Great Western Coffee Shop

Brilliant work and information, gentlemen.  I apologise for my questions but there is a purpose to which I hinted at with my reference to grannies.  Never mind aged females, I imagine that a great number of pax are paying well over the odds.

If I have not bothered to find out which is the cheaper shop for my bottle of Chilean Merlot, it is possible I will miss the Lidl price at ^3.99 and pay ^4.59 somewhere else (say), not to mention the Lidl occasional offfer of an additional ^2 off for half a case (I stress I am not a shareholder, now, there's an idea though). 

'Domage' and all that, but not enough difference to wage a campaign about (although in my case a considerable amount over a year's purchases  ;D).

However, what is time and time again exposed here is a pretty rotten situation of social exclusion.  If you are not aware, or not very bright, etc, you will also probably be less well off, and thus you will literally pay for that 'shortcoming' by paying more than the well-off person.

I am not very lefty, but I read that Scotrail is to tackle this issue.  I don't think we can expect a company like FGW or SWT to implement social exclusion policies.  I suspect, however, they would not like to be thought of as playing on people's ignorance.  I just wonder if computer apps (applications) could be developed to help customers and booking clerks through the maze.

Of course it did occur to me that the Scotrail initiative could just end up with everyone paying through the nose, if misused by the companies, instead of just the unaware doing so.  I am not sure that the old chestnut of caveat emptor can apply to someone who is poor, does not own a car, and is not very intelligent or well-educated or computer savvy, when we are discussing transport issues.

There is of course (now thinking of the 'socially-included') the point that GrahamE mentioned which is that he might have taken the car.  So there is a good reason for making potential car driving pax aware of good deals.  I just wonder how commercially-oriented the present franchise setup really is?   

One could be cynical and suggest that the franchisees are eminently commercially-oriented: they know that many of their train services are already crammed and they can therefore charge as much as they like (within the RPI plus whatever limits, obviously).  If many of their passengers inadvertently pay 'over the odds', due to well-documented vagaries in the ticketing system, what does it matter - to the franchisees, anyway?  ::)

I was trying to remember if there is already some obligation on rail companies to find the best price, or just not to actually mislead. Judging by this from the ORR site, there was nothing much in the past:

From http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.10937
ORR has been working with the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) to address the ticket complexity research findings, pushing for the provision of better ticket information for passengers. More accessible information must be made available so that passengers can access the most cost-effective fares, understand ticket restrictions and are aware of alternative routes.


That is still relying on their better natures, of course, so arguably naive.

Mind you, there is a parallel in the energy companies being compelled to tell you if you have a cheaper option. That follows several attempts to do the same by code of practice etc, that didn't work. So maybe there is some will on the government's part to change things, if not the ability to outsmart the industry's pricing teams.

I am ... delighted ... to be able to look at this from a wider viewpoint - in fact one of the moderators might like to split the thread to move us onto a very useful general discussion removed from my particular journey set that triggered it - I'm too close to the action to make an impartial judgement as to whether such a split should be done.

As a supplier (as gamekeeper rather than poacher, if you like) I have been really given the once-over by people testing our systems for providing equal or better services for the disabled with the outcome being a lot of extra work for us and our suppliers, resulting in "thank you - we had no intention of booking - just checking you out", and as such I am very reluctant indeed to be the poacher.  So thank you (and BNM) for pushing me to call Network Rail;  they came out (unfortunatley) telling me that my best option was over 400 pounds, specifically telling me that the 243 option wouldn't work ("yes, you need 2 tickets") which was incorrect.   I can't say I blame the chap on the phone for his error, but it does point to a damaged and disreputable system which is supposed to be the voice of authority.  We can read the rules here better than they can!!!

You mention "grannies".  Not so much on the railways, but there are times I'm disgusted by some business operators. My stepson, strong American accent, is given an out-of-date big old 50p coin in his change by an ice cream vendor who should know better.  And Lisa and I have long learned which of us is likely to be offered the best price in what circumstances.   But there is a problem on the railways for their staff too - I recall a post asking why a conductor didn't offer split tickets as a kindness to folks who were clearly in need of such kindness, and he (or his colleague) replied that by offering a split, the intended recipients of the kindness would have thought they were being scammed - "how can 2 tickets possibly be cheaper than one"?


As I understand it, their ticket office staff are obliged to sell the lowest price ticket for what the customer states he wants - something like that.  So they do not have to offer splits, and indeed I have come across numerous incidents of institutionalised lying ... as recent as earlier this month, I asked for "the cheapest ticket or combination of tickets on the train at XX:XX to take me to ZZZ" and I was offered a 76 pound fare.  I refused that, and bought a ticket from where I was to YYY (peak) then a superoffpeak from there to ZZZ at 40.40 in total. "I didn't think of that" says the ticket clerk.  Yeah ... right ... it's a very well know split, mate!, but a good way to defuse what could (had I been someone else) have been rather nasty.

