Why do some South Eastern operators, e.g. Thameslink and Southern have
First Class? Aside from the fact that the seating is not very differnt
to Standard (apart from Thameslink who at least have proper First Class
seats), there are never any ticket checks on board these trains so
First Class can become a free-for-all with no distinction between who
has a Standard ticket in First and who doesn't.

Just what is the logic behind offering First Class on suburban routes
in the London metropolis? Should they adopt the Chiltern route of
abolisihing First Class? I mean, look at the Silverlink County First
Class - it's rubbish!

On 7 Nov 2005 13:08:31 -0800, "Andrea" wrote:

Why do some South Eastern operators, e.g. Thameslink and Southern have
First Class? Aside from the fact that the seating is not very differnt
to Standard (apart from Thameslink who at least have proper First Class
seats), there are never any ticket checks on board these trains so

While rare, ticket checks are more common than never.

First Class can become a free-for-all with no distinction between who
has a Standard ticket in First and who doesn't.

Just what is the logic behind offering First Class on suburban routes
in the London metropolis?

Passengers are more likely to get a seat if they pay for first. In
some cases, first class may technically not exist when the trains are
being used on suburban routes.

Should they adopt the Chiltern route of
abolisihing First Class? I mean, look at the Silverlink County First
Class - it's rubbish!

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:41:57 +0000, Arthur Figgis
] wrote:

Passengers are more likely to get a seat if they pay for first. In
some cases, first class may technically not exist when the trains are
being used on suburban routes.

Yes, that's an interesting point. The train I get to work on a Friday
(runs Victoria to London Bridge via Crystal Palace) is formed of
ex-Brighton Express stock (complete with First Class seating) but
AFAIK there are no first class fares available along that route, and
certainly not for my part of it.

Does that, therefore, mean that I am entitled to sit in the "First
Class" area with my Z1-3 Annual?

And what about on trains between London Bridge and Charing Cross that
have an origin/destination where first class fares are available?

--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com

In article , James Farrar
writes
AFAIK there are no first class fares available along that route, and
certainly not for my part of it.

Does that, therefore, mean that I am entitled to sit in the "First
Class" area with my Z1-3 Annual?

It's nothing to do with what fares are available.

Check the timetables. If they show first class is available on a
service, you need a first class ticket to sit in first class. If they
show it as standard class only, you can sit anywhere on the train with a
standard class ticket, irrespective of what the seating is like.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Clive Feather:
Check the timetables. If they show first class is available on a
service, you need a first class ticket to sit in first class. If they
show it as standard class only, you can sit anywhere on the train with a
standard class ticket, irrespective of what the seating is like.

So why is this allowed? I have no problem if the train operators want
to use their first-class rolling stock this way, but it seems obvious
to me that they should be required to mark it as second class, instead
of requiring passengers who don't buy first-class tickets to know which
trains the timetable says first class exists on.
--
Mark Brader | "And so it went. Tens of thousands of messages,
Toronto | hundreds of points of view. It was not called the
| Net of a Million Lies for nothing." --Vernor Vinge

Mark Brader wrote:

So why is this allowed? I have no problem if the train operators want
to use their first-class rolling stock this way, but it seems obvious
to me that they should be required to mark it as second class, instead
of requiring passengers who don't buy first-class tickets to know
which trains the timetable says first class exists on.

Once upon a dim distant time paper window labels were used to indicate
declassified accommodation. However, that died out during the British Rail
days (around the mid to late 1970s). Other than on the Midland Main Line
Meridians, where there are 'permanent' window labels in one vehicle,
declassifying standard class, I don't recall seeing it in many years. I
suspect that it fell out of favour with higher diagramming of stock,
resulting in stock working on several routes in a day, some of which may
require first class accommodation, and the manpower was not there to keep
labelling and de-labelling stock. However, IIRC, most of the Windsor line
diagrams are captive and stock could, theoretically, be labelled up at the
start of the day and remain so until end of service.

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , James Farrar
writes
AFAIK there are no first class fares available along that route, and
certainly not for my part of it.

Does that, therefore, mean that I am entitled to sit in the "First
Class" area with my Z1-3 Annual?

It's nothing to do with what fares are available.

Check the timetables. If they show first class is available on a service,
you need a first class ticket to sit in first class. If they show it as
standard class only, you can sit anywhere on the train with a standard
class ticket, irrespective of what the seating is like.

Is this stated officially anywhere? I have heard this rule mentioned in this
group many times but I can't find any reference to it in the Conditions of
Carriage.

Peter Smyth

SNOB !
"Andrea" wrote in message
oups.com...
Why do some South Eastern operators, e.g. Thameslink and Southern have
First Class? Aside from the fact that the seating is not very differnt
to Standard (apart from Thameslink who at least have proper First Class
seats), there are never any ticket checks on board these trains so
First Class can become a free-for-all with no distinction between who
has a Standard ticket in First and who doesn't.

Just what is the logic behind offering First Class on suburban routes
in the London metropolis? Should they adopt the Chiltern route of
abolisihing First Class? I mean, look at the Silverlink County First
Class - it's rubbish!

In message .com,
Andrea writes

Why do some South Eastern operators, e.g. Thameslink and Southern have
First Class? Aside from the fact that the seating is not very differnt
to Standard (apart from Thameslink who at least have proper First Class
seats),

The First Class accommodation on SWT is noticeably different to Standard
- wider seats (2+2 rather than 2+3), sockets for computers and phones,
individual reading lights, etc.

there are never any ticket checks on board these trains so
First Class can become a free-for-all with no distinction between who
has a Standard ticket in First and who doesn't.

I've certainly seen checks.

Just what is the logic behind offering First Class on suburban routes
in the London metropolis?

In the case of SWT, there is a distinction between true suburban routes
(the Hounslow and Kingston loops, for example) and semifast outer
suburban routes, such as the Windsor line, where there are a limited
number of inner London stops. First class is usually provided only on
the latter - presumably because there is a demand for it.

--
Paul Terry

"Paul Terry" wrote in message
...
In message .com, Andrea
writes

In the case of SWT, there is a distinction between true suburban routes
(the Hounslow and Kingston loops, for example) and semifast outer suburban
routes, such as the Windsor line, where there are a limited number of
inner London stops. First class is usually provided only on the latter -
presumably because there is a demand for it.

--
Paul Terry

On the Portsmouth line the first class is busy in the peaks to the point of
being full on some trains after Haslemere and ticket checks are the norm
towards London.

Paul