Discussion About What Action Should be Taken Against Passengers With Expired Railcards

[SuspectUsual]

Some people would rather buy their tickets in advance and get the railcard at a later date (before travel)

It’s not just a “rather” on the part of the passenger though is it? The railway actively encourages passengers to buy in advance by having cheap Advance tickets

 

[eoff]

If that is the case - and I have no reason to doubt that, as it makes perfect sense for the expiry date to be visible - then I must be missing the point of this thread.
Because anyone holding a railcard has sight of their railcard expiry and therefore has responsibility for its timely renewal.
...

Sure but I don't think people read the expiry date on their card routinely which could be 35 months after purchase.
I suppose there is some irony here that holders of the Disabled Railcard used to get sent a renewal form but this stopped a long time ago, so impacting some of the people who might not be able to easily read the expiry date on the card.

 

[jthjth]

The fundamental point is that the penalties are often out of all proportion to the loss to the railway. The loss is around £35 per year. If the railway could not hide behind criminal prosecutions and instead had to rely on civil prosecution they would soon find out that compensation is limited to their actual loss. There should be a cap on imposed penalties. Twice the cost of railcard would seem reasonable to me.

 

[Tevion539]

The fundamental point is that the penalties are often out of all proportion to the loss to the railway. The loss is around £35 per year. If the railway could not hide behind criminal prosecutions and instead had to rely on civil prosecution they would soon find out that compensation is limited to their actual loss. There should be a cap on imposed penalties. Twice the cost of railcard would seem reasonable to me.

Is it £35 though? That may be the cost of a railcard, but its validity can’t be backdated.

 

[Krokodil]

The fundamental point is that the penalties are often out of all proportion to the loss to the railway. The loss is around £35 per year. If the railway could not hide behind criminal prosecutions and instead had to rely on civil prosecution they would soon find out that compensation is limited to their actual loss. There should be a cap on imposed penalties. Twice the cost of railcard would seem reasonable to me.

I think that if you took it near a civil court the compensation would be the sum of the difference in fares, plus costs. You'd need an incredibly good lawyer to argue it down to £35.

 

[AlterEgo]

Is it £35 though? That may be the cost of a railcard, but its validity can’t be backdated.

Well, yes, it’s £35. That’s what should have been paid to regularise the tickets. It’s the only thing missing. You then have to buy a new railcard of course to regularise travel going forward.

 

[jthjth]

I think that if you took it near a civil court the compensation would be the sum of the difference in fares, plus costs. You'd need an incredibly good lawyer to argue it down to £35.

Why? The principle of civil compensation is to put the victim back in the position they would otherwise have been in had the loss not been incurred.

 

[John R]

Why? The principle of civil compensation is to put the victim back in the position they would otherwise have been in had the loss not been incurred.

The loss that occurred is that the individual was not entitled to a discount but claimed one. Not that they should have bought a card to entitle them to the discount.

 

[jthjth]

The loss that occurred is that the individual was not entitled to a discount but claimed one. Not that they should have bought a card to entitle them to the discount.

That’s not the actual financial loss to the railway. I would agree with you that it would be the actual loss if the person buying railcard discounted tickets was not entitled to purchase a railcard. But that’s a different argument.

 

[Lewisham2221]

The fundamental point is that the penalties are often out of all proportion to the loss to the railway. The loss is around £35 per year. If the railway could not hide behind criminal prosecutions and instead had to rely on civil prosecution they would soon find out that compensation is limited to their actual loss. There should be a cap on imposed penalties. Twice the cost of railcard would seem reasonable to me.

How are they hiding behind criminal prosecutions? It is a criminal offence to board a train without a valid ticket* - a Railcard discounted ticket without an accompanying valid (in date!) railcard is not a valid ticket - thus, a criminal offence has been committed and can rightly be prosecuted as such.

Why? The principle of civil compensation is to put the victim back in the position they would otherwise have been in had the loss not been incurred.

Interesting. Is shoplifting treated that same way - i.e if I were to steal goods from a shop, I'd only have to repay the wholesale price of the goods I'd stolen, not the shops retail price?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Sunday at 13:35 ==

That’s not the actual financial loss to the railway. I would agree with you that it would be the actual loss if the person buying railcard discounted tickets was not entitled to purchase a railcard. But that’s a different argument.

So you're saying that anybody who is eligible to a Railcard doesn't ever actually need to purchase that Railcard? They can just freely purchase Railcard discounted tickets and only pay the Railcard fee if and when they are stopped and issued a MG11/TIR or similar?

