Carlisle Security and Northern Rail: major concerns

[yorkie]

Arriva Rail North are continuing to deploy Carlisle Security contractors at unstaffed stations (see a previous thread: Revenue protection took my details unstaffed station ), whose remit appears to be to inspect tickets and issue Unpaid Fare Notices (UFNs) for single journeys only, when passengers are in need of a ticket.

The inspectors are unable to take payment to issue fares, and request the names, addresses, and even the date of birth of passengers in order to to issue UFNs instead.

Presumably this data is accessible to all three companies involved (Carlisle Security, IRCAS and Arriva Rail Northern), though the inspectors are unwilling or unable to discuss any data protection issues and answer even basic data protection questions.

The UFNs they issue state "you were unable either to provide or to pay for a valid ticket for your journey", even when a passenger is able to pay for a ticket. The inspectors claim the form is correct, stating "you're not able to pay because there's no ticket machine or ticket office open". I think more appropriate wording is "we were unable to take payment"

They ask passengers for ID, and have been caught recording details, such as date of birth, without the passengers consent. Clearly, ID is not required to travel by train (I would simply inform them I do not have ID, which I don't!), and I do not believe there is a valid reason to store a passengers DOB when the passenger is simply asking to purchase ticket.

Passengers are required to pay by either telephone, for which a 5p/minute charge applies to arrange payment or a 7p/minute charge applies if the payment needs to be disputed (e.g. in the case of a passenger making a return journey), or alternatively by post to ITAL, which does not appear to be a free post address. It is unclear how ITAL would react to being sent Rail Travel Vouchers, but they're a valid payment method, so they would have to take them, surely?

The relevant option for UFNs on Northern's telephone line appears to be option 7, which is stated as "Penalty Fares". Yet Northern does not operate a Penalty Fare Scheme. It's an interesting choice of words, given they were also attempting to deny a passenger a Railcard discount until the passenger insisted on it.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

If I worked for Northern, I would be furious that the company has deployed poorly trained contractors in such an inappropriate way.

Northern Rail states:

"Our customers want and expect more from the service we deliver. We want to provide help when you need it, offer a personalised service and be a company that is easy to do business with.

We know providing a great customer experience is about the support you receive from the moment you search for a ticket to the moment you reach your end destination."

This is about as far from reality as it can possibly get. Was this written by marketing people who have absolutely no idea what the company is up to? Or is it deliberately written to mislead people? Either way, it's unacceptable.

And, very worryingly, Jason Wade (Head of Loss Prevention at Arriva Rail North) states:

“Arriva Rail North are delighted to partner with Carlisle Support Services to deliver a key element of our customer service and revenue protection activity, as we continue our journey to modernise and to achieve demonstrable improvements for our customers. Carlisle have demonstrated a strong partnership ethos and have a track record of both delivery and positive employee engagement. We look forward to working together to bring a fantastic service to our customers”

Either Jason Wade is completely out of touch (in which case, if you're reading this Jason, please do get in touch) or... well, the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.

Is it possible for me to speak to a senior person at Northern about my concerns?

I am prepared to continue to help passengers who experience problems at the hands of people representing Arriva Rail Northern but I am not prepared to pay 7p/minute to speak to someone who isn't knowledgeable or in a position to actually do anything.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, I think this is completely inappropriate. At any station block or barrier check where it is possible within the rules to have boarded the train without a valid ticket (that's pretty much every case, then, except a dead-end branch with a ticket office/cash and card TVM at every station), it should be possible on having established that it was a legitimate reason to purchase a ticket there and then with all applicable discounts and with no implication of criminality.

But then Northern have had this problem for long enough with no will to properly solve it. Other TOCs manage perfectly well. I blamed it largely on Alex Hynes, however it is very telling that Arriva blustered about changing it then did nothing of the sort.

 

[Merseysider]

What an excellent way to permanently put people off travelling by train. How insidious.

 

[yorkie]

Here is another case:
https://twitter.com/SimonLovesTacos/status/897770977924452353

If I can't buy a ticket at station, on train, or via the http://Ircas.co.uk - Why should I call a premium number?

Hello Simon, which station did you travel from? ^HS

Alderley & Holmes Chapel. Not staffed after lunch. Issued with unpaid fare notice. Website doesn't work. Ridiculous.
My question was relating to why I have to call a premium number to buy a ticket that you couldn't sell me at a station.