On line vendors and ticket machines are under no such obligation.  In a town near here, the TVM has [had - not checked for a few months] Peak and Offpeak to London, and travelcards for the same times and a couple of others on the front "London" screen.   Even late in the day when all remaining London trains are super off peak.  There is a button "look at other alternative fares" which finds the superoffpeak for those in the know.



To some extent I agree with you, but then there are all sorts of fare concessions for the 15 and unders, the over 60s, the forces, the disabled, overseas visitors ... each and all of whom take up exactly the same space (sometimes more),  make as much noise and mess (sometimes more), and take as much staff resource (sometimes more) - perhaps this is a very crude way of providing an alternative to have to work the system for those who are in groups which you, swrural, are suggesting may be more likely to be socially excluded.

For all the intellectual fun of the challenge, I would much prefer a nice, easy system to pay as I go, knowing roughly what the fare would be if I just turned up and travelled under a system that I could trust to charge - lets's see - around 300 pounds for this week rather than the nearly 700 that I would have ended up paying for exactly the same journeys if I hand't thought it through.


Not obvious.  Rover tickets up by 9% next week.  And look back at the Westbury to London travel card rise from last November through to this January ...  the RPI figure is purely regulated fares and is the basket average even for them.

There HAVE been some good corrections - Swindon to Salisbury on direct trains down from 56 pounds to just under half of that.  Alas, we forget the "downs" and remember the ups.   But then I used the Westbury to London ticket, and I never need to go through from Swindon to Salisbury as I live halfway between, and I would have split anyway and still paid less than the new fare!

Some

Eh?  Wot, me??  :o



Edit note: Done!  ;D

I raised the issue of 'Montpelier - Temple Meads - Worcester' vs 'Temple Meads - Worcester' elsewhere as (I think) a pretty extreme example of a split-ticket anomoly (the split fare is just over half the cost of the through ticket fare); part of my point in doing this was that it looks to me like someone is trying to rob me. On one occasion, when I asked the guard for two tickets, he said something to the effect that 'my job is to sell people what they ask for, not to advise them on the cheapest option'.

As another example on the same route: if you request a ticket to Bristol from the machine at Foregate St (which I usually have to do as the Ticket Office is shut when I travel), you are only offered the 'via Brimingham' fare, which is about 50% more expensive than the direct Bristol fare. No-one in their right mind would actually go via Brum unless they had business there, but to get the direct fare you have to delve quite a long way into the machine's menu (to the accompanying tut-tutting from the queue that is forming behind you).

To my mind this kind of thing makes the railways look like a racket, and that sentiment could burst the bubble of confidence the industry is currently enjoying. We want rail to be the best option, not the least worst.

Now there in particular, Red Squirrel, I have to agree with you whole-heartedly.  :-X

The staff don't make the rules, and I believe that his job description comment is accurate.  His job, though, is also to provide customer information if requested.  But for every 100 people asking for "return to Worcester", I would expect only 10 to ask "which is the cheapest ticket to Worcester" and only 1 to ask "which is the cheapest ticket or combination of tickets to Worcester"

but ...


(s)he should sell them to you, and not make a comment such as the one above, which looks to be out of context.   Perhaps you've shortened the conversation ... if so, it now look illogical to me.

Yet I would agree that if you say "I'm going to Worcester ... coming back at xx;xx.  Please sell me the cheapest tickets for me to do that" then (s)he should sell you a split (my opinion - other may say it's not practical).  And I would go further and suggest that the system which commonly allows splits to be significantly cheaper is damaged to the extent of being disreputable.


Is that still the case?   I haven't verified my own example [above] for a while, and wondered if it still happens

Ticket office staff do have industry guidelines to adhere to. These are codified in ATOC's Retail Standards Guide.

A copy of this guide is available online. It's dated 2006 but I'm fairly sure there have been no major changes to the guidelines ticket office staff have to abide by:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/105629559/ATOC-Retail-Standards-Guide-v6

Also of interest may be the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement. This deals, in depth, with ticket retailing, fares setting, revenue allocation and revenue settlement.

http://www.atoc.org/clientfiles/File/RSPDocuments/TSA%20V9_4%20-%20Main%20Agreement%20(Volume%201).pdf

page 15



And page 20

I have a certain degree of sympathy with both the industry and ticket office staff here. The system is fiendishly complicated, and to a large extent that is the result of what it inherited at privatisation (eg Didcot splits). Can you imagine the position if a customer turns up at Temple Meads and has a right to be sold the cheapest set of split tickets from Shirehampton to e.g. Bathgate (several hundred other stations are available).  It's just not realistic. If said customer asks for the cheapest ticket, the ticket issuer could be there for half an hour looking at the permutations, and still would be unlikely to find the best option.  And then who would be to blame if the tickets sold included a Value Awayday Tartan Return from Berwick to Bathgate, but that ticket wasn't valid for return departures from Edinburgh between 1644 and 1729 on Fridays?

