
Is it sad (for humanity) that I think he was decent for only charging me the difference?
Is it sad (for humanity) that I think he was decent for only charging me the difference?
neonwilderness
What would Badgers do?
You monster
MrSki
Who am I to say you're wrong
When I was a kid I got a ticket on BR for a day out & we had a change of plans on the train & got out a few stations early. Got stopped at the ticket barrier & was told "you can get a refund on that young man, go to the excess fare window" Also you were allowed to get off on stations on the way to your destination & maybe do a quick tour of the town or have a pint & get back on using the same ticket that was still valid. Them was the days.
kittyP
Pluviophile
Can you actually grasp the concept of sympathy even half as well as you grasp Railway by-laws?
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
free spirit
more tea vicar?
So I've finally found the t&c's in question, and the pertinent item is hidden away as item 11 a.
I'd lay odds that megatrain would never attempt to enforce this rule in court, as they'd likely get laughed out of court for the rule being unreasonable. It's also not stated or even hinted at anywhere else in their advertising, website etc not even in their 'important information' section just before the tick box to tick that you've read the t&c's. Put simply, this looks and feels like a classic case of tricking people into buying something that has terms and conditions attached that then result in that person being likely to fall foul of those t&cs and being forced to cough up a load more money as a result... and that's not allowed.
I'd lay odds that megatrain would never attempt to enforce this rule in court, as they'd likely get laughed out of court for the rule being unreasonable. It's also not stated or even hinted at anywhere else in their advertising, website etc not even in their 'important information' section just before the tick box to tick that you've read the t&c's. Put simply, this looks and feels like a classic case of tricking people into buying something that has terms and conditions attached that then result in that person being likely to fall foul of those t&cs and being forced to cough up a load more money as a result... and that's not allowed.
The cost of the ticket doesn't just divide by miles travelled. For instance some stations must cost more per single passenger visit. There are probably other factors. If you get on at a less busy earlier station it is much less stress and indirectly less cost for the company for the guard to check your ticket.
This is a well known feature of rail travel.
This is a well known feature of rail travel.
kittyP
Pluviophile
All this was fields.
MrSki
Who am I to say you're wrong
Since privatisation. Before it cost more the further you went.
The market knows best.
mauvais
on reddit or something
If the ticket contract terms were that you were only allowed to do that, then yes.
Whether it's a meaningful breach is another question. Only something called a 'fundamental breach' would relieve the train company of the obligation to carry you, although they might be able to claim damages (for nothing!) before that point.
On reflection, I can understand the whole 'not a fine' argument. If you look at getting on the train late as being an act that firstly is a fundamental breach of contract which relieves the train company of their obligations to take you anywhere in the first place, and secondly is also one that by action forms the acceptance of a new contract - which was an agreement to pay the walk-up price - then it's legally workable.
That, in particular the breach bit, seems thoroughly dubious to me. Decent support for it would be if the train company sued everyone who bought tickets and didn't turn up. I'd also argue that there was no intention to enter into the second contract.
I am not a lawyer!
I only came back to reply to this. You can do that now. Most ticket types allow a break of journey. The only ones that always don't are Advances, and Megatrain tickets BECAUSE MEGATRAIN TICKETS ARE NOT NORMAL TRAIN TICKETS!!
But hey let's not let the facts get in the way of another ridiculous rant about the railways and how having private rail companies are "bad", when the fact is the MT bargain tickets wouldn't even exist if the rail company's were in public ownership as it is a Stagecoach promotional thing.
Let's face it the only reason this thread was started is because SWT and Stagecoach are private companies, because only a complete numbskull would play the sympathy card over something where they are so obviously in the wrong. And the only reason the rest of you are in agreement is because of your gripe about the railways.
I'm out.
Megatrain don't sell tickets for FGW.......................
