Passenger charged £155 for getting off train one stop early
![[Deleted User]](https://w3.vanillicon.com/v2/3e92690f543e43d30aefbbf3681b8ec9.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 4,890 Forum Member
✭✭✭
How ridiculous is this?!
http://travel.uk.msn.com/news/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=154787558
A man had a train ticket from Birmingham to Durham but decided to get off one stop early at Darlington and was asked to pay £155 for breaching the terms of his ticket.
http://travel.uk.msn.com/news/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=154787558
A man had a train ticket from Birmingham to Durham but decided to get off one stop early at Darlington and was asked to pay £155 for breaching the terms of his ticket.
0
Comments
But let's face it - he's paid for the journey and I really don't think that one extra empty seat for just one stop would really annoy people enough to cost the railway any money.
I think the most likely explanation is that it was a cheap deal and because they are so complicated to work out the railways decided it was safer to always insist on the full journey rather than someone working out how to get something cheaper by getting off early. A bit like someone discovering that a return ticket was cheaper than a single so they book the return and only go one way. A colleague did this at work several years ago on an extended business trip by air. One return would have expired due to the length of his stay but he found that two returns was cheaper than two singles.
No, it wasn't paid, but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous
But it should not have been requested at all really should it? Someone should be able to get off at any stop that is on that route and forfeit the rest of the journey.
But people don't get charged for not turning up and using their train ticket at all so why should he be charged for not using one section of it? Surely if you pay from Birmingham to Durham then you've paid for a seat from Birmingham to DUrham - whether or not you actually use that seat for the entire time is irrelevant. It's YOUR seat, for that period of time, to be sat in whenever you wish!
But more likely I think it's related to the discount scheme I mentioned. Discounts are often based on making more efficient use of resources. It's entirely possible for a discount to make a longer journey cheaper than a shorter one. I have no idea if that was the case here but it's simpler for the rail company to try and deal with that by a carte-blanche insistence that you always complete the journey in full.
But just to be clear here. I'm not supporting the demand for more money. I think the rail company did the right thing in waiving it. I'm just trying to help explain why it might have come about.
I doubt very much they would be fined for an empty seat as they can prove the ticket was reserved and paid for prior to the journey. If this were the case they would be regularly fined for no shows.
It cannot be justified. If they did that to me I would call the police and report being held against my will.
Probably another one like the people who bought a discounted ticket from A to B, thought they would get off at C, and complained when they were fined (quite correctly) because they didn't have a valid ticket.
He got off early, not late.
It sounds a bit arbitrary but this is a government regulator we're talking about :rolleyes:
The price he paid would have been for the trip to Durham, not Darlington. Train fares are not charged on a per mile basis, sometimes longer fares are more heavily subsidised for all manner of reasons, perhaps to encourage people on a popular commuter route to use the train rather than a car.
The terms of the ticket clearly state:
"You may not start, break and resume, or end your journey at an intermediate station except to change to/from appropriate connecting trains where these are shown on your ticket(s) or other official itinerary. "
Obviously this is to prevent people booking a cheap ticket and getting off half way to where they really want to go.
He broke the terms and conditions. Frankly he was lucky to get away with the fine being waived. If the train company decided they couldn't be bothered keeping up their side of the agreement and stopped the train halfway to the station, I'm sure nobody would just shrug their shoulders.
http://www.peopleforum.cn/redirect.php?tid=40049&goto=lastpost
"A spokesman said: ‘The terms and conditions of the advance purchase first-class ticket – the ticket which Professor Evans had used for his journey – clearly state that breaking a journey en route, or starting from an intermediate station, is not permitted.’
A spokesman for the Association of Train Operating Companies said: ‘Hundreds of thousands of people take advantage of cheap advance tickets every week with no problem at all.
'In return for significantly reduced prices, there are certain conditions which apply that are clearly advertised when the tickets are bought.’
Amy Bradley, from the Passenger Focus consumer group, said: ‘There are some very good deals to be had on the railway, but passengers tell us the price of flexibility is too high.’"
Very well put. I think the person who made the decision to make that charge should hang their head in shame.
There are routes where it is cheaper to buy a ticket to the next main terminus and get off early at the actual station you require than it is to buy a ticket to the actual station.
There are other routes where it cheaper to buy two separate tickets that make up the whole journey than to purchase one ticket for the whole journey.
Ah but what if he hadn't made the journy at all and stayed at home?
That seat was paid for if he choses not to occupy it thats his choice.
The most he should have been charged is the cost of a single from his final destination to his point of departure ie 1 stop.
The train prices in this country are a joke, I recently found out it is cheeper for me when going to London to buy a return to Brighton and get off at clapham and use my oyster card... yeah that makes sense!
Those are the kind of deals (maybe not the back hander, lol) that rail companies might come up with. It's a common business practice these days and I actually think it's a major factor behind 'rip off Britain'. Sneakily getting customers to pay extra for things they don't really need. I think they'd do better to be more honest and upfront rather than trying to pretend that they are giving genuine discounts. There are always hidden costs these days.