Which? article

[whole diary]

[stuving]

Which? magazine is trailing an article for its next issue (January, out December 19th) with this:

Train travel secrets
How you can use the strange quirks of the train network to cut your travelling costs.

Now I wonder what that's about ...

[JayMac]

I'd hazard a guess it'll be an article about the not so secret art of split ticketing. Unlikely that Which? will go into any great depth about loopholes and anomalies. In many ways the Which? subscription model has been superseded by the immediacy of the internet.

Purely supposition on my part and I'll not know for definite what Which? will say about the 'strange quirks of the train network', as I cancelled my subscription in early October. Which ( ), incidentally, led to some poor customer service from Which?. Direct Debit still came out later that month, despite assurances it wouldn't. Four weeks it took for the money to be refunded. Which? blamed my bank. My bank blamed Which?.

I though about complaining to a leading consumer championing organisation, but I couldn't decide Which one.   

[stuving]

The on-line article is here.

It's not clear what it's aimed at doing, until the last paragraph. That says it's campaigning for better ticket sales sites and practices to give you the cheap deals without having to dig an your own arcana mine. Hence it's not really trying to provide a list of splits, nor is it really a how-to, or even a plea for simpler ticketing.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Hmm. 

For me, the only vaguely useful content in that particular 'Which?' article was their map:

[thetrout]

The map is quoting Single Fares...! I also think it is rather misleading!

Lets go a little deeper using the London Kings Cross - Norwich split at Ely suggestion.

^64.10 for a Standard Anytime Single London Kings Cross - Norwich which can be used on any train.

What the article doesn't mention for Kings Cross - Norwich is:

• Less comfortable train
• Likely 3+2 Seating in Standard Class and 2+2 in First Class
• Takes on average an extra 45 minutes LONGER!
• Requires a change of Trains at Cambridge

A quick look on the journey planner suggests that a journey from KGX - NRW^» (Network Rail Western - about) departs at 05:45 changing at Cambridge arriving 08:30

Whereas to make the same journey from London Liverpool Street - Norwich suggests a direct train at 06:30 taking 1 hour and 57 minutes arriving at 08:27

The first Off Peak train from Liverpool Street - Norwich is the 09:30 where a ticket is ^47.00 for a Standard Off Peak Single and ^48.00 for a Standard Off Peak Return. Looking at Monday 30th December advance tickets for the 06:30 LST - NRW show as ^8 Standard Class and ^13.00 First Class (No Railcards) so that is cheaper than the split suggestion from ^64.10 by 87% and from ^43.90 (Amount if split at Ely) is 81%

I would willingly spend an extra ^3.10 (Difference between SVS and SOS Fares) to travel on a Class 90 & Mark 3 Coach with 2+2 or 2+1 Seating and a Buffet Car than go the cavorted route via Cambridge.

Maybe that's just me. But in the morning peak as I say the split is saving you from the full price on 6 trains from London which to me when there is a 30 minute frequency is not such a big deal. Particularly with a First Class Advance at ^13.00 and with railcard is ^8.60

Maybe I'm reading too much into it?!

[Chris from Nailsea]

Hmmm, again. 

I'm sorry if I have inadvertently set you off researching the apparent failings of 'Which?', thetrout! 

In my previous post, I was merely referring to the fact that I found the map in the 'Which?' article to be a useful reminder as to the basic shape of our land, without floodwater covering much of it... 

[LiskeardRich]

Which ( ), incidentally, led to some poor customer service from Which?. Direct Debit still came out later that month, despite assurances it wouldn't. Four weeks it took for the money to be refunded. Which? blamed my bank. My bank blamed Which?. .   

Which were technically correct to an extent, on the basis of the Direct Debit (DD) Guarantee which stipulates your bank must repay you a DD collected in error, and then the bank recover from the originator (Which).
Which would be correct in about 4 weeks for a refund, as due to the DD guarantee the bank should refund you and recover the funds, so due to this no organisation will process a refund for a minimum of 12 working days, as that is the timescale for a bank to submit an indemnity claim, a majority of organisations send refund by Bacs which is 3-5 working days. Most companies once a refund is requested it goes through workflows which take up to 2-3 working days. Total process time for a customer to receive a refund by a company receiving the funds to be refunded by DD is 17-20 working days, or 4 weeks.