If you do not wish to ring you can also email the team using this address [email protected] ^VR

It should only take a few seconds to buy a train ticket; it should not require emails, postage stamps, premium rate numbers etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they really must do this it would not be at all difficult to set up a website to take payment by credit/debit card for these given the reference number (or if preferred by cheque or postal order to a Freepost address). And they could make them settleable at a Northern ticket office of the passenger's choice.

Every single parking company has a website for payment of PCNs, it's not hard. I could put them one up in about an hour.

 

[sheff1]

When boarding at an unstaffed station with no opportunity to purchase, the NRCoT say that passengers should buy a ticket from the conductor on the train if there is one available; at an interchange station provided there is sufficient time before a connecting service; or, if neither of these is possible, at the destination.

It does not say what one should do if it is not possible to pay at the destination, which is the case if these contractors cannot take payment. Phoning a premium rate number is not paying at the destination.

What (bye)law do the contractors say is being broken ?


If the inspectors are unwilling or unable to discuss any data protection issues or answer basic data protection questions is a passenger still obliged to give their name and address ? Would Railway Byelaw 23(1) trump failure to comply with data protection legislation (I do not know if the inspectors refusal is such a failure or not) ?

 

[MikeWh]

Here is another case:
https://twitter.com/SimonLovesTacos/status/897770977924452353
It should only take a few seconds to buy a train ticket; it should not require emails, postage stamps, premium rate numbers etc.

If you do not wish to ring you can also email the team using this address [email protected] ^VR

Sorry, are they really suggesting that you should email the prosecutions department to pay for a simple ticket?

 

[yorkie]

The inspectors do not allow people to leave without leaving their details.

Sorry, are they really suggesting that you should email the prosecutions department to pay for a simple ticket?

That is indeed the case, yes.

 

[furlong]

The inspectors do not allow people to leave without leaving their details.

After offering cash payment in accordance with the terms of the contract ("pay at destination") surely there's no requirement to provide details and if someone's exit is actually impeded the person doing that risks prosecution for false imprisonment/assault.

 

[furlong]

If this is not merely anecdotal, the practice needs reporting to the DfT/police/ICO to try to get it stopped immediately - if need be with a test case/fines/prosecutions. The staff should perhaps be checking carefully with their unions the legality of any instructions they've been given. I know of no provision to require passengers intending to pay in cash to be forced to provide names and addresses to the franchise holder in order to travel on our railway! If staff are going to be employed, why don't they simply sell the tickets? The mind boggles!

 

[furlong]

The relevant option for UFNs on Northern's telephone line appears to be option 7, which is stated as "Penalty Fares".

That should be reported to the DfT, perhaps reminding them of Northern's own January 2013 statement (released in the FOI request) that "The FTP must not be confused with the Penalty Fares regime." and suggesting that they might want to reassess what the company is now doing, which may be materially different now from what was considered before.

 

[tspaul26]

The inspectors do not allow people to leave without leaving their details.

This must be stamped on immediately: it will almost certainly constitute both a crime and an actionable civil wrong.

 

[tspaul26]

What (bye)law do the contractors say is being broken ?

I suspect that they would have absolutely no idea what you are talking about if you were to ask.

If the inspectors are unwilling or unable to discuss any data protection issues or answer basic data protection questions is a passenger still obliged to give their name and address ? Would Railway Byelaw 23(1) trump failure to comply with data protection legislation (I do not know if the inspectors refusal is such a failure or not) ?

No, it would not. The passenger will always be safest to provide name and address.

If I were stopped by these people, I would do the following:

• Offer payment for my fare
• If asked to provide name and address, ask for an explanation of why these were required/what breach is alleged
• If an explanation is given (even if a really weak one), to request to see the person's photographic ID
• Provide name and address orally
• Leave the station immediately afterwards

I would refuse to provide any other details, would not provide ID and would not accept an UFN.

If the contractor attempted to prevent me from leaving, I would give one warning and, if that was not heeded, immediately call the police.

When I got back to work, I would then discuss the matter with my colleagues in the litigation department, contact my MP and the Secretary of State and arrange for the details to be leaked to the press.

Northern would then get a solicitor's nasty letter suggesting that a sizeable money payment could make the matter go away for them.

Oh, and I would pay my fare at the earliest opportunity, such as when I am next passing by a station (even if not actually traveling).

 

[Gareth Marston]

Goon Squads instead of proper ticketing buying facilities....and the TOC's/DfT wonder why the current system gets so much criticism?

