Train fares supremo Barry Doe's knowledge of the complexities of train fares and ticket buying cannot readlity be condensed into a blogging site such as this, and is not always relevant for this context, but occasionally he has a little tip that's worth repeating.
In issue 677 of Rail magazazine he points out that redspottedhanky.com is the ony independent train ticket website that doesn't charge booking or credit card fees. I am still normally using Eastcoast, as previousy recommended by Barry, but I take it it is nor what he calls independent.
Trying out RSH for a journey I'm making revealed that the interface is virtually identical to Eastcoast's - and the tickets proferred the same selection. Not a scientific test, but at least there's consistency.
Monday, 29 August 2011
Thursday, 25 August 2011
Barking Skyride
Congratulations to all involved in the Barking & Dagenham Skyride last Sunday 21 August, especially council cycling officer Nick Davies. Thanks also to Charlie, Gerhard, Juwel and Stephanie for hosting an LCC stall in Barking Park. It generated quite a bit of interest.
Saturday, 13 August 2011
Halcrow archive films - Victoria Line
http://www.halcrow.com/Who-we-are/film_archive/Victoria-line-archive-film/
I recently Facebooked a link to a 1960s film of the Victoria Line station construction work at Oxford Circus. This is part of Halcrow's film archive, and their website says it it the first in a series of five films about the Victoria Line, but I can't see any links to the other four. Maybe they're being digitised.
I recently Facebooked a link to a 1960s film of the Victoria Line station construction work at Oxford Circus. This is part of Halcrow's film archive, and their website says it it the first in a series of five films about the Victoria Line, but I can't see any links to the other four. Maybe they're being digitised.
Labels:
archive film,
halcrow,
oxford circus,
victoria line
Saturday, 6 August 2011
Thug
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5PqTlvfavM
This is a very shocking video of a man threatening to punch a cyclist in the face for no apparent reason in Watetloo Rd, Romford. The incident ws filmed on the cyclist's helmet camera.
The video contains offensive language by the man who got out of a car to confront the cyclist.
This is a very shocking video of a man threatening to punch a cyclist in the face for no apparent reason in Watetloo Rd, Romford. The incident ws filmed on the cyclist's helmet camera.
The video contains offensive language by the man who got out of a car to confront the cyclist.
Labels:
27 july 2011,
fares to romford,
helmet camera,
thug,
waterloo road
Wednesday, 3 August 2011
Elsenham airport
Train fares supremo Barry Doe points out that train tickets from London to Elsenham are cheaper that those to, but also valid via. Stansted airport. An opportunity to save your self a little £. Dubious sustainability credentials I admit.
Thursday, 7 July 2011
Pavement Cycling not 'blameworthy'?
Just come across an interesting case concerning pavement cycling last
year in the High Court in which the judge made some interesting comments: [my emphasis]
http://www.bailii. org/ew/cases/ EWHC/QB/2010/ B11.html
"43. In my judgment, this piece of road was dangerous for all but the most experienced, traffic fast, confident and dominant of cyclists i.e. the 'serious' cyclist as Mr Ibbotson puts it, as opposed to the ordinary prudent cyclist using a cycle to go to work encumbered with his cyclerucksack.
44. In my judgment, although it is illegal for cyclists to use the pavement (unless it is specifically sanctioned by a local authority for shared use), when weighing up the danger to himself (cp danger to
pedestrians) it was a reasonable decision by the Claimant to ride on the pavements in this area rather than the road in the context of the duty of care owed to himself to take reasonable care for his own safety
whilst cycling. In my judgment, although illegal and potentially negligent in any action vis a vis a pedestrian, it was not "blameworthy" in terms of negligence in contributory negligence."
It would be interesting to know whether this has any implications for pavement cycling beyond deciding damagesas it seems to echo then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng's famous statement when pavement cycling FPNs were introduced that “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so."
year in the High Court in which the judge made some interesting comments: [my emphasis]
http://www.bailii. org/ew/cases/ EWHC/QB/2010/ B11.html
"43. In my judgment, this piece of road was dangerous for all but the most experienced, traffic fast, confident and dominant of cyclists i.e. the 'serious' cyclist as Mr Ibbotson puts it, as opposed to the ordinary prudent cyclist using a cycle to go to work encumbered with his cyclerucksack.
44. In my judgment, although it is illegal for cyclists to use the pavement (unless it is specifically sanctioned by a local authority for shared use), when weighing up the danger to himself (cp danger to
pedestrians) it was a reasonable decision by the Claimant to ride on the pavements in this area rather than the road in the context of the duty of care owed to himself to take reasonable care for his own safety
whilst cycling. In my judgment, although illegal and potentially negligent in any action vis a vis a pedestrian, it was not "blameworthy" in terms of negligence in contributory negligence."
It would be interesting to know whether this has any implications for pavement cycling beyond deciding damagesas it seems to echo then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng's famous statement when pavement cycling FPNs were introduced that “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so."
Labels:
duty of care to self,
ibbotson,
pavement cycling
Friday, 1 July 2011
East Coast Abolish £5 minimum spend on ticket website
My main objection to this limit is that it was applied after you had typed in all your credit card details, shoe size, mother's maiden name. A little programming tweak would have brought the warning up at a much earlier point in the process and saved irritation. East Coast's predecessor ignored me when I flagged this bug up, but fares guru Barry Doe has used his contact and achievd the better result of removal of the £5 minimum. I last fell for this bug buying a £4.20 ticket. I would have happily paid £5 to avoid the hassle, and finished up paying £5.20 to a competitor who charges £1 per transaction.
Thanks Barry, thanks East Coast (at last).
Thanks Barry, thanks East Coast (at last).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)