DD guarantee is as follows, I've bolded the relevant part to you.l

^The Guarantee is offered by all banks and building societies that accept instructions to pay Direct Debits
^If there are any changes to the amount, date or frequency of your Direct Debit the organisation will notify you (normally 10 working days) in advance of your account being debited or as otherwise agreed. If you request the organisation to collect a payment, confirmation of the amount and date will be given to you at the time of the request
^If an error is made in the payment of your Direct Debit, by the organisation or your bank or building society, you are entitled to a full and immediate refund of the amount paid from your bank or building society
◦If you receive a refund you are not entitled to, you must pay it back when the organisation asks you to
^You can cancel a Direct Debit at any time by simply contacting your bank or building society. Written confirmation may be required. Please also notify the organisation.

[Chris from Nailsea]

... you are entitled to a full and immediate refund of the amount paid ...

Nothing like 4 weeks there, then. 

[LiskeardRich]

... you are entitled to a full and immediate refund of the amount paid ...

Nothing like 4 weeks there, then. 

Absolutely and should be issued by your bank not the originator

[Super Guard]

... you are entitled to a full and immediate refund of the amount paid ...

Nothing like 4 weeks there, then. 

Absolutely and should be issued by your bank not the originator

From personal experience, I had a similar situation with my bank, who were less than helpful even when I quoted the DD guarantee.  They then tried to say it was my fault and neither the bank or organisation, but eventually they backed down and refunded my whopping ^12!

[LiskeardRich]

... you are entitled to a full and immediate refund of the amount paid ...

Nothing like 4 weeks there, then. 

Absolutely and should be issued by your bank not the originator

From personal experience, I had a similar situation with my bank, who were less than helpful even when I quoted the DD guarantee.  They then tried to say it was my fault and neither the bank or organisation, but eventually they backed down and refunded my whopping ^12!

I see such examples several times a month. Certain banks try all sorts to avoid an indemnity claim, normally blaming the customer for the dd errors.

[bobm]

I'm lucky - my bank allows me to see what is due out of my account the following working day.  If I see a rogue direct debit I can phone up and get it stopped before it even leaves the account.

[Alan Pettitt]

I have never had a problem, I simply cancel the direct debit online with the bank first, then whatever the originator does has no effect.

[stuving]

The on-line article is here.

It's not clear what it's aimed at doing, until the last paragraph. That says it's campaigning for better ticket sales sites and practices to give you the cheap deals without having to dig an your own arcana mine. Hence it's not really trying to provide a list of splits, nor is it really a how-to, or even a plea for simpler ticketing.

I've finally located the magazine article (January issue). It covers much the same material but at greater length, and adds a short explanation in terms of the history of InterCity vs  NSE^▸ (Network South East) and RR pricing policy (quoting Barry Doe) It reads more as a recommendation to look for splits then the on-line article, and to that end it names the two main web sites and gives a few more examples.

The final section of the on-line version is there but not expanded, hence it loses emphasis. (It is also headed "Which says", while another "expert view" is attributed to their their man Matt Stevens.) That includes "'We want to see train companies making it easy for passengers to see where buying split tickets will be better value than buying one through ticket. The routing guide that tells you which routes are valid for your ticket also needs to be much more visible - passengers can't be expected to wade through the detail of the 346 maps that it's made up of." I don't think they really mean "visible", nor to apply it to the guide itself. Surely that are really calling for the content of the guide (route validity information) to be more accessible and usable.

There is a little more on the Routing Guide, which also says it's "made up of" 364 maps. Now I find the maps the easy bit to understand; it's the words that are hard work. They note how valid routes are being removed, though say nothing on the proviso that routes be checked on Journey Planner (which they never name as such). There is a reference to section 19 of the NCC.