Avoiding zone 1 via Primrose Hill

I’m not sure. If there was just one pink reader involved then I’d say yes you would be. But there are two and they are both sited in the same zone (2/3). However, if you want to be certain to be charged the correct fare then travel the wrong way first and touch the pink reader at Willesden Junction before returning.

This is classed as a temporary or limited service route so changes to the normal fare tables are unlikely to be arranged.

Thanks for letting us know.

Hi Michael,

Unfortunately the route you used is not a usual route. I therefore doubt that you’ll get a refund.

Updating the fare tables is a very complex operation which is generally only done 3 times a year. There is no way that changes would be made just for engineering works.

Hi Michael,

Please can you tell me the times of direct trains tomorrow (31st Dec)?

I know that engineering work often sends trains this way, but it is NOT a regular service pattern. If the fare finder offered zone 2 only fares by default then people would be asking how to make the journey without being charged extra when there are no direct trains (ie most of the time).

If the line via Primrose Hill ever becomes a normal 7-day a week service then I would expect fares to be created. There is nothing to stop you contacting TfL and asking them to consider adding direct fares, but in my opinion this is unlikely to be done in the current setup.

I don’t think it can be argued that the charge is ‘wrong’ in any meaningful way.

TfL publish two fares for travel between these stations and define the circumstances under which they’ll each be charged. Your journey matched one of those two sets of criteria so you were charged the fare that applies to that journey.

The fact that they also supply some textual commentary as to what the zonal assumptions behind the fares are is neither here nor there. A fare between A and B was quoted and that fare was charged.

To my knowledge National Rail fares don’t change based on diversionary routes, so why would TfLs?

Thanks for coming back to us. I’m pleased that they considered a refund in your case. I do not share your optimism that they will correct the fare tables for services which may only run on a handful of days a year.

I still don’t see how being charged the advertised fare can qualify as being overcharged but you clearly have your own opinion.

The pink validators are a different issue and I’d love a better solution but I’ve yet to come up with one. The oyster system really wasn’t designed for the complexity it’s now having to deal with on a daily basis.

Hi Michael,

I can understand your frustration, I really can. It’s good that you’ve raised an FOI request because that will either prove or disprove that lots of people are ‘overcharged’. If it turns out to be a potential problem then that may influence what happens next.

I think one of the issues is your understanding of the default route. It is a difficult concept because two very different criteria are at play. In the vast majority of cases the default route is the one most people are likely to use on any given day with normal services running. It also describes what will be charged however you travel if you don’t leave the system via a gateline (and don’t exceed the maximum journey time). The problem occurs when there is a potential route which doesn’t involve leaving the system which charges less than the most obvious route. An example of this might be Clapham Junction to Lewisham NR. Most people would choose to travel via Waterloo because there are plenty of trains on both legs, but you can change at Denmark Hill and stay in zone 2 if you don’t mind chancing the half hourly Victoria to Dartford service. Because that is cheaper and a significant minority of people use it, that has to be the default route. The more common route is detected by the gates between Waterloo and Waterloo East. I have had several people ask why they are overcharged when making the popular journey, especially in the days when the single fare finder didn’t display the alternate routes without you pressing another button.

The other things to note are that some journeys are charged via zone 1 regardless of the route taken. That is a fact regardless of how fair or otherwise it may seem. And when engineering work forces you to use a different (usually more expensive) route you are charged for what you do, rather than what you might have done without the diversion.

It is very rare that an engineering diversion using only trains will take you over a route which ought to be cheaper. In fact I can’t readily think of an example apart from the one you are talking about in this thread. As I’ve mentioned before, this is an unusual situation because trains travel over tracks which aren’t normally used for passenger services. The problem for TfL is that if they make the default route the one used on, say, 20 days in a year they will end up getting complaints from people who think they’ve been overcharged on the other 345 days.

Now, as I said at the start, if your FOI request shows that lots (hundreds per day) of people are making journeys which ought to be cheaper then it is just possible that TfL might consider changing the default route. However, hundreds per day is still only a very small percentage compared to the many thousands who will make journeys via zone 1 when the diversion isn’t in place. Therefore my considered opinion is that they are unlikely to make a change.

When you get the results of your FOI request back, I would recommend that you write to London Travelwatch if the figures suggest a big problem. They have in the past persuaded TfL to make adjustments where a cheaper route cannot be detected by the system. I must stress though that it is unlikely to be a quick fix even if LTW do manage to have a positive influence. The March faretables are already locked down and being tested, so a new permanent fare won’t appear until September at the earliest.