-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
A New Series of "Fare Dodgers At War With the Law..."
- Thread starter Blinkbonny
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Did we watch different versions of this?!
They're perfectly entitled to ask for ID, just as anyone else can. Doesn't mean there is any requirement for the ID to be supplied.
The RPIs are simply trying to build some confidence that the details they are being given are valid. As you note, they are entitled to collect name & address.
If the requested name & address isn't supplied to their satisfaction or can't be verified, including the voluntary presentation of ID, calling the BTP seems an entirely appropriate escalation.
I wonder what the poster would suggest should be done instead? Rely on the fare evader's honesty!?
I do wonder about some of the naïevity shown on here. People caught out committing crimes don't meekly hand over their real name and address!
On the one hand we have people complaining in threads about graffiti, jumping of the barriers and staff explaining the very real threats they face; but then when TOCs are shown to be doing something about it we have complaints about that too!
Personally, the conduct demonstrated seemed entirely appropriate, patient and professional in difficult circumstances. I'm glad to see the TOCs taking action against those who defraud the railway.
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,200
A name and address does not need to be supplied to their satisfaction. Legally it only has to be given verbally (again with a note of further offences if given incorrectly).
The passenger isn’t detained and is free to leave. What do they do if they opt to leave after giving a name and address?
I promise you I’m not naive to the realities (although I realise London is a different kettle of fish to what I’m used to.)
In my experience Police will also tend to refuse to verify details for TOCs - PNC etc. should not be being used for this purpose. I’d pry an eyebrow on a data protection basis if it is. If BTP wish to then carry the case for prosecution, fine… but it’s unlikely. As we saw with the immigration case, the fare evasion elements weren’t continued.
We are in the privileged position of knowing that:
- It is not a requirement to provide ID,
- An individual can walk away,
- It is not an offence to refuse to provide ID.
To those without that knowledge, threatening to call the police for not providing ID insinuates that an offence is being committed and exceeds the RPIs’ authority. Hence why I asked if broadcasting this tactic might cause TOCs issues as courts are usually loathe to accept the ends justifying the means.
- It is not a requirement to provide ID,
- An individual can walk away,
- It is not an offence to refuse to provide ID.
To those without that knowledge, threatening to call the police for not providing ID insinuates that an offence is being committed and exceeds the RPIs’ authority. Hence why I asked if broadcasting this tactic might cause TOCs issues as courts are usually loathe to accept the ends justifying the means.
Yes that's something that's creeping into language a little bit. If you hang out on Reddit (and even here occasionally) you'll see people ask questions like "What's the best railcard for my journey?" when they're actually asking what's the best ticket. By no means common but it does crop up from time to time. Disappointing a show about fare evasion got it wrong however.
wessexen
Member
They also followed some of Woking's team around, there may be other revenue teams they also followed. I ended up bumping into the camera crew more than once (so I may end up on TV at some point) and spoke to quite a few of the revenue team as I have got to known them from my previous roles within the company.
I know they popped up on my going home train at least once.
I thought the show was quite good, other than the infuriating intro-snippet of actual content-recap cycle which assumes people actually watch the telly and join programmes half way through.
The TfL lot came across well. Firm but fair.
There was however about 20 minutes of content for a 45 minute show, a sad indictment of television’s decline.
The TfL lot came across well. Firm but fair.
There was however about 20 minutes of content for a 45 minute show, a sad indictment of television’s decline.
Egg Centric
Established Member
If I were a miscreant and I saw that first episode, the message I'd take away is run and do not cooperate.
Now obviously there's a lot of truth to that, but I'm surprised TFL/SWR permitted filming without some kind of way of preventing giving that impression. Especially since that wasn't the impression one got from season 1 (iirc)
Now obviously there's a lot of truth to that, but I'm surprised TFL/SWR permitted filming without some kind of way of preventing giving that impression. Especially since that wasn't the impression one got from season 1 (iirc)
SouthernOne
Member
Episode two features a gentleman buying a short ticket from Vauxhall to Waterloo instead of much further out. There’s a preview of around six minutes. Which you can find on the evening standard website or the telegraph website.
