Printed wrong part of ticket

BobBy_2

Looking for some advice. My son & gf purchased tickets from Cross Country and opted for 'print at home' delivery. They then printed out the wrong part of the ticket - i.e. the email confirming purchase, rather than the pdf file of the ticket. A rather rude ticket inspector on the train refused to accept this - despite them showing him the original email and pdf file on their mobile phones - and charged them >£200 for new tickets (originals were only £20). The ATOC conditions of Travel define e-tickets and confirm these are acceptable if just shown on a mobile phone. Cross Country refer to 'e-Ticket/'Print at Home' on their website. Any thoughts whether they can claim a refund on basis the ticket descriptor is confusing and therefore unclear whether e-ticket or paper-copy ticket rules apply? Cross Country being unhelpful so far as usual. Thanks.

zzzLazyDaisy

The T&C's are very clear - you must print out the ticket on A4 paper and carry it with you. Neither the confirmation e-mail nor a screen shot on a mobile phone complies with this condition.

Cross Country's T&Cs are here (scroll down for e-tickets and m-tickets)
https://www.buytickets.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/terms.aspx?prevPage=%2Fregistercustomer.aspx

There was a very similar thread in January which might provide useful information

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4372241

securityguy

BobBy wrote: »

The ATOC conditions of Travel define e-tickets and confirm these are acceptable if just shown on a mobile phone.

They don't, thanks to the old English teacher chestnut of what "may" means.

What they do is list a variety of platforms that e-tickets "may" be stored on (section 9). That lists all the current e-ticket carriers

An Electronic Ticket may be stored on a:

i. Smartcard (including an Oyster or ITSO card);
ii. payment card or identity card;
iii. mobile telephone;
iv. personal organiser;
v. other mobile electronic device; or
vi. database, in conjunction with an authorised Contactless Bank Card.

That's just the definition of an e-ticket (ETA: which is very different to an airline e-ticket, but very similar to the boarding pass that you get in exchange for an airline e-ticket). That's a list of things that might carry an e-ticket, not a statement that they're interchangeable. Interestingly, it doesn't include "piece of paper", which makes you wonder if the NR conditions of travel include Print@Home in e-ticket: the XC conditions of travel distinguish between e-tickets and m-tickets, with m-tickets all being things that the NR conditions of travel think are e-tickets.

But assuming for the purposes of this discussion that section 9 of the national conditions does include print at home, the next paragraph says "The purchase and use of the Electronic Tickets listed in this Condition are subject to specific conditions of use. These will be made available when you participate in such a scheme."

And in the XC conditions, it's very clear:

E-ticket / print@home: For some bookings we allow you to print your own ticket.

You must ensure that you print the ticket clearly on A4 paper and carry the ticket with you when you travel.

Tickets are only valid when accompanied by the correct identification selected whilst making the booking.

Tickets are non-transferable and you must ensure that no one else is able to obtain and/or print a copy of your ticket.

Some train operating companies apply additional restrictions to the use of e-ticket / print@home - you must note any additional restrictions notified during the booking process.

dggar

Not directly relevent to this thread but CrossCountry (XC) now charge a fee to obtain printed tickets from Ticket machines at stations.

Unless there is a discount for getting your tickets via the XC web site it is better to use another Train company's site.

However beware that TheTrainLine charge a booking fee so I would advise that they be avoided.

BobBy_2

Thanks for these helpful, if dispiriting, responses.

However, to play devil's advocate, there seems acceptance that an e-Ticket is something that can be stored (i.e. exist) electronically. Taking the conditions literally:

'You must ensure you that you print the ticket clearly on A4 paper and carry the ticket with you when you travel.'

The requirement does not state that it is the paper copy of the ticket that must be carried when you travel. If we accept that the e-form of the ticket exists, and this is being carried on the train (on a phone, for example), doesn't this satisfy the literal meaning of this condition? It does not state you need to carry the paper copy with you. Surely printing out a COPY of an e-ticket does not invalidate the original e-ticket itself?

ILW

BobBy wrote: »

Thanks for these helpful, if dispiriting, responses.

However, to play devil's advocate, there seems acceptance that an e-Ticket is something that can be stored (i.e. exist) electronically. Taking the conditions literally:

'You must ensure you that you print the ticket clearly on A4 paper and carry the ticket with you when you travel.'

The requirement does not state that it is the paper copy of the ticket that must be carried when you travel.If we accept that the e-form of the ticket exists, and this is being carried on the train (on a phone, for example), doesn't this satisfy the literal meaning of this condition? It does not state you need to carry the paper copy with you. Surely printing out a COPY of an e-ticket does not invalidate the original e-ticket itself?