 

[moliones]

What is the passenger's obligation if travelling between two unstaffed/un-TVMed stations, and not seeing a guard en-route? Are they obliged to make efforts to pay?

Connected to this thread, if their payment method (cash) is not accepted (say a non-cash-accepting TVM), what further efforts must be made?

 

[robbeech]

Yesterday as I alighted at Meadowhall station there were inspectors checking tickets of everyone passing. I am not sure if these people are from this company. I called there twice during the day and both times there were issues, not with myself but with other people. The first time I alighted on platform 4 and they were waiting on the bridge. A person arrived NOT by train and was being apprehended by them being told they were seen getting off the train. This was not the case as I made clear to them as I had seen the person arrive not on the train. They were infact heading to the ticket office to purchase a ticket to start their journey. The second ocassion later in the day relates a little more to this topic of boarding at unstaffed stations.
I boarded an Adwick service at Sheffield that was ex Lincoln (the route I initially took that morning from Woodhouse) and an announcement was made that the guard was unable to sell tickets due to a faulty machine and passengers should seek to purchase a ticket at their destination where possible. At Meadowhall where I alighted the less than friendly team were waiting for us at the top of the steps. I was one of the first off, I had my ticket (South Yorkshire connect +) but I did explain to them that the machine on board was broken and many of these passengers will need to buy a ticket here. The response was “they should have bought it from Sheffield mate so it’ll be expensive for them”. I didn’t go any further with it as it’s not really any of my business but I’m assuming that those who had travelled from Gainsborough Lea Road, shireoaks, Kiveton Park, Kiveton bridge, woodhouse, or Darnall which are I believe the unstaffed and no machine stations on the route will all be involved in this debacle now. If I had read this thread and the original one before that point I would have definitely stuck around to try to help. Of course, there will have been people who boarded at Sheffield who (unless they had a tight but valid connection) should have purchased a ticket but that then brings back the whole argument of northern being happy to sell on board 99% of the time even from staffed stations and never mentioning that they shouldn’t.

 

[island]

They have no legal right to inspect IDs or record information from them, such as date of birth.

The Information Commissioner’s Office would probably be very interested in this.

 

[robbeech]

What is the passenger's obligation if travelling between two unstaffed/un-TVMed stations, and not seeing a guard en-route? Are they obliged to make efforts to pay?

Connected to this thread, if their payment method (cash) is not accepted (say a non-cash-accepting TVM), what further efforts must be made?

I’m not sure where the law stands but if there simply is no reasonable opportunity to pay then I don’t feel you should have to go out of your way to purchase a ticket. If you felt very guilty you could purchase one online and then not collect it.
You need an opportunity to pay in your chosen method. If I wanted to go from Worksop to Gainsborough Lea Road when the ticket office was closed at Worksop and wanted to pay in cash* then my first opportunity to purchase is on board. If the guard is unable to sell a ticket for whatever reason then I see it as no opportunity to buy. The chances are you’ll want to return so you can purchase a ticket on the way back.


* Worksop TVM is now card payments only due to recent vandalism and theft of contents. I’m assuming they stole the money, surely you’d steal the blank ticket stock?

 

[PeterC]

After offering cash payment in accordance with the terms of the contract ("pay at destination") surely there's no requirement to provide details and if someone's exit is actually impeded the person doing that risks prosecution for false imprisonment/assault.

You would need to offer the EXACT fare in legal tender (no Scots notes, no sacks of pennies) to argue that you had satisfied your half of the contract.

 

[Merseysider]

Possibly - although the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement, which is binding upon the TOC, simply lists 'Cash denominated in Pound Sterling' as an acceptable payment method, so Scots notes should be fine. Assuming one is happy to potentially forego any change, or if the fare is a round £ number.

CHAPTER 7: METHODS OF PAYMENT
PART I: GENERAL

7-1 REQUIREMENT TO ACCEPT CERTAIN METHODS OF PAYMENT
(1) Generally applicable methods of payment

Each Operator must accept the following methods of payment for Rail Products:-

1. 
   
   
   • (a) cash denominated in pounds sterling;
     
     ...

 

[Bletchleyite]

You would need to offer the EXACT fare in legal tender (no Scots notes, no sacks of pennies) to argue that you had satisfied your half of the contract.