 

[jthjth]

How are they hiding behind criminal prosecutions? It is a criminal offence to board a train without a valid ticket* - a Railcard discounted ticket without an accompanying valid (in date!) railcard is not a valid ticket - thus, a criminal offence has been committed and can rightly be prosecuted as such.


Interesting. Is shoplifting treated that same way - i.e if I were to steal goods from a shop, I'd only have to repay the wholesale price of the goods I'd stolen, not the shops retail price?

With shoplifting you deny the shop the opportunity to sell that item at retail because the item is no longer available on the shelf. With one or two narrow exceptions that’s not the case with a discounted rail ticket.

Yes, the whole argument hinges around the right of the railway to use criminal prosecutions. They are in a special situation that is unavailable to many other sellers of goods and services. Serial evasion, such as short faring over a sustained period, is fraud and should be treated as such. Having an out of date rail card really isn’t.

 

[Krokodil]

With shoplifting you deny the shop the opportunity to sell that item at retail because the item is no longer available on the shelf.

Can I claim a BOGOF promotion when compensating the shop for the item I nicked? After all, if I'd bought one in the first place I'd have been eligible for a second one free...

 

[Tevion539]

Well, yes, it’s £35. That’s what should have been paid to regularise the tickets. It’s the only thing missing. You then have to buy a new railcard of course to regularise travel going forward.

Okay, I understand that, if you renew, you’re no longer causing a loss. At least for the next 12 months.

But for those that have travelled for months on an expired railcard? Surely the loss can be greater than the cost of the railcard at that point? Unless I’m misunderstanding.

 

[talldave]

We've discussed this extensively before but (as ever) it isn't that simple. I assume your plan would mean buying railcard disciounted tickets for someone else would no longer be possible.

You assume wrong. You can buy a ticket for any Railcard as long as you have the card details. Just like I can shop for my mum using my her Nectar card.

 

[Lewisham2221]

With shoplifting you deny the shop the opportunity to sell that item at retail because the item is no longer available on the shelf. With one or two narrow exceptions that’s not the case with a discounted rail ticket.

Yes, the whole argument hinges around the right of the railway to use criminal prosecutions. They are in a special situation that is unavailable to many other sellers of goods and services. Serial evasion, such as short faring over a sustained period, is fraud and should be treated as such. Having an out of date rail card really isn’t.

And paying the wholesale price gives the opportunity for the retailer to put that item back on the shelf. There is no guarantee that the retailer will succeed in selling that product.

The railway is in a special situation in that it is able to bring the prosecution without need for police or CPS involvement.

Obtaining Railcard discounted tickets for a period of six months, without holding a valid Railcard, is a sustained period of fare evasion. It matters not if you "accidentally" forgot to renew, or never held one at all, or are eligible for said Railcard or not. You weren't eligible to use the discounted ticket for that journey. Thus the loss is the difference between the fare paid for the invalid ticket and the undiscounted fare for the journey undertaken.

 

[jthjth]

Okay, I understand that, if you renew, you’re no longer causing a loss. At least for the next 12 months.

But for those that have travelled for months on an expired railcard? Surely the loss can be greater than the cost of the railcard at that point? Unless I’m misunderstanding.

Something like pay £35 (or a bit more?) to cover travel up to the point of being stopped. Then require a new rail card to be purchased at another £35 valid from that point onwards. You can have a debate about what to do about a railcard that is recently out of date, but that’s a secondary argument.

Knowing that if you get caught you essentially have to buy both and “old” railcard and a new one should cover most cases. If you argue that the evasion has gone on for more than 12 months then perhaps the railway should examine its revenue protection techniques.

I think I’m arguing for something that is fair and proportionate. I don’t think the current system is such.

 

[Failed Unit]

Down south you’re lucky to be asked at all. I get my Disabled Railcard checked maybe 20% of the time.

Depends where.
One the train it is very rare. But certain stations (Welwyn Garden City) seem to always reject railcard tickets (however the person staffing the gate then rarely asks for it anyway….)

 

[talldave]

You can buy a ticket regardless of whether you possess railcard or not. Some people would rather buy their tickets in advance and get the railcard at a later date (before travel) or buy a ticket for someone else, and that’s perfectly legal.

And that's the stupidity that's led to the ludicrous situation that we have today.

If you want a discount, show the card/ have proof of a valid card. End of. All this pussy footing around with corner cases is ridiculous.

The rail industry seems to be falling over itself to make it so easy for people to buy with a discount they're not entitled to and promptly threatens court when it catches them doing so. It's a stupid mentality that's no doubt going to get worse under Labour's interpretation of nationalisation.

 

[duffield]

And that's the stupidity that's led to the ludicrous situation that we have today.

