Nice to read about this, but it does present challenges - I think some of the land is now in private ownership and may have been built on between Helston and Penzance.

I find it useful, and it is appropriate since on a mobile device it takes you to a mobile version of this site that is readily usable.  Saves typing in a url on a tiny keyboard, then I can save site to favourites and never type it again.  You can also photograph the QR^▸ (QR Code - Quick Response code) and save it or email it.

These codes can effectively be virtual business cards, containing map links, telephone numbers and so on.  So someone seeing a website or poster can just add it all to their contacts, no more losing slips of paper.  So it reaches more people, faster, with almost no expense. 

Hi if you ask for a refund you find yourself dealing with First Great Western.  They just say no, taking a "we don't make mistakes" attitude, which is unwise considering that websites can and do have problems despite everyone's best efforts.

If you contact Trading Standards, now Consumer Direct, they will tell you what others have here: Distance Selling rules do not apply in this case.  But they'll probably also tell you that you can write to the company saying that misleading statements by them led you to buy something you did not expect and so you would like it refunded.  The key word  in law seems  to be "Misrepresentation".  In this case Trading Standards were interested and said that if the refund was refused they might look into it.  Passenger Focus expressed the same interest.

Likewise your credit card company's TOS probably give "product not as described" as grounds for a chargeback, in other words a refund.  In this case FGW^▸ (First Great Western) did not see a case for a refund but the credit card company did, finally.

I see FGW's site has been made over but the booking apparatus looks the same, so I am updating this so anyone having difficulties will understand that they can pursue the matter.  There's now also a warning at stives.mobi/transport.php

I truly cannot see why they set it up like this.  Well, until I spoke with someone who got off a plane very tired and clicked the first option seeing the word "cheapest" and bought a first class ticket without meaning or wanting to.

This is in fine print on the fourth screen in the purchase process,  3 screens after selecting the ticket type, which did not say it was not refundable, whereas on the initial screen other ticket types did say they were not refundable.  I think a screenshot is needed to show how obscure this fine print info really is.  And why is it presented so late in the sales process, and only so late for this particular ticket choice?

At best the presentation is inconsistent and confusing, misleading the customer.  If this ticket is in fact meant to be the same as another one  on the initial page, why present the same ticket twice there with different descriptions and apparently different conditions attached?

At worst the presentation is deliberately misleading.  It might have been an error originally, but there is no excuse for leaving it there now they know about it, and because it could look like "bait and switch". FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are responsible for what they say on their website, even if they do get data in from The Trainline, and FGW could easily just change wording or presentation as needed before outputting the Trainline data, or even put it back to how it used to be before this problem started.

There is a good case here for the customer asking for a full refund from FGW, as well as asking them to sort out what they say on their website to make things clear for everyone.

Just a PS, for more discussion of Trading Standards and so on, see this other thread:
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=8620.0

Super idea, this is a very confusing and frustrating field.  Maybe if you just start the thread as people add to it the original post can be updated with contact details for these entitities?   It could help to hear people's feedback on how useful or receptive these entities are.

Yes, Trading Standards are passing themselves off as Consumer Direct now, but everyone still calls them Trading Standards, not least of all because that is what they actually do, apply and enforce Standards.   I have found them very helpful.  Usually in the first instance they advise you of your rights and tell you to write to the company CEO^▸ (Chief Executive Officer) raising the exact issue, or category of issue, that Trading Standards have identified for you.

Also, on the original topic of this thread, I did ultimately get replies by email to each issue I raised by email with FGW^▸ (First Great Western), but sometimes several days later, and often without any initial acknowledgement of receipt of my email to them.   So if it is serious, do what Trading Standards advised, write a physical letter to the CEO and send it Recorded Delivery (costs just ^1.40 at time of writing).

Also, advertising on websites is, from March of this year, covered by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and it is free to complain to them, you just send them evidence of the advertising and state what you think is the problem with it, but the response is not likely to be rapid.   But it can lead to ads being modified and a judgement against the advertiser being made public for all to see.

Hi thanks for the info.

There seems to be no rhyme or reason to whether you get confirmation of an email sent to FGW^▸ (First Great Western).  I resent my two emails, and one got a confirmation, one did not, and trying again with different IPs or different email addresses also got no confirmation.  So I don't know if their system is overloaded, malfunctioning, filtering by IP, filtering by keyword, filtering by email address or name, or just plain rubbish.

Trading Standards told me to write them Recorded Delivery and suggested talking to Passenger Focus, an entity I'd never heard of.   Passenger Focus turned out to be irrelevant but told me two useful facts.   Customer service phone calls to rail companies seem to get little response, whereas written complaints are handled by a different, dedicated team who are supposed to take it seriously.   Secondly, Passenger Focus told me typical written response time in reality would be about 20 days.

Weirdly, Passenger Focus are not proactive.   They say they can't just send FGW or the Trainline a constructive email highlighting a general issue on the website that could be improved to avoid future aggravation.   They have to wait till a customer has had a complaint rejected by a rail company before they can do whatever they do, or don't do.

Hi Brucey that has got me interested - what is the Mixing Deck?

Hi thanks for the reply.  Here's a typical screenshot
 

The Journey Summary bit refers to the Cheapest Standard Single ticket and popped up when that ticket was selected.  The words Advance and non-refundable are nowhere to be seen.

Hi all

I was pleased to find this site when googling the phrase First Great Western Customer Service.

I'd like to alert you to a problem you may have when reserving tickets via the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) site.  There seem to be some web development and design issues there that can lead to you getting a ticket with different conditions from what you thought.

Sometime in the last few months a new feature was added to their site, so that when you search for a journey and display a page of available times and fares, the first two rows are now described as just  the cheapest second and first class tickets, then below that rows of advance and other tickets are displayed.

The first entry describes itself as the cheapest standard single, but does not say Advance or that it can only be used on that train and cannot be refunded.

Two rows below it you may see also an Advance ticket listed, which says it can only be used on that journey and cannot be refunded.

These would appear to a visitor to the site to be two different tickets.  Not to FGW, though.   Buy the first listed ticket and you actually get the Advance ticket, which you then find FGW say cannot be refunded.

If these two are the same ticket at best it is confusing and inefficient to display them as two separate and different appearing items.   At worst it misleads customers into buying tickets with unexpected restrictions.

So be very careful using this site.


PS I don't know if I can post images or screenshots here as a new user - I do have them, and they make it very clear that these items appear as separate entries in their own rows making them look like different products.

Hi just a quick query about emailing FGW^▸ (First Great Western).

Should I always expect an autoresponse with a reference when I email them on the email address they give, fgwfeedback[at]firstgroup.com?

I emailed them once last week and got an autoresponse within two minutes with a case reference number.   When I emailed them twice this weekend I got no autoresponse to either email, so I am wondering if that is normal?

I need to resolve something with them soon, so if email is not working I need to know.