Point of order...while legal tender is relevant as a debt exists (though the railway does not insist on it) you don't need to offer the exact fare, you just have no legal expectation of change.

There is I think also no requirement for it to be taken on the spot, as long as it *is* taken.

 

[tspaul26]

Will posters please refrain from discussions of legal tender, which is of almost no practical utility in the circumstances set out in the original post.

For the sake of clarity:

• There is no obligation to accept legal tender in settlement of a debt
• In order to raise a defence of tender to a debt claim, the exact amount must be tendered to the penny

The relevant issues in this case insofar as payment is concerned will be the terms of the contract. We may therefore derive the following questions to dispose of the matter:

1. Is payment by rail travel vouchers permitted under the terms of the contract?
2. Has the passenger been given an opportunity to pay by that method in accordance with the contract?
3. Has the passenger actually paid the fare due?

If the answers are Yes, No and No then the fare should be paid as soon as possible in a manner that provides some evidence of payment e.g. a booking office receipt and printed ticket. This could be by using rail travel vouchers or by some other method.

This evidence must be retained (ideally for six years) and, if necessary, copies provided in response to any correspondence from the operator together with a written explanation.

Finally, if asked to provide name and address by a railway official, the safest course of action is to provide them. The threshold to activate the requirement to provide is so low and the potential consequences of an unlawful failure so to do sufficiently severe as to make insistence on strict legality highly risky.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In order to raise a defence of tender to a debt claim, the exact amount must be tendered to the penny

This is false. Overpayment with no expectation of change is acceptable.

 

[Darandio]

Very interesting thread and we certainly all agree it is unacceptable. But, despite all of this outcry has anyone actually contacted anyone about it?

 

[185]

Jason Wade started just after me at RRNE, as a minor manager looking after contracts - I took over his post some years later. He's quite a personable chap.

I do wonder whether Railway Ivory Tower Syndrome, the detachment of those in suits from the real world outside has set in, and I do wish him a swift recovery.

In real terms, I do wonder if he knows what is going on outside, and falling for the glossy reports and emails sent over by Carlisle and local revenue managers - when infact the situation down on the ground is utterly bringing the company's name into disrepute.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Jason Wade started just after me at RRNE, as a minor manager looking after contracts - I took over his post some years later. He's quite a personable chap.

I do wonder whether Railway Ivory Tower Syndrome, the detachment of those in suits from the real world outside has set in, and I do wish him a swift recovery.

In real terms, I do wonder if he knows what is going on outside, and falling for the glossy reports and emails sent over by Carlisle and local revenue managers - when infact the situation down on the ground is utterly bringing the company's name into disrepute.

Personable or not, isn't it the responsibility of ANY manager (in rail or elsewhere) to actually go out and find out what service is like on the ground/at the coal face on a regular basis?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personable or not, isn't it the responsibility of ANY manager (in rail or elsewhere) to actually go out and find out what service is like on the ground/at the coal face on a regular basis?

"Back to the floor" isn't that common, that's why they made a programme about it. ("Undercover Boss" is a later international version C4 did, but it's much more reality TV/sensationalist styled than the former, focusing more on people and emotions than purely business fact as the former did).

Employees tend to hide problems from visible management for fear of being blamed, and that's not just a railway thing.

 

[Hadders]

The whole situation stinks.

Maybe we should arrange a forum meet where we know Carlisle will be in attendance. We could even hold an impromptu fares workshop

This must also be a candidate for some undercover investigative journalism. It would be very interesting for someone to get a job on this contract and see what they’re actually instructed to do.

 

[70014IronDuke]

"Back to the floor" isn't that common, that's why they made a programme about it. ("Undercover Boss" is a later international version C4 did, but it's much more reality TV/sensationalist styled than the former, focusing more on people and emotions than purely business fact as the former did).

Employees tend to hide problems from visible management for fear of being blamed, and that's not just a railway thing.

Of course. That's not excuse for not working to check, however.

 

[Wolfie]

It would be VERY interesting for someone in this situation to send Carlisle and Northern an SRA under the DPA and then follow up with a question as to why the information is being held. The Information Commissioner can and should crucify this load of try-on merchants. I'm sure that a tame MP would have an absolute field-day...

As for Carlisle reportedly trying it on by detaining people until they provide ID (something that real railway staff, let alone rent a goon, have ZERO entitlement to ask for) I would be making immediate phone calls to the police followed up with formal complaints to the Security Industry Authority - strip the muppets of their licence!