The OP mentioned Scotrail abolishing split ticket anomalies. Indeed they are doing this, but the initiative is actually the scottish parliament's, which is funding the cost to the TOC. Of course, it's a lot simpler to do in one area, and, being somewhat cynical, maybe one of several measures being introduced in the run up to the Indepdence vote to persuade people that an independent Scotland is the preferred option. (I feel this topic may be about to go off on a tangent...)

It wouldn't be the first time a topic on this forum has gone that way, John R ... ;D

If you buy a Didcot split, then you are using your understanding of the system to your advantage (and it doesn't always work out cheaper, as far as I can see). Let the buyer beware. I can see that there are plenty of examples where there are multiple routes, some of which are more congested than others, and that the system is necessarily complicated.

The reason I keep coming back to fares off the Severn Beach line to Worcester (obviously other examples are available but that's the one I know) is because this is a situation where it isn't complicated, and the through fare looks like a racket. There is only one sensible route and you have to change at Temple Meads. The only sane ticket price has to be equal to or slightly less than the sum of the constituent fares. Montpelier - Bath makes this point: Montpelier - Temple Meads: ^1.50; Temple Meads - Bath: ^6.90; Montpelier - Bath: ^7.00 (all singles).

The problem with the fares between the Severn Beach Line and Worcester stems from the introduction by FGW of Cheap Day (now Off Peak Day) tickets between Bristol and Worcester/Great Malvern in 2007. Prior to this there were only Standard (now Anytime) Day Singles/Returns. Existing Cheap Day fares on the route between Bristol and Great Malvern priced by FGW (for example Bristol - Gloucester/Cheltenham) were also cut. This is a rare example of a fares cut, and a significant one at that. A day return from Bristol to Worcester prior to May 2007 would have cost you ^20.70, no matter what time of day you travelled. Today, you can travel on an Off Peak Day Return for ^12.30

If you look at current Anytime and period return (Off Peak Return - SVR) fares between Severn Beach Line stations and Worcester, you'll note that there is no saving to be had by splitting at Bristol. It is only when making an Off Peak Day journey for the Bristol-Worcester portion that a split yields a saving.

Cock up rather than conspiracy I suspect in not also introducing Cheap Day (now Off Peak Day) fares from Severn Beach Lion stations to Worcester/Great Malvern.

Perhaps this is one anomaly worth pointing out to FGW to see if they'll fix it and introduce Off Peak Day fares from Severn Beach Line stations to Worcester/Great Malvern.

Thanks for that explanation, bignosemac - at last it makes (some sort of) sense. Last time I had a discussion with the guard about this he did say he'd raise this as it was such a yawning anomoly, but maybe I should be public-spirited and have a go myself... I'll have a delve through the 'Contact' details elsewhere on this site.

Now all I need to work our is why Worcester ticket machines try to sell you the 'via Brum' fare to Bristol..!

If someone wants to PM me their anomolies, I'm meeting shortly with FGW's Head opf Fares. He's friendly, and likely to deal....so get them to me by the end of the week.

I've made a note of the Severn Beach-=Worcester one - any more? (FGW fares only, natch!)

You could try enquiring about reinstatement of "via Bristol" as a valid route from Westbury group to Taunton (and further west) in the routeing guide (it was valid until a couple of years ago).
IIRC there are still "not Bristol" and "any permitted" fares but the latter don't give any more options!

I'd be very reluctant, and advise others to be cautious, when bringing anomalies and loopholes to the attention of FGW's Fares Manager. Particular if those loopholes and anomalies are saving you money.

The lack of Off Peak Day fares on the Severn Beach Line to Worcester is one of very few I'd consider bringing to their attention as it a fare type that is missing, most probably as an oversight. Introducing Off Peak Day fares on this flow will stop the necessity for split tickets, although it's possible FGW will be happy with the status quo as they get more revenue from people unaware of the split. If that remains the case then there's little that can be done, save for taking every opportunity to inform people of the split. I've done that on the train on one occasion and will continue to do so if I hear someone nearby asking for a day ticket to Worcester.

In the past, I've enquired about certain anomalies to check they are valid for the journey I wish to make, only to discover that they are later closed. Maybe coincidence, but I'm a suspicious git.

In most cases I don't think we need to be doing the Fares Manager's job. I'm sure they are grateful for the input, but when an anomaly is brought to their attention which they can fix to their benefit, it's best to let them find out for themselves. Case in point: The Westbury - London Zones 1-6 Travelcard oft used by grahame in the past.

I'm not sure criticism of various fares anomolies is valid here if you don't want them corrected!

FGW's Fares dept. are of course free to read this forum (and others) and take whatever action they feel is appropriate. I'm just saying we shouldn't be making their job any easier by contacting them directly about most anomalies and loopholes.

My comment stands....

Just checked ... bought a super off peak ticket.  Standard and Off Peak fares on front screen; had to go through 2 other screens to find super off peak.  Aren't all trains super off peak today?