If you want a discount, show the card/ have proof of a valid card. End of. All this pussy footing around with corner cases is ridiculous.

The rail industry seems to be falling over itself to make it so easy for people to buy with a discount they're not entitled to and promptly threatens court when it catches them doing so. It's a stupid mentality that's no doubt going to get worse under Labour's interpretation of nationalisation.

What about TVMs? Are you going to make people enter their 16-digit railcard number correctly (or whatever it is) to buy a ticket? People can just about manage a 4 digit PIN. It sounds clumsy, slow and passenger hostile to me. At the moment it's possible to buy a ticket for a common railcard journey in about four presses and a card touch.

 

[Tevion539]

Knowing that if you get caught you essentially have to buy both and “old” railcard and a new one should cover most cases. If you argue that the evasion has gone on for more than 12 months then perhaps the railway should examine its revenue protection techniques.

I think I’m arguing for something that is fair and proportionate. I don’t think the current system is such.

At that point, though, there is no incentive to buy the railcard at all is there? If I know I could get discounted tickets, knowing I’d only have to buy the railcard when I’m eventually stopped and nothing more, what’s the deterrent to stop that behaviour? That surely would be open to abuse.

 

[AlterEgo]

Okay, I understand that, if you renew, you’re no longer causing a loss. At least for the next 12 months.

But for those that have travelled for months on an expired railcard? Surely the loss can be greater than the cost of the railcard at that point? Unless I’m misunderstanding.

No? All they should have done to regularise their tickets - assuming they still qualify - was to pay £35.

If they don’t qualify it’s a different story entirely.

The railway already leaves wide open goals for a few forms of railcard abuse which are essentially undetectable. Not least the forgotten railcard policy, which is easy to abuse. And a couple of other methods I won’t divulge on a public forum.

The fanaticism about expired railcards is just opportunism.

 

[Egg Centric]

Here’s the rub. Settling with one of these entities out of court? It is not revenue.

Are you saying that they can keep 100% of an out of court settlement but only 1.5%(ish) of a rail ticket (or less after ORCATS etc)?

If that is the case the incentives set up are absolutely mental

 

[jthjth]

What about TVMs? Are you going to make people enter their 16-digit railcard number correctly (or whatever it is) to buy a ticket? People can just about manage a 4 digit PIN. It sounds clumsy, slow and passenger hostile to me. At the moment it's possible to buy a ticket for a common railcard journey in about four presses and a card touch.

Put a chip in a plastic rail card and hold it near the TVMs reader. For a phone railcard use the phone’s NFC chip. Or have a barcode scanner like petrol pumps do to read your Clubcard/Nectarcard that you have either physically or virtually. Funny how supermarket petrol pumps can read a loyalty card but TVMs can’t read a railcard.

 

[island]

The normal penalty for not paying Vehicle Excise Duty is an £80 fixed penalty, I would suggest that is about the level which would provide sufficient deterrent to pay when challenged whilst still being proportionate.

That depends on how you're caught. If caught by the computer system it's £80 in the post, reduced to £40 for prompt payment. On another DVLA system it's £30 plus 1.5 times the unpaid tax. By police, depends on your attitude. They can give a warning, issue FPN, report for prosecution. But if a DVLA clamper van catches you, then the release fee is £260.

All rather like the railway!

As a matter of interest I hold a PTAC. So tickets I purchase are marked PRIV. Every time I have travelled on EMR I have been asked to show it. This does seem strange as I can only purchase PRIV tickets from a booking office who always ask to see my PTAC.

I'm pretty sure PRIV tickets have been available online for a while now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Sunday at 14:38 ==

Put a chip in a plastic rail card and hold it near the TVMs reader. For a phone railcard use the phone’s NFC chip. Or have a barcode scanner like petrol pumps do to read your Clubcard/Nectarcard that you have either physically or virtually.

Station-issued Railcards do not have barcodes, chips, etc., and not all phones have NFC capability.

 

[Tevion539]

No? All they should have done to regularise their tickets - assuming they still qualify - was to pay £35.

If they don’t qualify it’s a different story entirely.

The railway already leaves wide open goals for a few forms of railcard abuse which are essentially undetectable. Not least the forgotten railcard policy, which is easy to abuse. And a couple of other methods I won’t divulge on a public forum.

The fanaticism about expired railcards is just opportunism.

Maybe I’m just not understanding your point. I’m open to changing my view on it, but i don’t see it at the moment. I agree though, those travelling on a railcard they were never entitled to should be dealt with more stringently.

 

[AlterEgo]

Maybe I’m just not understanding your point. I’m open to changing my view on it, but i don’t see it at the moment. I agree though, those travelling on a railcard they were never entitled to should be dealt with more stringently.

