Standard ticket holder in first class

[Nsit]

Hello

I was travelling from London Liverpool Street to Stansted on the stansted express in first class with a standard ticket. I was approached by a ticket inspector so I can pay a fine and immediately asked for my details, which I refused to give.

I got up and went to the standard carriage and by the time I got to the airport the police were waiting for me where I was forced to give my details.

The inspector then started to question me and when I asked the police officer if I had to stay for the questions, he said no.

I should say that from the beginning of my encounter with the inspectors up until the point I left, things were escalating and I was getting upset. It felt like it was getting very personal.

I'm not perfect, it happened, but I'm also not a rampant fare dodger or someone that sits in first class as a habit.

I now fully appreciate the situation and I'm keen to make steps to make things better but I don't know where to start.

I'm an EU citizen that has lived her for 15 years and I'm very concerned that a potential criminal record will ruin my chances of residency.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated - thank you

 

[Greenback]

What you may or may not have done previously is not going to eb the immediate concern of the inspector. They have to deal with the situation as it is, whihc is you ar ein accommodation on the train for which you do not have a valid ticket.

Unfortunately, things began to escalate as soon as you refused to provide your details, which is a requirement I'm afraid.

I'd advise you to contact the train company, apologise for what happened, and offer to pay the difference between a standard class ticket and a first class ticket.

 

[northwichcat]

Why did you sit in the First Class area when you had a standard class ticket? If you have a genuine reason like poor signage or standard class being full and you were willing to pay for an upgrade to get a seat then I would think you will have a better chance of avoiding a criminal record.

I'm not sure if this thread might be of any use: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=85262 Southern and Gatwick Express are both part of the GTR franchise so I imagine they'll take the same kind of approach. (Unless you're someone well known I don't imagine your name will be all over the media like it was in this instance.)

 

[najaB]

Why did you sit in the First Class area when you had a standard class ticket? If you have a genuine reason like poor signage or standard class being full and you were willing to pay for an upgrade to get a seat then I would think you will have a better chance of avoiding a criminal record.

From the OP's story the latter doesn't appear to be the case not the case - they weren't willing to pay the Penalty Fare and were able to move to standard class.

If anything puts them at risk of a criminal record it's the refusal to give name and address.

Nsit, as Greenback said: when contacted by the train operating company (TOC) apologise for your behaviour, acknowledge that you shouldn't have been sitting in First class and offer to recompense them for the costs they've incurred dealing with your case. TOCs don't generally *want* to take people to court as they only get a small fraction of any fine that is imposed. They much rather deal with the matter out of court (though their preference would be for people to pay the correct fare in the first place. )

 

[AlterEgo]

Hello

I was travelling from London Liverpool Street to Stansted on the stansted express in first class with a standard ticket. I was approached by a ticket inspector so I can pay a fine and immediately asked for my details, which I refused to give.

I got up and went to the standard carriage and by the time I got to the airport the police were waiting for me where I was forced to give my details.

The inspector then started to question me and when I asked the police officer if I had to stay for the questions, he said no.

I should say that from the beginning of my encounter with the inspectors up until the point I left, things were escalating and I was getting upset. It felt like it was getting very personal.

I'm not perfect, it happened, but I'm also not a rampant fare dodger or someone that sits in first class as a habit.

I now fully appreciate the situation and I'm keen to make steps to make things better but I don't know where to start.

I'm an EU citizen that has lived her for 15 years and I'm very concerned that a potential criminal record will ruin my chances of residency.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated - thank you

How did things "escalate?" What actually happened? Why did the police become involved?

 

[Nsit]

How did things "escalate?" What actually happened? Why did the police become involved?

Hello

Thanks for the question.

The inspector came around and asked for my ticket, she saw the standard ticket and asked me rudely what I was doing there. I said "I'm sorry, I didn't realise, I was distracted, I will move." Then she pointed at the signage and said 'can't you read?, I'm going to give you a penalty, what's your name."

I would have paid for an upgrade, I would have even paid the penalty, but I was approached as a criminal first and reacted by refusing to give my details. There are easier ways to get my money and she was being unecesarily rude.

They called the police officers that were waiting at the airport, I gave my details. But by the end of the process, it felt personal and it had just escalated as I was visibly upset. It just felt ugly - we were not being civil to each other.

However, I'm not sure any of this makes a difference. I was sat where I wasn't suppose to be sat and refused to give my details. I regret the incident and need practical advice on best way forward. I called train focus today for some advice and they said in the first instance complain.

Any other advice much appreciated.