The gentleman featured known as Nathan, which is not using his real name in the documentary. He is the Senior Revenue manager for SWR.
The gentleman featured known as Nathan, which is not using his real name in the documentary. He is the Senior Revenue manager for SWR.
Last edited:
They mentioned £19.5K worth of avoided fares in that segment, one wonders if someone from one of the army installations along the route was involved.
SouthernOne
Member
The £19.5 K guy is nothing to do in the military. See the article from the evening standard, there’s a six minute video on it.
There’s often military police around London Waterloo to deal with Armed Forces staff!
There’s often military police around London Waterloo to deal with Armed Forces staff!
Last edited:
Which surely tallies with what we see in Disputes & Prosecutions...
It's been an issue for a while that the railway does very well in tackling the passenger who cooperates or somehow a bit more vulnerable (perhaps older, younger, or not familiar with UK custom and practice). It's rubbish at dealing with the hardcore evader who doesn't give a stuff and will happily just barge past/through people probably with a few choice words to boot.
Admittedly those are a lot harder to deal with and really require a police presence. But still. Its a trend I've noticed for a long time now.
SouthernOne
Member
You are very right in what you’re saying, the co-operative ones pay a heavy price, and those who do not co-operate walk free whether they’re giving false details or just running away. Staff are told not to follow. The BTP are not interested.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,200
BTP often host Military Police at central London locations - I believe the key goal is to give RMP exposure to day to day routine Policing. Side benefit of being able to deal more robustly with military personnel. Happy to be corrected by someone who knows more.
Egg Centric
Established Member
Absolutely. I'm just surprised that the documentary makers were "allowed" to give that impression. TfL/SWR didn't have to allow them along to make the documentary so should have thought about this...
Or even if you're not a miscreant. I had an RPI not understand break of journey once, luckily got corrected by another member of staff but I was preparing to run if they went down the invalid ticket route (had a clear path to the exit, ticket not bought online).
Most people on the disputes forum would be in a better place (maybe not long term, but for the incident in question) if they a) didn't buy online handing over a lot of info to the railway and b) stayed silent and run.
Having seen this thread I actually just watched the first series which is available through YouTube.
A couple of things struck me:
1. One issue was people paying with invalid payment cards which then go on to reject payment. Presumably because contactless payment needs to be so quick, the payment isn't verified until later?
It struck me here that a person in question had used a card to pay for dozens of fares. Surely with modern technology it could not be so difficult, for, say, if a card fails to produce payment twice, to have it blocked from being used on the TfL system, rather than letting someone rack up hundreds of pounds worth of fares and then having to pursue them?
2. Several instances highlighted were where people bought a zone 1-2 season ticket but then came in from further out and slipped into zone 1-2 by entering from an un-gated station and then changing at, say, Woolwich Arsenal, before going on to zone 1.
What I believe then happens is that after a while they are flagged up to the system presumably for persistent not tapping in but tapping out and vice versa. Again, couldn't some sort of automatic stop be put on a card once this was done two to three times in succession? If it's an innocent mistake a user could then have the card reactivated once they had come forward to offer their explanation.
In addition, one of these offenders had been doing this for something like 5 years, which begs the question of how little they must have been checked outside zone 1-2, for which presumably they had no valid ticket? This makes one wonder how many people persistently bilk it between stations that have no barriers.
A couple of things struck me:
1. One issue was people paying with invalid payment cards which then go on to reject payment. Presumably because contactless payment needs to be so quick, the payment isn't verified until later?
It struck me here that a person in question had used a card to pay for dozens of fares. Surely with modern technology it could not be so difficult, for, say, if a card fails to produce payment twice, to have it blocked from being used on the TfL system, rather than letting someone rack up hundreds of pounds worth of fares and then having to pursue them?
2. Several instances highlighted were where people bought a zone 1-2 season ticket but then came in from further out and slipped into zone 1-2 by entering from an un-gated station and then changing at, say, Woolwich Arsenal, before going on to zone 1.
What I believe then happens is that after a while they are flagged up to the system presumably for persistent not tapping in but tapping out and vice versa. Again, couldn't some sort of automatic stop be put on a card once this was done two to three times in succession? If it's an innocent mistake a user could then have the card reactivated once they had come forward to offer their explanation.