It does appear to.

securityguy

BobBy wrote: »

Thanks for these helpful, if dispiriting, responses.

However, to play devil's advocate, there seems acceptance that an e-Ticket is something that can be stored (i.e. exist) electronically. Taking the conditions literally:

'You must ensure you that you print the ticket clearly on A4 paper and carry the ticket with you when you travel.'

The requirement does not state that it is the paper copy of the ticket that must be carried when you travel.

Good luck with convincing a court that the "the ticket" in the first clause of that sentence isn't "the ticket" in the second. Courts usually hold that contracts have their natural or plain meaning, and it's fairly clear that "the ticket" is the thing you printed, not some platonic ideal of a ticket existing in the abstract.

If we accept that the e-form of the ticket exists, and this is being carried on the train (on a phone, for example), doesn't this satisfy the literal meaning of this condition?

It does not state you need to carry the paper copy with you.

So you need to convince a court that the terms and conditions suggest that you print a ticket for the fun of it. Again, it would fall to the "natural and plain meaning" problem: why would the Ts&Cs insist you print it, even specifying the paper size, other than to carry it for inspection?

And even if they accepted this rather strained reading of the terms and conditions, how would you prove that you'd actually printed it to satisfy your interpretation?

BobBy_2

Thanks both for the sanity check. I agree the plain English interpretation of the clause, to people used to dealing with paper tickets, doesn't really support this. However, this was proposed on the basis that these tickets were purchased by young people who deal everyday with e-commerce. They bought something called an 'e-Ticket'. In their world, the electronic version of most things is definitive. We are all frequently emailed receipts for goods we purchase with an email telling us we must print a copy of the receipt. Why? Who knows. I don't think it is stretching reality too far for people from this generation to not see a paper copy of an e-Ticket as superfluous. To avoid ambiguity, the condition really ought to state '..print the ticket clearly on A4 paper and carry this copy of the ticket with you when you travel.' To me the conditions are fairly sloppily worded and the whole concept of an 'e-Ticket' really doesn't seem to match its common modern usage. But thanks anyway for all your advice.

Buzby

The argument would be lost as the requirements of the e-ticket, and m-tickets differ. Print at home means just that, and has to be a physical image of the PDF. They fact they will accept either type does not help you if the image is displayed in the wrong medium.

I got caught out on a bus trip, but the driver was willing to point out my error and accept incompetence on my part. ATOC is not so forgiving. I is an expensive lesson, but I cannot see any way to challenge the fine, since the traveller was in the wrong.

securityguy

BobBy wrote: »

They bought something called an 'e-Ticket'.

Hmm, it's a bit of a mess, isn't it? In the national rail conditions of carriage, there is reference to "electronic tickets" which are definitely paperless. But a national rail print@home (having just fished one out that I bought from XC last year) says that it's an e-ticket, but then goes on to say it has to be printed out, etc. The conclusion would be that an e-ticket isn't an electronic ticket within the meaning of the NR CoC, but refers instead to a print@home. At which point that does conflict with, say, an airline e-ticket which does not have to be printed (and although it's used to obtain a boarding pass, that too might not have to be printed either).

I doubt it's enough to get your money back, but it might be worth a go on the basis of the ambiguity of whether an e-ticket is an electronic ticket or not. However, the ticket itself (ie, the PDF) does say it has to be printed on clean white paper, so I suspect you'll still lose.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

BobBy wrote: »

Thanks both for the sanity check. I agree the plain English interpretation of the clause, to people used to dealing with paper tickets, doesn't really support this. However, this was proposed on the basis that these tickets were purchased by young people who deal everyday with e-commerce. They bought something called an 'e-Ticket'. In their world, the electronic version of most things is definitive. We are all frequently emailed receipts for goods we purchase with an email telling us we must print a copy of the receipt. Why? Who knows. I don't think it is stretching reality too far for people from this generation to not see a paper copy of an e-Ticket as superfluous. To avoid ambiguity, the condition really ought to state '..print the ticket clearly on A4 paper and carry this copy of the ticket with you when you travel.' To me the conditions are fairly sloppily worded and the whole concept of an 'e-Ticket' really doesn't seem to match its common modern usage. But thanks anyway for all your advice.

Well there you go then, it appears that the youth assume far too much with out knowing the facts. And young people who deal with e-commerce should know to read the small print and how to print out a PDF when they follow the instructions on the email which does indeed tell you to print the PDF.

Its worth pointing out to you that the ticket was delivered electronically so that covers the e-ticket part of it BUT a clause of said ticket states that it MUST be oriented out on A4 paper for it to be VALID. That couldn't be clearer in their t&CD.

You want dirt cheap tickets? Make sure you don't fall foul of the rules surrounding the ticket.