 

[12guard4]

For the police to get involved I would imagine that you was refusing to give details and/or not cooperating with the revenue protection staff member.

 

[Nsit]

How did things "escalate?" What actually happened? Why did the police become involved?

They got involved because the inspector called them so I can give me details.

 

[Nsit]

From the OP's story the latter doesn't appear to be the case not the case - they weren't willing to pay the Penalty Fare and were able to move to standard class.

If anything puts them at risk of a criminal record it's the refusal to give name and address.

Nsit, as Greenback said: when contacted by the train operating company (TOC) apologise for your behaviour, acknowledge that you shouldn't have been sitting in First class and offer to recompense them for the costs they've incurred dealing with your case. TOCs don't generally *want* to take people to court as they only get a small fraction of any fine that is imposed. They much rather deal with the matter out of court (though their preference would be for people to pay the correct fare in the first place. )

Greenback/Najab - thanks

I'm happy to ring and offer compensation.

I also rang trainfocus today for an opinion.

They said in the first instance an option is to make a complaint if I want until I hear from them with possible advice.

The back story is that I would have paid for an upgrade or the penalty if I hadn't been spoken to like a criminal first. When I handed the inspector my ticket she asked me why I was sitting there. I was responded with, I'm sorry, I was distracted and didn't realise, I will move. Then she pointed to the signage and said, don't you know how to read, I'll have to give you a penalty, what's your name. And that's how things escalated.

I'm not sure how important the back story is though, the facts are that I was sat where I wasn't meant to be sat and refused to give my details. So filing a complaint is just filing a complaint and I'm not sure it effects the illegality of the situation.

In any case, thank you for the advice.

 

[AlterEgo]

Do not ring them.

Wait until they write to you. Then write back. This is a legal process and you'll need to keep records of what you've received and sent.

 

[najaB]

I'm not sure how important the back story is though, the facts are that I was sat where I wasn't meant to be sat and refused to give my details. So filing a complaint is just filing a complaint and I'm not sure it effects the illegality of the situation.

You are correct there, it doesn't affect the legal situation. Impressing on the TOC that you accept that you were in the wrong part of the train will go a long way towards resolving the matter quickly.

That said, if you really feel that you were treated disrespectfully then by all means continue to raise your complaint as a separate matter.

 

[gray1404]

Yes wait for the letter to arrive from the train company. The ticket inspector should not be so rude as to be coming out with comments like can't you read " and should certainly not provoke you. So yes, make a complaint about her. There are many passengers who cannot read due to disability or lack of understanding of English. Really disappointed to hear of an RPI coming out with statements such as this.

 

[Nsit]

Thank you all for your comments.

I've read on other posts of people being summoned to court after not having responded to previous letters/warnings by the TOC.

Can I contact them to make sure they have my correct details?

Is it likely that the first letter I do receive is a summons to court?

Like I said, it felt like it was getting too personal at the end and I don't trust the inspector. Plus I can't remember if I gave my postal code. I suspect I'm being paranoid.

 

[Nsit]

Apologies - one final question- why did he read my rights?

 

[najaB]

Is it likely that the first letter I do receive is a summons to court?

Like I said, it felt like it was getting too personal at the end and I don't trust the inspector. Plus I can't remember if I gave my postal code. I suspect I'm being paranoid.

I can happen, but seldom does. They would've asked you for the post code, and even if they didn't you can post mail to any any address with just street address and town, the postcode is just for convenience of sorting mail.

 

[Nsit]

Thank you all for your comments.

I've read on other posts of people being summoned to court after not having responded to previous letters/warnings by the TOC.

Can I contact them to make sure they have my correct details?

Is it likely that the first letter I do receive is a summons to court?

Like I said, it felt like it was getting too personal at the end and I don't trust the inspector. Plus I can't remember if I gave my postal code. I suspect I'm being paranoid.

 

[Nsit]

Hello

Sorry one last question. The inspector read me my rights - am I right in thinking that he booked me on the spot and I will most definitely get a summons, which in that case I should speak to a solicitor?

 

[AlterEgo]

Hello

Sorry one last question. The inspector read me my rights - am I right in thinking that he booked me on the spot and I will most definitely get a summons, which in that case I should speak to a solicitor?

No. Getting read your rights means you were placed under caution for the purposes of an interview. It is not the equivalent of being charged.

Wait for a letter.

Received wisdom is that solicitors are generally useless with obscure railway ticketing laws, which they will seldom deal with.

 

[Nsit]

No. Getting read your rights means you were placed under caution for the purposes of an interview. It is not the equivalent of being charged.

Wait for a letter.