It’s really simple. If I buy Disabled Railcard tickets with a third off, how much has the railway lost in revenue?

The answer to that questions depends on whether I’ve bought a railcard or not. If I’ve got a railcard they’ve lost nothing, and in the case of a Disabled Railcard it’s £20 for a year. If I still qualify but forget to renew, the railway has lost out on £20 regardless of how many tickets I buy after expiry.

Anyway while all this is being argued about, a proper fare evader simply travels about with an in-date railcard obtained by one of a few fraudulent means. That’s the higher hanging fruit you never hear of on the forum; they don’t get caught. The system is designed so they don’t.

 

[duffield]

Put a chip in a plastic rail card and hold it near the TVMs reader. For a phone railcard use the phone’s NFC chip. Or have a barcode scanner like petrol pumps do to read your Clubcard/Nectarcard that you have either physically or virtually. Funny how supermarket petrol pumps can read a loyalty card but TVMs can’t read a railcard.

Yes, so we're talking expensive changes and upgrades and a long roll-out period (these things always seem to take forever and cost a fortune).
We'd have to hope that it would only need software changes and not hardware upgrades for every TVM since that would be ridiculously expensive. I'm pretty sure TVMs can't scan barcodes for example; obviously they can read contactless bank cards but does that mean a simple software upgrade to read railcard chips, or is that function fixed in firmware or something?

That's not to say it can't be done but it illustrates just one reason why the whole business of switching to having to prove you have a valid railcard in order to buy a ticket is not a quick fix. And of course the TVM changes are in addition to all online retail sites and apps having to be changed to validate railcards in real time.

 

[Tevion539]

The answer to that questions depends on whether I’ve bought a railcard or not. If I’ve got a railcard they’ve lost nothing, and in the case of a Disabled Railcard it’s £20 for a year. If I still qualify but forget to renew, the railway has lost out on £20 regardless of how many tickets I buy after expiry.

Anyway while all this is being argued about, a proper fare evader simply travels about with an in-date railcard obtained by one of a few fraudulent means. That’s the higher hanging fruit you never hear of on the forum; they don’t get caught. The system is designed so they don’t.

Ok sure - but the validity can’t be backdated, so previous tickets would still be invalid, no? If not, again, what’s the incentive to stop people abusing that?

As for the latter, I think I recall a recent thread about an “accidental” wrong licence number being entered to renew a railcard. How are we supposed to know how people have obtained railcards on board if all the details look correct? Unless it’s a screenshotted railcard with an altered name/photo etc, which would be an easier spot depending on the photoshop skills. A handful of times I’ve seen people using senior railcard tickets, when they’re in their 30s etc but then show Network Railcards, which aren’t valid on the network that I work. This is obviously an easier spot.

I really am open to changing my approach to passengers on board and I’m trying to keep an open mind here so please don’t see this as me being argumentative with you. I do genuinely appreciate your opinion. Maybe the railway as whole should be too. But there still needs to be deterrents in place.

 

[jthjth]

Ok sure - but the validity can’t be backdated, so previous tickets would still be invalid, no? If not, again, what’s the incentive to stop people abusing that?

As for the latter, I think I recall a recent thread about an “accidental” wrong licence number being entered to renew a railcard. How are we supposed to know how people have obtained railcards on board if all the details look correct? Unless it’s a screenshotted railcard with an altered name/photo etc, which would be an easier spot depending on the photoshop skills. A handful of times I’ve seen people using senior railcard tickets, when they’re in their 30s etc but then show Network Railcards, which aren’t valid on the network that I work. This is obviously an easier spot.

I really am open to changing my approach to passengers on board and I’m trying to keep an open mind here so please don’t see this as me being argumentative with you. I do genuinely appreciate your opinion. Maybe the railway as whole should be too. But there still needs to be deterrents in place.

Of course validity can be back dated. Turn up with an out of date railcard: that will be £35 to cover the period up to now. (ie regardless of the actual previous railcard expiry date in the last 12 months). Then charge another £35 for another railcard from that point to 12 months in the future. If you turn up with a railcard 12 to 24 months out of date charge £70 plus £35. In other words put right previous non validity in yearly chunks and enforce a new railcard for the following 12 months. For most people that will cost them a bit more than if they had done things properly, but not an outrageous amount more. If they indulge in more complex and deliberate fraud then prosecute for fraud.

 

[tatitiliti]

Thing is, it would be very helpful for email reminders to be issued approaching the expiry date - at next to no cost for the sender.

On the other hand, you’re getting 1/3 or more off rail fares for a very small comparative cost - you’d think the onus would be on the user to set a reminder to renew it.