Worcester to Paddington. Off Peak Anomaly??

[whole diary]

[JayMac]

LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) is a HUGE improvement on CT! They actually clean the trains, so much so that it is hard to find a newspaper lying around. After an initial drop in performance, LM became unbelievably punctual and reliable. They have fitted ticket gates, and put in ticket machines. The publish posters showing which trains have spare seats, and how many carriages rush hour trains are formed of.

And the biggie, is that they are finally replacing the clapped out 150s, several years overdue! At last, ALL of the West Mids area will have acceptable rolling stock.

The only problems they've had are due to the poor WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) upgrade and the problems with the unions. Neither are LM's fault, as the Sunday problems started in Silverlink's days. Hopefully LM will force all staff to accept a new deal where Sunday is part of the week.

I'll concede the point. My limited experience of LM has been clouded by WCML and ex-Silverlink issues. However some of the union issues can be laid at LM's door. It takes two to tango!

[willc]

A few years ago some friendly staff at Oxford used to sell off-peak returns (can't remember if it was Savers or Cheap Day Returns) from Hanborough to save people money on the peak Oxford-Padd fare that would otherwise have been required on that train.

The majority of off-peak and off-peak day returns allow break of journey/joining or alighting short on both legs now, so unless there is a specific restriction applied to the Hanborough/Cotswolds tickets, that looks like it would be a legitimate money-saving tip for Oxford travellers.

I'm not sure how they were getting away with doing that, as the Cathedrals Express has never stopped at Hanborough, so those tickets would not have been valid.

There is another Cotswold line peculiarity, where you can get a Saver fare from Shipton, Ascott, Finstock and Combe if you're going to London, as there's only the one train a day you can use to make the journey (I'm ignoring the recent addition of an afternoon stop at Shipton, which allows a sort of evening out in London thanks to Shipton's unbalanced service, with extra evening calls westbound).

PS The LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) 150s are clapped out because no-one wanted to do anything about refurbishing them while waiting for the franchise to change and because LM then sidestepped the issue by ordering new stock. LM have spent the past two years letting the 150s shake themselves to bits while on a minimum maintenance regime. Anyone thinking these are going to be an instant fix to problems in the West Country and the North of England has got another think coming - they will need a huge amount of work to make them fit for any further use by anyone.

And they won't be forcing the unions to do anything - they will have to negotiate a new agreement.

[Btline]

You can't blame LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) for not maintaining the 150s when they've committed to new rolling stock. Central Trains did next to none and they certainly had no intention of replacing them!

And as I said, at least LM are cleaning them!

[willc]

Why can't I blame them? They've been the operator of the things for the past two years and still will be for months to come - if they're such a great organisation, why aren't they bothered about the state of these trains, which do nothing for their reputation?

They could at least fix all the windows that refuse to close properly and do something about the dodgy transmissions that shake the entire coach every time they pull away from a station - issues which affect pretty much every set I've ridden on between Stratford and Birmingham recently.

[JayMac]

A few years ago some friendly staff at Oxford used to sell off-peak returns (can't remember if it was Savers or Cheap Day Returns) from Hanborough to save people money on the peak Oxford-Padd fare that would otherwise have been required on that train.

The majority of off-peak and off-peak day returns allow break of journey/joining or alighting short on both legs now, so unless there is a specific restriction applied to the Hanborough/Cotswolds tickets, that looks like it would be a legitimate money-saving tip for Oxford travellers.

I'm not sure how they were getting away with doing that, as the Cathedrals Express has never stopped at Hanborough, so those tickets would not have been valid.

Perfectly allowable. Joining/alighting short is allowed and NRCoC^▸ (National Rail Conditions of Carriage) makes no mention of services needing to have called at the stations printed on the ticket. The ticket type and permitted route merely has to be valid for the service you board. Also you could say you boarded the preceeding train at Hanborough and changed at Oxford onto the Cathedrals'.

I have used this NRCoC allowance, coupled with the Routeing Guide to get to Hereford from Bristol on a             Bristol TM^‡(resolve)-Worcester FS Off-Peak Day Return. Bristol to Worcester is route permitted via Newport (Gwent), which means travelling through Hereford. The CDR^▸ (Off Peak Day Return [ticket type] (formerly 'Cheap Day')) fare to Hereford is ^19.50 but to Worcester it is only ^10.50. On neither leg do I board or alight a train at Hereford that has gone/is going anywhere near Worcester.

[JayMac]

Why can't I blame them? They've been the operator of the things for the past two years and still will be for months to come - if they're such a great organisation, why aren't they bothered about the state of these trains, which do nothing for their reputation?

They could at least fix all the windows that refuse to close properly and do something about the dodgy transmissions that shake the entire coach every time they pull away from a station - issues which affect pretty much every set I've ridden on between Stratford and Birmingham recently.