In addition, one of these offenders had been doing this for something like 5 years, which begs the question of how little they must have been checked outside zone 1-2, for which presumably they had no valid ticket? This makes one wonder how many people persistently bilk it between stations that have no barriers.
That's what happens after a couple of days of payment attempts failing, as far as I know. The issue is that if people keep on using different cards that have never had a history of failed payments, they can't be prevented from touching in even though they have no intent of actually paying for the journey.
The other 'wheeze' involves exploiting the fact that not all blocked cards are actually stored on gatelines etc. - only those blocked/last seen within a certain period, a list which is only periodically updated (every couple of hours AFAIK). So if the fare dodger 'stays low' with a particular blocked card, it will once again be accepted for travel after a certain period. That allows them to 'cycle' through blocked cards if they have enough such cards.
No, because there is no strict requirement to touch in or out if travelling within the Zones covered by your Travelcard. You can entirely legitimately undertake non-stop splits when combining a Travelcard on Oyster with a separately bought ticket/pass, which would therefore result in lots of 'incomplete' journeys. So it wouldn't be a lawful basis for blocking the Oyster card.
That is a big problem in Southeastern-land, where only the largest stations tend to be barriered - partly because of the lack of on-train checks.
It's interesting how different TOCs value gates. SE make the assumption that most people are travelling to major stations, the few who are doing minor station to minor station journeys will be honest (probably true, tapping in becomes a habit) and it's not economical to chase the few that aren't honest. GTR take completely the opposite approach and gate everything, unless it really is a tinpot halt or architecturally impossible. GTR is probably the closest you can get to a fully gated network (well, maybe LU).
Contactless cards are blocked after 2 failed revenue inspections (where the card is checked but no tap in is found). Given the infrequency of checks in the London Zones, that's longer than the life of most cards. I've had one "visual check" with the zones in 6 years (on SWR): someone who seemed to speak little English and accepted anything that approximately a bank card, Oyster card or orange paper.
On LU’s gates at stations which are not shared with Mainline Tocs the gates will still continue to allow exit (but not entry) in most cases of hotlisted cards. We have had at least one case mentioned on this forum in the Disputes section and I believe it was cases like this that were being referred to in the TV programme.
In this day and age with anyone being able to get a digital card off an App with no questions asked however I’m not sure how useful blocking cards actually is…
Bishopstone
Established Member
It’s unfortunate that, because the wheels of justice (or bureaucracy) turn so slowly, the viewer doesn’t get to see the outcome of the high value fraud cases featured.
Because the rest of the programme is a succession of ticketless under-30s giving RPIs lip, stating they live at Tescos, then running away without consequence. I’m surprised that TfL, SWR, and DfT (if they had any involvement) were comfortable with the edit. Or maybe they aren’t.
Because the rest of the programme is a succession of ticketless under-30s giving RPIs lip, stating they live at Tescos, then running away without consequence. I’m surprised that TfL, SWR, and DfT (if they had any involvement) were comfortable with the edit. Or maybe they aren’t.
So now we have to do a 'Guess the Station' to work out where the high dodger got on his trains - those stations with the nameboards blacked out should have been pretty instantly recognisable to most on here (though failed myself).
I wonder what data the RPIs have access to, presumably it was all based on gateline entry/exit data but do they also have access to ticket sales data as presumably to buy an e-ticket onboard a train you need to be logged into either the SWR website or another one which would give pretty instant access to who it was, though maybe with forged details. I assume they don't have access to bank card details.
I wonder what data the RPIs have access to, presumably it was all based on gateline entry/exit data but do they also have access to ticket sales data as presumably to buy an e-ticket onboard a train you need to be logged into either the SWR website or another one which would give pretty instant access to who it was, though maybe with forged details. I assume they don't have access to bank card details.
SouthernOne
Member
The photo of the man in the shelter looks like Witley. It’s two stations south of Godalming.
Falcon1200
Established Member
Indeed, I have a new level of respect for them.
Although they did say that because they had scanned the ticket of one absconder they did have their details?