Perils of ignoring Pick Up only at Reading

[whole diary]

[John R]

Friday's service showed it stopping at Reading and gave no indication that it was pick up only. However, that's a problem for RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) to solve (if it so wishes) - don't think you can expect the railway to take account of unofficial web services that may give inaccurate information. National Rail's site is a different matter, as it is the official source of information, but I'm not sure it's possible to look back to Friday on that.

RTT is actually correct from what I can see. If you look at the public timetable on RTT rather than the working timetable, it will not give you an arrival time for Reading.

That's correct, although I don't think you can expect Joe Public to realise the implications of not showing an arrival time as being "you can't get on this train and get off it at Reading". In reality, I doubt whether anyone on that train who expected to get off at Reading was relying on RTT - most just boarded knowing full well it usually stops at Reading  but they shouldn't be on board, and maybe a small proportion were genuinely caught out.

[SDS]

The 1915 FO should always be first stop SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) (ie not PU^▸ (stops to Pick Up only) or SD at RDG^‡(resolve)). This train gets extremely overcrowded (I define overcrowding by Thameslink 'standards') and I have known some TMs^‡(resolve) refuse to take the train due to the overcrowding.

It will only take a few PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-RDG season ticket holders to be excessed for not using their brain and looking at the screens, ah it says it doesn't stop at RDG maybe today it doesnt.

The trouble is it's all customer service now and I bet FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would refund any excesses that were rightly issued.

[Super Guard]

I think the inconvenience of an extra hour+ onto the intended 25 minute journey would be enough for one to double check in the future, rather than excessing (just my personal opinion).  It is something that would have to run non-stop every week, or it just causes confusion for all.

Two things I'm not sure of with respect to Reading pickup only services

1) what the window labels say
2) what does real time trains report

I am sure there are window labels without Reading on.

[SDS]

Indeed there are labels which do not say RDG^‡(resolve) on them. It is normally agreed before hand by the AOM to remove RDG from the CIS^▸ (Customer Information System) (which is default not to show it).
Sometimes the XX:03 FO WoE services get the RDG stop taken off the CIS as well.

In the past I used to inform people I knew went to RDG that the 1915 FO wasn't scheduled to call and got abuse thrown back at me, so now I just don't care. Sooner it becomes perma first stop SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) the better and get some revenue guys to excess the lot of them. (Seeing as you can't PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) them).

[ellendune]

In the past I used to inform people I knew went to RDG^‡(resolve) that the 1915 FO wasn't scheduled to call and got abuse thrown back at me, so now I just don't care. Sooner it becomes perma first stop SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) the better and get some revenue guys to excess the lot of them. (Seeing as you can't PF^▸ (Penalty Fare) them).

I think the inconvenience of an extra hour+ onto the intended 25 minute journey would be enough for one to double check in the future, rather than excessing (just my personal opinion).  It is something that would have to run non-stop every week, or it just causes confusion for all.

I have sympathy with SDS because of the abuse, but my vote would be with Super Guard as it is a more customer centred approach for those who made a genuine error.

[ChrisB]

Genuine error not to read departure boards and just assume?....hmm

[ellendune]

Genuine error not to read departure boards and just assume?....hmm

If you have got used to the idea that all HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) stop at Reading or that the 19:15 stops at Reading on other days - Yes genuine error not looking at the departure boards.

[BerkshireBugsy]

I have the feeling that this is one of those threads where contributors nay have to agree to disagree.

I am curious to know what contributors feel about the scenario where a clear PA^▸ (Public Address) announcement was made prior to departure from paddington stating that "this service is not scheduled to stop at Reading" . Should passengers who chose to ignore this be excessed?

[ChrisB]

Absolutely!

[ellendune]

Still think that more than an hour's delay would be sufficient disincentive. Assuming they did get the train back!

[SDS]

I have the feeling that this is one of those threads where contributors nay have to agree to disagree.

I am curious to know what contributors feel about the scenario where a clear PA^▸ (Public Address) announcement was made prior to departure from paddington stating that "this service is not scheduled to stop at Reading" . Should passengers who chose to ignore this be excessed?

After PAs are made and its shown as first stop SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) then defo Excess with a threat that if they are caught again then prosecution could result!

[Timmer]

Because of the selfish nature of those who are deliberately ignoring the 'pick up' only rule that have been put in place for a reason, to allow those who are travelling long distance on less frequent services to be able to travel, I have no sympathy with anyone who ends up in Swindon or Taunton.

Sadly the only solution available to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to stop this happening is to remove Reading stops on some peak time services. Yes that would be an inconvenience for those wishing to board at Reading, but as has been suggested travel on an earlier service and change onto the train that didn't stop at Reading further down the line.

[BerkshireBugsy]

Sadly the only solution available to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to stop this happening is to remove Reading stops on some peak time services. Yes that would be an inconvenience for those wishing to board at Reading, but as has been suggested travel on an earlier service and change onto the train that didn't stop at Reading further down the line.

I'm going to state that my journey from London to Thatcham often requires a change at Reading and often the option of catching an earlier service isn't always available to me.

Having said that I feel there are enough service options to get me back to Reading without catching a service that May or May not stop at Reading allowing me to change for a local service

[bobm]

Sadly the only solution available to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to stop this happening is to remove Reading stops on some peak time services. Yes that would be an inconvenience for those wishing to board at Reading, but as has been suggested travel on an earlier service and change onto the train that didn't stop at Reading further down the line.

That is not such much a problem for South Wales services where there are other services to Didcot or Swindon to catch the train - but still an inconvenience. However on the West of England run it is less easy. Apart from the fact most are pick up only at Reading at present so could potentially run non stop under your suggestion, those which aren't tend to run via Bristol so you'd either end up prolonging your journey even more or end up on a XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyager.

I agree though something needs to be done - perhaps manual ticket checks on the platform?

[BerkshireBugsy]

I agree though something needs to be done - perhaps manual ticket checks on the platform?

Block the staircases and switch all escalators into to "down"?

Elf and safety would have a field day !