Are more of these 150's going to end up in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)-land? If so I would rather they came my way in a reasonable condition. Barton Hill and Exeter TMD^▸ (Traction Maintenance Depot) already have enough work keeping various FGW DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s in running order.

[Btline]

Why on earth would LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) spend money on them when they are due to leave starting next year? They only finished the 170s and 323s about six months ago, so it would be a refurb for a year. Great. And remember that the order has been delayed. LM initially expected them to start arriving 6 months earlier.

LM don't need to worry about their reputation, people know new trains are coming, and they haven't got noticeably worse since CT. In fact, they seem better as they are clean and have less rubbish in them! Besides, any negative thoughts from pax about the 150s is immediately cancelled out by the huge improvement overall from the CT days.

[willc]

I wasn't talking about a refurbishment, I was talking about basic day-to-day maintenance to keep them in sound condition, like fixing window catches so you don't get a gale blowing through the coach - I repeat, LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) have had the things on their books for TWO YEARS, never mind whether the 172s are late. It doesn't take that long to mend window catches or keep the engine and transmission in good order.

It could be interesting to see what happens when the time comes to hand them back to the leasing company, which will expect them to be in decent order so the next users get something that runs - at least until it can get a slot in a workshop for a thorough refit - not wrecks.

Perfectly allowable. Joining/alighting short is allowed and NRCoC^▸ (National Rail Conditions of Carriage) makes no mention of services needing to have called at the stations printed on the ticket. The ticket type and permitted route merely has to be valid for the service you board. Also you could say you boarded the preceeding train at Hanborough and changed at Oxford onto the Cathedrals'.

But is it? This is a train-specific exemption, so surely that makes it out of the ordinary. Just another little surprise lurking in the so-called 'simplified' fares system.

[inspector_blakey]

All right, it may not call Hanborough, but presumably it's still legitimate for an Oxford traveller to circumvent this restriction by buying a ticket from the last Cotswold line station at which the service calls before OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) (Charlbury?)

[JayMac]

Perfectly allowable. Joining/alighting short is allowed and NRCoC^▸ (National Rail Conditions of Carriage) makes no mention of services needing to have called at the stations printed on the ticket. The ticket type and permitted route merely has to be valid for the service you board. Also you could say you boarded the preceeding train at Hanborough and changed at Oxford onto the Cathedrals'.

But is it? This is a train-specific exemption, so surely that makes it out of the ordinary. Just another little surprise lurking in the so-called 'simplified' fares system.

I still think a SVR from Hanborough is valid boarding the Cathedrals' at Oxford. After all, timetable and journey planners show HND-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) at 0801 changing onto Cathedrals' at OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) as valid on the SVR fare.

[Timmer]

Are more of these 150's going to end up in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)-land? If so I would rather they came my way in a reasonable condition. Barton Hill and Exeter TMD^▸ (Traction Maintenance Depot) already have enough work keeping various FGW DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s in running order.

They are indeed coming our way in the not too distant future. One can only hope that before they are arrive here that they go straight into a major overhaul and refresh as you are absolutely right Barton Hill and Exeter have enough to do just maintaining the current FGW DMUs fleet.

[Tim]

As for "stupid" names. I would argue that names like Saver are far worse than Off Peak. What does "Saver" tell you about the ticket for an inexperienced traveller. I know what "Off Peak" says!

"Saver" and "cheap" where much better names.  You are right that they do not convey anything to the inexperienced traveller other than the fact that they are not full price.  Inexperienced travller is then prompted to find out the restrictions.   "anytime" and "off peak" are rubbish names because they imply a simple distinction between peak and off peak which does not in fact exist.  If you are going to have a horrendously complicated system of ticket restrictions then don't make the problem worse by introducing a "fares simplification" which in fact doesn't simplify any fares but just obscured some of teh complexity.

[willc]

I still think a SVR from Hanborough is valid boarding the Cathedrals' at Oxford. After all, timetable and journey planners show HND-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) at 0801 changing onto Cathedrals' at OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) as valid on the SVR fare.

Depends which journey planner you use - FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s does show this but national rail doesn't - instead sending you on the next stopper from Oxford to Didcot and changing there for London rather than hanging around at Oxford for 40 minutes. Whatever the case, it's not intended to benefit Oxford passengers, who have a far greater choice of trains, hence no easement - and I'd like to see the response if you turned up for the 9.31 from Oxford to London and asked for a Saver/whatever it's called from Hanborough to London on this basis.

[devon_metro]

And the biggie, is that they are finally replacing the clapped out 150s, several years overdue! At last, ALL of the West Mids area will have acceptable rolling stock.

Central Trains would have done that anyway, its a franchise commitment.

The relationship between management and workers is very hostile, hardly a great company!