as without allowing break of journeys you would only be able to do the journey A-D with an A-D ticket, as the railways intended.
You get on the train from A to D for a job interview. However halfway through your journey you get a text telling you that someone else has the job, don’t bother showing up. So you get off at the next station, C.
People can and do have changes of plans. This is going to end with a railway worker trying to stop a passenger from exiting. Because the A to C journey is more expensive than the A to D journey, and the passenger only paid for A to D. And so the railway staff try to force the passenger onto the train from C to D. And the passenger accuses the train company of kidnapping them. That is going to be a mess.
That or the rule is written, but unenforced and routinely flouted.
If the railway company doesn’t like this, they can assign prices to make this impossible. A simple per mile fee would work. Or at least, assign a positive number to each little segment of journey, (two consecutive stations). Assign the price for longer journeys to be the sum of these pieces. Assign the value of flexible tickets to be the maximum value of all the individual journeys they could be used on.
Using just contactless payments for flexible travellers in conjunction with advance tickets as the only options available would be a way to solve this.
in the situation you have described, the person with a possibility of change of plans could have used contactless rather than an advance ticket.
If the railway company doesn’t like this, they can assign prices to make this impossible.
The British railway companies do not seem to be doing a good job at assigning prices to make this impossible, despite not liking it.
You get on the train from A to D for a job interview. However halfway through your journey you get a text telling you that someone else has the job, don’t bother showing up. So you get off at the next station, C.
People can and do have changes of plans. This is going to end with a railway worker trying to stop a passenger from exiting. Because the A to C journey is more expensive than the A to D journey, and the passenger only paid for A to D. And so the railway staff try to force the passenger onto the train from C to D. And the passenger accuses the train company of kidnapping them. That is going to be a mess.
That or the rule is written, but unenforced and routinely flouted.
If the railway company doesn’t like this, they can assign prices to make this impossible. A simple per mile fee would work. Or at least, assign a positive number to each little segment of journey, (two consecutive stations). Assign the price for longer journeys to be the sum of these pieces. Assign the value of flexible tickets to be the maximum value of all the individual journeys they could be used on.
With my proposal of
in the situation you have described, the person with a possibility of change of plans could have used contactless rather than an advance ticket.
The British railway companies do not seem to be doing a good job at assigning prices to make this impossible, despite not liking it.