Received wisdom is that solicitors are generally useless with obscure railway ticketing laws, which they will seldom deal with.

Thankyou

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I don't want to appear hard on you, but it seems only fair to point out the relevant law here:

19. Classes of accommodation, reserved seats and sleeping berths

Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in any seat, berth or any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is reserved for a specified ticket holder or holders of tickets of a specific class, except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place.

and then:

23. Name and address

(1) Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person.
. . . . .

24. Enforcement
(1) Offence and level of fines
Any person who breaches any of these Byelaws commits an offence and, with the exception of Byelaw 17, may be liable for each such offence to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
. . . . .

The back story is that I would have paid for an upgrade or the penalty if I hadn't been spoken to like a criminal first. When I handed the inspector my ticket she asked me why I was sitting there.

So you can see why, when the ticket inspector came to you, that it could be construed that you already HAD committed a Criminal Offence in the breach of Byelaw 19, and then went on to compound it by breaching Byelaw 23(1).
I only mention this to assist you if you are thinking of making some sort of complaint, and that you don't risk having the point you are making disregarded entirely if you base it on the mistaken belief that an offence had not occurred.

It seems to me that the matter might have escalated through nothing more than a simple misunderstanding of the requirement to provide a name and address when a breach is suspected, and which would allow for a resolution to be arranged. If you think that this might be the correct analysis of the incident, then maybe your best line of response would be to treat it as an unfortunate misunderstanding and accept the consequences and learn from the incident.
But if you disagree with me, then you should probably consider what outcomes you reasonably think you can achieve at this stage, what the probabilities of success might be, and what cost in time and effort each would require. Another factor to consider would normally be to assess the standard of Evidence available to support the claims, but I'm going to guess here that the Statement which you made under caution is more than adequate to substantiate the Company's claim that you travelled in First Class with a Standard Class ticket, and in the matter of your treatment by the ticket inspector, that there is no Evidence to support your claim that the inspector was offensive, whether in terms of the Public Order Act or any other measure of behaviour, to corroborate your statement.

I'm sorry if this is not as supportive as you will have hoped for, but I do hope it helps.

 

[Nsit]

I don't want to appear hard on you, but it seems only fair to point out the relevant law here: and theno you can see why, when the ticket inspector came to you, that it could be construed that you already HAD committed a Criminal Offence in the breach of Byelaw 19, and then went on to compound it by breaching Byelaw 23(1).
I only mention this to assist you if you are thinking of making some sort of complaint, and that you don't risk having the point you are making disregarded entirely if you base it on the mistaken belief that an offence had not occurred.

It seems to me that the matter might have escalated through nothing more than a simple misunderstanding of the requirement to provide a name and address when a breach is suspected, and which would allow for a resolution to be arranged. If you think that this might be the correct analysis of the incident, then maybe your best line of response would be to treat it as an unfortunate misunderstanding and accept the consequences and learn from the incident.
But if you disagree with me, then you should probably consider what outcomes you reasonably think you can achieve at this stage, what the probabilities of success might be, and what cost in time and effort each would require. Another factor to consider would normally be to assess the standard of Evidence available to support the claims, but I'm going to guess here that the Statement which you made under caution is more than adequate to substantiate the Company's claim that you travelled in First Class with a Standard Class ticket, and in the matter of your treatment by the ticket inspector, that there is no Evidence to support your claim that the inspector was offensive, whether in terms of the Public Order Act or any other measure of behaviour, to corroborate your statement.

I'm sorry if this is not as supportive as you will have hoped for, but I do hope it helps.

Hello

Thanks for the response. You've supplied a lot of information, so let me see if we are on the same page.

I was in the wrong for being sat in their first class seat and for refusing to give my details. That's the objective truth - so I'm clear on the fact that I need wait for a letter and take appropriate and measured steps.

To your point, the matter escalated when she asked me if I knew how to read. And unless I try to wrangle up witnesses - which I'm pretty sure is not going to happen (unless the cctv can also show audio) - it is my word against hers.

I think the situation did get personal because we were all agitated. it was definitely one of those I'm-kind-of-taking-it-too-personal escalation incidents.

Are you saying that separate complaint will make the matter worse?

Don't worry about not being supportive, I'm just after some practical advice so many thanks.

Btw I didn't stay for the rest of interview because I was told by the police office that I didn't have to. When I asked the inspector how many questions he was going to ask me, he said as many as he can think of. This is new to me, I've never been stopped or had a caution so I didn't know how to behave or what my rights and obligations were.

Thanks

 

[najaB]

And unless I try to wrangle up witnesses - which I'm pretty sure is not going to happen (unless the cctv can also show audio) - it is my word against hers.

