Meanwhile in the case I posted about, travellers B & C were threatened with a fine for NOT using the third seat reservation, whilst traveller A, who returned on a different train, found that seat reservations had been cancelled on that train due to there not being time to prepare the train before departure!
If it is a group save ticket and without the full details of your journey and the exact tickets held then every answer is guessing the inspector was correct as it is a discount ticket and only available if you travel in the group you booked it for.
Try booking an airline ticket and turning up for the flight with the wrong name on the ticket or turning up for a different airline or a different flight time and see how far you get.
All the discounted tickets and offers were brought in to offer competition to the rail travel market like they do to the airline market. If you want a discounted ticket you have to abide by the regulations of the ticket, nobody calls Easyjet a jobsworth when they turn you away 5 minutes after the gate closes or Ryanair charges you a fortune when you want to change your booking.
nobody calls Easyjet a jobsworth when they turn you away 5 minutes after the gate closes or Ryanair charges you a fortune when you want to change your booking.
Ok fictional scenario... Harrowgate to London costs £20 per person.
If two friends travel together and sit next to a third stranger, that's £60 for three bums on seats.
However, if the three seats are booked as part of a 3+ group booking, each seat gets a 25% discount, so the three seats are now worth a total of £45 to the train company. This is a hit they take to encourage group travel.
But wait.. what if one of the 3 people doesn't show up? Well that seat is now booked for the journey so no one else can sit in it and the train company still only makes £45 from three seats.. rather than the £60 they would have made if the booking was made for the people who actually showed up. (2 people + 1 stranger).
But wait.. what if one of the 3 people doesn't show up? Well that seat is now booked for the journey so no one else can sit in it and the train company still only makes £45 from three seats.. rather than the £60 they would have made if the booking was made for the people who actually showed up. (2 people + 1 stranger).
So you can sort of see where they're coming from.
Except that they can and will sell a ticket to anyone who wants to travel from Harrogate to London, they just won't guarantee them a seat. However the standard ticket without a guaranteed seat will cost more than the discounted ticket with a reserved seat.
I now understand that the system automatically applied a group discount, which I didn't know before. I'm still left with, er, reservations about the idea that people who are effectively innocent of any wrongdoing can be fined for someone else's inadvertent breach of the rules.
The ticket inspector says "That is against the terms and conditions of the ticket. If you buy three tickets you have to use all three, or you are liable to be charged the full standard single fare."
If this is what the t&c say that I see no way, contractually, that it would be upheld in any court - other than one held by DS!
I think D was looking for a way out of not coming. I saw their cat the same day and it was perfectly fine (pun intended) and not ill at all. We all know though that the individual involved often lets others down though so no-one ought to have been surprised. ;-)
Except that they can and will sell a ticket to anyone who wants to travel from Harrogate to London, they just won't guarantee them a seat. However the standard ticket without a guaranteed seat will cost more than the discounted ticket with a reserved seat.
I now understand that the system automatically applied a group discount, which I didn't know before. I'm still left with, er, reservations about the idea that people who are effectively innocent of any wrongdoing can be fined for someone else's inadvertent breach of the rules.
I suppose the train company may take the argument that because that group of three booked three seats, someone who punched in that particular journey into their site may have been told there were no cheap seats available and so booked on another service or got the coach instead. It really depends on how deeply we go into it.
What would be interesting is say a group of eight people booked eight seats and none of them show up. What then? Does the train company try to charge their card? Because if the inspector kicked up a stink over one unfilled seat.. what would they do over eight?
I think it's just train company obsessed with profits + terms and conditions that sting you if something goes wrong. The inspector did let you off so there is one saving grace with the story. Although I find that in itself odd because they're not meant to do that.
The ticket inspector says "That is against the terms and conditions of the ticket. If you buy three tickets you have to use all three, or you are liable to be charged the full standard single fare."
If this is what the t&c say that I see no way, contractually, that it would be upheld in any court - other than one held by DS!
I think D was looking for a way out of not coming. I saw their cat the same day and it was perfectly fine (pun intended) and not ill at all. We all know though that the individual involved often lets others down though so no-one ought to have been surprised. ;-)
I don't think D is the only person who would prefer to spend time with a cat than with A's father.
Interesting take on the legal implications. I was pleased that B & C stayed cool and the inspector backed off.
I think its more to do with reserving a seat then not using it which takes a reservation off the market for someone else to use.
