Terry Casey wrote:
A friend went to Goodmayes station on Friday morning and asked for a single
to Southall, for which he was charged £5.10. He set off via Liverpool Street
and Paddington but when he got to Southall he was told his ticket was
invalid and he would have to pay again - £3.10.

He explained that he had asked for a ticket to Southall and pointed out that
the ticket included zone 4 (both Goodmayes and Southall being in zone 4.)

Wouldn't this be a case for a zero fare excess since the train-tube fare
is the same whether the destination is Zone U1234 or Southall?
--
Michael Hoffman

On 25 Feb, 21:31, Michael Hoffman wrote:
Terry Casey wrote:
A friend went to Goodmayes station on Friday morning and asked for a single
to Southall, for which he was charged £5.10. He set off via Liverpool Street
and Paddington but when he got to Southall he was told his ticket was
invalid and he would have to pay again - £3.10.

He explained that he had asked for a ticket to Southall and pointed out that
the ticket included zone 4 (both Goodmayes and Southall being in zone 4..)

Wouldn't this be a case for a zero fare excess since the train-tube fare
is the same whether the destination is Zone U1234 or Southall?
--
Michael Hoffman


Should have taken the £20 PF and then told the inspector that the
Penalty Fare guidelines as issued by the SRA (as was), state not to PF
passengers from other TOCS or off route.

On Feb 25, 9:31 pm, Michael Hoffman wrote:
Terry Casey wrote:
A friend went to Goodmayes station on Friday morning and asked for a single
to Southall, for which he was charged £5.10. He set off via Liverpool Street
and Paddington but when he got to Southall he was told his ticket was
invalid and he would have to pay again - £3.10.

He explained that he had asked for a ticket to Southall and pointed out that
the ticket included zone 4 (both Goodmayes and Southall being in zone 4..)

Wouldn't this be a case for a zero fare excess since the train-tube fare
is the same whether the destination is Zone U1234 or Southall?



Someone did point out that the revenue would be divided differently,
and FGW wouldn't get any of it, which was why they would have
objected.

Looked at that way, it's not much different, logically, from paying in
advance for a Ryanair flight and trying to use your booking on a train
to Southall because it's the same price. Or handing over your money
in one shop and taking goods out of another on the grounds that the
price was the same.

It's not just a product of the privatised railway, because London
Underground was separate before then.

BUT I don't think it would be a good idea to pay either a penalty fare
or the extra £3.10. The company losing out and the company making the
mistake should fight it out amongst themselves.

I think there would be zero chance of being prosecuted, and almost
zero chance of seeing the money again if one handed it over and tried
to claim back later.

MIG wrote:

Someone did point out that the revenue would be divided differently,
and FGW wouldn't get any of it, which was why they would have
objected.

Looked at that way, it's not much different, logically, from paying in
advance for a Ryanair flight and trying to use your booking on a train
to Southall because it's the same price. Or handing over your money
in one shop and taking goods out of another on the grounds that the
price was the same.

It's very different. It's more like if you handed over your money in one
shop so you could collect at another location, and then when you got to
the location they said you had never paid for the goods. (Not so
far-fetched--for example it is possible to pay at the John Lewis in
Cambridge and then pick up your items at a remote collection spot
several miles away.)
--
Michael Hoffman

On Feb 25, 11:04 pm, Michael Hoffman wrote:
MIG wrote:
Someone did point out that the revenue would be divided differently,
and FGW wouldn't get any of it, which was why they would have
objected.

Looked at that way, it's not much different, logically, from paying in
advance for a Ryanair flight and trying to use your booking on a train
to Southall because it's the same price. Or handing over your money
in one shop and taking goods out of another on the grounds that the
price was the same.

It's very different. It's more like if you handed over your money in one
shop so you could collect at another location, and then when you got to
the location they said you had never paid for the goods. (Not so
far-fetched--for example it is possible to pay at the John Lewis in
Cambridge and then pick up your items at a remote collection spot
several miles away.)


Let's not confuse the issue of the mistake made here by One, who seem
to have sold the wrong ticket, and your point about it being in
general a zero excess if you buy a ticket to one place and go to
another place where it's the same price, and where there are different
companies involved.

The ticket would seem to have been to Underground Zone 4, and this is
not the same place as Southall, and the trains that go there are not
run by the same company (although they should be a nationalised
network of course).

MIG wrote:
On Feb 25, 11:04 pm, Michael Hoffman wrote:
MIG wrote:
Someone did point out that the revenue would be divided differently,
and FGW wouldn't get any of it, which was why they would have
objected.
Looked at that way, it's not much different, logically, from paying in
advance for a Ryanair flight and trying to use your booking on a train
to Southall because it's the same price. Or handing over your money
in one shop and taking goods out of another on the grounds that the
price was the same.
It's very different. It's more like if you handed over your money in one
shop so you could collect at another location, and then when you got to
the location they said you had never paid for the goods. (Not so
far-fetched--for example it is possible to pay at the John Lewis in
Cambridge and then pick up your items at a remote collection spot
several miles away.)

Let's not confuse the issue of the mistake made here by One, who seem
to have sold the wrong ticket, and your point about it being in
general a zero excess if you buy a ticket to one place and go to
another place where it's the same price, and where there are different
companies involved.

And let's not confuse the issue of the economics from the train
company's point of view with my question of whether the inspector could
have instead issued a zero fare excess. This would have resulted in the
companies dealing with the problem themselves rather than bothering the
poor passenger.

The ticket would seem to have been to Underground Zone 4, and this is
not the same place as Southall, and the trains that go there are not
run by the same company (although they should be a nationalised
network of course).

They're a national (not nationalized) network until it's
inconvenient--then they can blame the other company for selling the
wrong ticket.
--
Michael Hoffman