CCTV will not have recorded audio, and it is unlikely you would be able to get it anway.

Are you saying that separate complaint will make the matter worse?

A separate complaint will have no effect on the legal side of things. The mistake that some people make is to raise a complaint thinking that it will in some way stop the legal matter from proceeding.

 

[Nsit]

Correct. I don't expect a seperate complaint to affect the illegality of the situation.

I will wait for the letter and for the advisory group I contacted yesterday to come back to me.

I will try to settle it by dealing w the persecution office. If it doesn't seem promising I will contact a solicitor.

I may still raise a separate complaint - I would have done it anyway had it not escalated.

I most likely will not visit the site again until there has been a next step so thanks all for the feedback. I will update you.

 

[gray1404]

I think the situation did get personal because we were all agitated.

When I asked the inspector how many questions he was going to ask me, he said as many as he can think of.

It defiantly sounds to me like on a number of counts the RPI was provocative towards the OP and must not be left to get away with such behavior.

There is a small possibility that the RPI was using a personal recording device and, if so, the OP could request a copy of such footage, which will most likely provide audio.

I am not sure how fruitful this will be in the grand scheme of things, aside from aiding the OPs complaint. Although the TOC needs to realise that if their passengers are provoked it is going to cause problems. Perhaps it would be helpful with the complaint against her though.

 

[221129]

It defiantly sounds to me like on a number of counts the RPI was provocative towards the OP and must not be left to get away with such behavior.

There is a small possibility that the RPI was using a personal recording device and, if so, the OP could request a copy of such footage, which will most likely provide audio.

I am not sure how fruitful this will be in the grand scheme of things, aside from aiding the OPs complaint. Although the TOC needs to realise that if their passengers are provoked it is going to cause problems. Perhaps it would be helpful with the complaint against her though.

Sorry, I didn't realise you were there.

 

[gray1404]

You know very well that I wasn't there, and of course any replies from anyone here can only be based on what the OP has said. There is no reason thus far to believe that they would lie. I do not think, with respect, that sarcasm is of any help here.

 

[BestWestern]

I would imagine that a healthy proportion of complaints received from people rightfully caught by an RPI include the suggestion that the staff member was rude/obnoxious/did this that and the other, etc. I would be very surprised indeed if such suggestions were routinely acted upon by management, considering hoe potentially time consuming that would be. That's a shame of course if there is an attitude problem at play.

A bodycam would go a long way to allowing such complaints to be swiftly looked into, but I'm not sure that the footage would be handed out to public/passengers/offenders on request - does data protection apply as per fixed cctv?

 

[AlterEgo]

You know very well that I wasn't there, and of course any replies from anyone here can only be based on what the OP has said. There is no reason thus far to believe that they would lie. I do not think, with respect, that sarcasm is of any help here.

Some fragile and entitled egos about!

The RPI is tasked with catching people breaking the law. It's not really out of order to say "can't you read?". I'd expect a copper to say something similar.

There is nothing terribly wrong with what the RPI did, the OP has no entitlement to complain, and I would be rather annoyed if I ever had to handle a complaint from a first class bunker who didn't like how they were spoken to.

Suck it up and deal with the process. The OP is not a victim here.

 

[Controller1701]

Thank you all for your comments.

I've read on other posts of people being summoned to court after not having responded to previous letters/warnings by the TOC.

Can I contact them to make sure they have my correct details?

Is it likely that the first letter I do receive is a summons to court?

Like I said, it felt like it was getting too personal at the end and I don't trust the inspector. Plus I can't remember if I gave my postal code. I suspect I'm being paranoid.

One little niggle in the back of my mind, but why, having supplied details would there be any reason to now be doubting if they have your correct details?

 

[jon0844]

You know very well that I wasn't there, and of course any replies from anyone here can only be based on what the OP has said. There is no reason thus far to believe that they would lie. I do not think, with respect, that sarcasm is of any help here.

I have seen RPIs who are perhaps a bit timid and won't get involved with obvious fare evasion, but can't recall any that are rude or aggressive. Some will sigh and get frustrated, but that's a bit different.

If someone is refusing to cooperate or failing the attitude test, then later says they were treated badly, that usually sets alarm bells ringing.

But of course I wasn't there either. Nevertheless, failing to give details is not the best way to keep someone 'on side', especially if it results in the police being called.

I also can't recall a time BTP were called to deal with someone in first class without a first class ticket.

One little niggle in the back of my mind, but why, having supplied details would there be any reason to now be doubting if they have your correct details?

Quite.