Isn't there always at least one coach with no seat reservations? And once a train has left the station from which an empty seat is reserved, anyone can use that seat.
...........Perhaps it's to stop people booking group tickets, getting 20% off an already reduced fair and somehow abusing the group offer. I'd have to spend time plotting journeys on their website and I'm not about to do that. ............
If a minimum group size is three, then the discount would need to be greater than a third to make it worthwhile for two people to book three seats. With a group size of three or more, it would never be worth booking an extra seat, since they'd have the discount anyway.
So what happens if someone decides to book an additional seat for their own comfort. Maybe they are obese and can't fit in a single seat.
At the end of the day the train company may have certain T&C but if they are unfair then they are unenforceable. In a situation such as the OP, I would be tempted to let them take me to court.
So what happens if someone decides to book an additional seat for their own comfort. Maybe they are obese and can't fit in a single seat.
Yes, I wonder what would have happened if "B" or "C" had been playing in a concert and put a tuba on the third seat. Would the inspector have ordered them to take it off the seat AND tried to fine them for not having a third passenger?
(Hypothetical and quite silly I know but would be interesting to find out)
Isn't there always at least one coach with no seat reservations? And once a train has left the station from which an empty seat is reserved, anyone can use that seat.
Not on the bloody train I was on, ALL seat reserved ALL seats occupied, it was a long journey.
Yes, I wonder what would have happened if "B" or "C" had been playing in a concert and put a tuba on the third seat. Would the inspector have ordered them to take it off the seat AND tried to fine them for not having a third passenger?
(Hypothetical and quite silly I know but would be interesting to find out)
I would imagine the T&Cs would say something about the seat must be occupied by a person. Only guessing mind!
I should make it clear that it was not sold as a special group rate, it was just the cheapest price available on the normal East Coast booking matrix. Can anyone shed any light on this bizarre incident?
You say that it wasn’t a special group rate, but is it possible that the ‘East Coast booking matrix’ automatically assigned you a preferential rate and you were unaware of it.
Could it be that the total cost of 3 discounted tickets was actually cheaper than 2 standard (off-peak) tickets? It seems a little unlikely, but if that was the case then the Ticket Inspectors actions would be completely justified.
Nowhere in that does it say that all passengers must make the journey. Neither does it say that all passengers must make the journey in the advanced tickets T&C. The inspector was talking bullshit.
I would have told the inspector to take it up with the person who was not travelling. Or failing that the person who bought the tickets (ie the one who agreed the T&C).
But the seat has been paid for. If they had booked for two people it would have been cheaper. They booked for 3 and paid for 3, so what are they trying to discourage?
Actually, this is about preventing 'strangers' from buying group tickets and then traveling separately. If the ticket is for a specific train then it's very harsh to fine you for this, however I suspect that you just booked a seat and that you are actually able to travel on any train.
These tickets are specifically for groups of people to travel together and they can't just assume that you are telling the truth and that the other person isn't traveling at a different time.
If you'd just bought full price tickets (or better still, advanced tickets) you wouldn't have the problem. You live and learn!
I would have told the inspector to take it up with the person who was not travelling.
No, it's the people travelling without a valid ticket who are liable (assuming it is part of their ticket conditions that they travel as a group).
Perhaps the main reason for the restriction is to prevent people getting a group discount and then travelling separately. Was the missing passenger's ticket shown to the inspector?
No, it's the people travelling without a valid ticket who are liable (assuming it is part of their ticket conditions that they travel as a group).
Perhaps the main reason for the restriction is to prevent people getting a group discount and then travelling separately. Was the missing passenger's ticket shown to the inspector?
I'm a bit baffled by this. The ticket is only valid on the train it's booked for, so if "D" doesn't travel on that train he simply loses the use of the ticket. It's not refundable so the travellers make a net loss if the ticket isn't used.
I'm a bit baffled by this. The ticket is only valid on the train it's booked for, so if "D" doesn't travel on that train he simply loses the use of the ticket. It's not refundable so the travellers make a net loss if the ticket isn't used.
OP, you've been getting plenty of advice most of which is common sense regarding the T&Cs and some free legal advice from a competent lawyer. I don't know what else you are wanting from this?
If the T&Cs say that you all have to be there as a condition, and those travelling without a member of the group means that it is now invalid, there aint a lot else that can be said! You can argue the morality of the situation all you like, it is as it is! As I said before, had I been the Inspector I wouldn't have given myself the hassle of the confrontation or would have just mentioned what the T&Cs were without attempting to make it look like I was going to surcharge them, but this inspector didn't, a jobsworth maybe but they may also have been technically correct!
Anyway, its all moot, your friends were able to travel unabated!
OP, you've been getting plenty of advice most of which is common sense regarding the T&Cs and some free legal advice from a competent lawyer. I don't know what else you are wanting from this?
If the T&Cs say that you all have to be there as a condition, and those travelling without a member of the group means that it is now invalid, there aint a lot else that can be said! You can argue the morality of the situation all you like, it is as it is! As I said before, had I been the Inspector I wouldn't have given myself the hassle of the confrontation or would have just mentioned what the T&Cs were without attempting to make it look like I was going to surcharge them, but this inspector didn't, a jobsworth maybe but they may also have been technically correct!
Anyway, its all moot, your friends were able to travel unabated!
To be clear: I said quite early on that I now understood that the tickets were sold at a group discount, but that this was not made clear at the time of purchase. I'm grateful for the free legal advice and the interesting comments from other FMs.
edited for an afterthought: the comments I've disagreed with have been the ones trying to justify the rule. My point is that customers do not need to know the reasons for rules as long as the rules are clear, fair, and legal. I'll leave it at that.
What if nobody had travelled, East Coast would still have the money, but 3 empty seats. They wouldn't charge you full fare for not travelling.
Don't give them any ideas!
Imagine if travelling with Ryanair, for example (your favourite airline...) and decided not to make use of that £10 return ticket. You don't really then want to be charged the £300 on-the-day fare.
Imagine if travelling with Ryanair, for example (your favourite airline...) and decided not to make use of that £10 return ticket. You don't really then want to be charged the £300 on-the-day fare.
I would imagine if they and Ryanair could get away with it, then they would.
Actually, this is about preventing 'strangers' from buying group tickets and then traveling separately. If the ticket is for a specific train then it's very harsh to fine you for this, however I suspect that you just booked a seat and that you are actually able to travel on any train.
These tickets are specifically for groups of people to travel together and they can't just assume that you are telling the truth and that the other person isn't traveling at a different time.
If you'd just bought full price tickets (or better still, advanced tickets) you wouldn't have the problem. You live and learn!
No these are advance purchase small group discount fares, and have to be booked for a specific train. So no you cannot travel on any train with these fares.
Comments
This goes back to T&Cs and a jobsworth.
Try booking an airline ticket and turning up for the flight with the wrong name on the ticket or turning up for a different airline or a different flight time and see how far you get.
All the discounted tickets and offers were brought in to offer competition to the rail travel market like they do to the airline market. If you want a discounted ticket you have to abide by the regulations of the ticket, nobody calls Easyjet a jobsworth when they turn you away 5 minutes after the gate closes or Ryanair charges you a fortune when you want to change your booking.
You're right, they get called a lot worse!
If two friends travel together and sit next to a third stranger, that's £60 for three bums on seats.
However, if the three seats are booked as part of a 3+ group booking, each seat gets a 25% discount, so the three seats are now worth a total of £45 to the train company. This is a hit they take to encourage group travel.
But wait.. what if one of the 3 people doesn't show up? Well that seat is now booked for the journey so no one else can sit in it and the train company still only makes £45 from three seats.. rather than the £60 they would have made if the booking was made for the people who actually showed up. (2 people + 1 stranger).
So you can sort of see where they're coming from.
Except that they can and will sell a ticket to anyone who wants to travel from Harrogate to London, they just won't guarantee them a seat. However the standard ticket without a guaranteed seat will cost more than the discounted ticket with a reserved seat.
I now understand that the system automatically applied a group discount, which I didn't know before. I'm still left with, er, reservations about the idea that people who are effectively innocent of any wrongdoing can be fined for someone else's inadvertent breach of the rules.
If this is what the t&c say that I see no way, contractually, that it would be upheld in any court - other than one held by DS!
I think D was looking for a way out of not coming. I saw their cat the same day and it was perfectly fine (pun intended) and not ill at all. We all know though that the individual involved often lets others down though so no-one ought to have been surprised. ;-)
I suppose the train company may take the argument that because that group of three booked three seats, someone who punched in that particular journey into their site may have been told there were no cheap seats available and so booked on another service or got the coach instead. It really depends on how deeply we go into it.
What would be interesting is say a group of eight people booked eight seats and none of them show up. What then? Does the train company try to charge their card? Because if the inspector kicked up a stink over one unfilled seat.. what would they do over eight?
I think it's just train company obsessed with profits + terms and conditions that sting you if something goes wrong. The inspector did let you off so there is one saving grace with the story. Although I find that in itself odd because they're not meant to do that.
Weird. I could be talking complete rubbish btw.
I don't think D is the only person who would prefer to spend time with a cat than with A's father.
Interesting take on the legal implications. I was pleased that B & C stayed cool and the inspector backed off.
Isn't there always at least one coach with no seat reservations? And once a train has left the station from which an empty seat is reserved, anyone can use that seat.
If a minimum group size is three, then the discount would need to be greater than a third to make it worthwhile for two people to book three seats. With a group size of three or more, it would never be worth booking an extra seat, since they'd have the discount anyway.
So what happens if someone decides to book an additional seat for their own comfort. Maybe they are obese and can't fit in a single seat.
At the end of the day the train company may have certain T&C but if they are unfair then they are unenforceable. In a situation such as the OP, I would be tempted to let them take me to court.
Yes, I wonder what would have happened if "B" or "C" had been playing in a concert and put a tuba on the third seat. Would the inspector have ordered them to take it off the seat AND tried to fine them for not having a third passenger?
(Hypothetical and quite silly I know but would be interesting to find out)
Not on the bloody train I was on, ALL seat reserved ALL seats occupied, it was a long journey.
Surely there only ever were legal implications aren't there! T&Cs implies a contract doesn't it?
I would imagine the T&Cs would say something about the seat must be occupied by a person. Only guessing mind!
You say that it wasn’t a special group rate, but is it possible that the ‘East Coast booking matrix’ automatically assigned you a preferential rate and you were unaware of it.
Could it be that the total cost of 3 discounted tickets was actually cheaper than 2 standard (off-peak) tickets? It seems a little unlikely, but if that was the case then the Ticket Inspectors actions would be completely justified.
Other than that ....
Nowhere in that does it say that all passengers must make the journey. Neither does it say that all passengers must make the journey in the advanced tickets T&C. The inspector was talking bullshit.
Actually, this is about preventing 'strangers' from buying group tickets and then traveling separately. If the ticket is for a specific train then it's very harsh to fine you for this, however I suspect that you just booked a seat and that you are actually able to travel on any train.
These tickets are specifically for groups of people to travel together and they can't just assume that you are telling the truth and that the other person isn't traveling at a different time.
If you'd just bought full price tickets (or better still, advanced tickets) you wouldn't have the problem. You live and learn!
No, it's the people travelling without a valid ticket who are liable (assuming it is part of their ticket conditions that they travel as a group).
Perhaps the main reason for the restriction is to prevent people getting a group discount and then travelling separately. Was the missing passenger's ticket shown to the inspector?
I'm a bit baffled by this. The ticket is only valid on the train it's booked for, so if "D" doesn't travel on that train he simply loses the use of the ticket. It's not refundable so the travellers make a net loss if the ticket isn't used.
OP, you've been getting plenty of advice most of which is common sense regarding the T&Cs and some free legal advice from a competent lawyer. I don't know what else you are wanting from this?
If the T&Cs say that you all have to be there as a condition, and those travelling without a member of the group means that it is now invalid, there aint a lot else that can be said! You can argue the morality of the situation all you like, it is as it is! As I said before, had I been the Inspector I wouldn't have given myself the hassle of the confrontation or would have just mentioned what the T&Cs were without attempting to make it look like I was going to surcharge them, but this inspector didn't, a jobsworth maybe but they may also have been technically correct!
Anyway, its all moot, your friends were able to travel unabated!
edited for an afterthought: the comments I've disagreed with have been the ones trying to justify the rule. My point is that customers do not need to know the reasons for rules as long as the rules are clear, fair, and legal. I'll leave it at that.
Don't give them any ideas!
Imagine if travelling with Ryanair, for example (your favourite airline...) and decided not to make use of that £10 return ticket. You don't really then want to be charged the £300 on-the-day fare.
I would imagine if they and Ryanair could get away with it, then they would.
No these are advance purchase small group discount fares, and have to be booked for a specific train. So no you cannot travel on any train with these fares.