New railcard

[transportphoto]

Has anyone got a ticket issued with the TTRC? If so could they scan and upload so we can see how the discount prints?

Cheers,

TP

 

[First class]

It prints as 2GETH.

 

[Ticket Man]

we had a brief about this the other day.

don't know if its been mentioned already but Virgins railcard easement will not apply to the two together.
I can see that causing a few upsets

 

[First class]

we had a brief about this the other day.

don't know if its been mentioned already but Virgins railcard easement will not apply to the two together.
I can see that causing a few upsets

Good luck enforcing that!

The Train Manager would have to announce every VALID railcard, he couldn't just say "off peak tickets invalid except those with a railcard" as they do at the moment.

No operator is obliged to accept the railcard at all though, same as the Family one. NSE (within area), DIS, YNG and SNR, CON50 are the mandatory ones.

 

[furryfeet]

Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham and Glasgow only have one letter.

Whoever programmed it was quite obviously a complete amateur.

OR
the specification was badly drawn up.
If the the spec said "if the 1st letter is B then valid" then the programmer has done his job correctly !

Without seeing the specs and the test plans then it is impossible to judge where this has gone wrong, although the buck has to stop with the project manager.

 

[Old Timer]

Apologies if this has already been asked but there are an awful lot of posts to read !

What happens when the railcard holder, shall we say has multiple "companions" ?

By the way but I am sorry to pour rain on anybodys garden party but using this Railcard and living at a different address constitutes a breach of the NCoC, and potentially constitutes a RoR 1889 S5 offence.

 

[Mike395]

Apologies if this has already been asked but there are an awful lot of posts to read !

What happens when the railcard holder, shall we say has multiple "companions" ?

By the way but I am sorry to pour rain on anybodys garden party but using this Railcard and living at a different address constitutes a breach of the NCoC, and potentially constitutes a RoR 1889 S5 offence.

Only the holder and their named/photographed companion can travel discounted - anyone else in the party wouldn't be entitled to any discount off the back of it.

And whilst a false address is technically illegal - I can't see it standing up in court - or even being caught realistically, as your address isn't printed on the card in any case!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

And whilst a false address is technically illegal - I can't see it standing up in court - or even being caught realistically, as your address isn't printed on the card in any case!

The images I have seen of the Railcard include the holder's postcode and house number on the reverse.

I cannot see that there would be much difficulty in securing a prosecution against a passenger detected supplying a false address once their identity is established.

 

[First class]

Only the holder and their named/photographed companion can travel discounted - anyone else in the party wouldn't be entitled to any discount off the back of it.

And whilst a false address is technically illegal - I can't see it standing up in court - or even being caught realistically, as your address isn't printed on the card in any case!

I don't think rail-specific Law is the right area to be looking at.

I think it would constitute "False representation" which is an offence under the Fraud Act 2006.

2Fraud by false representation

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b)intends, by making the representation—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)A representation is false if—

(a)it is untrue or misleading, and

(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3)“Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a)the person making the representation, or

(b)any other person.

(4)A representation may be express or implied.

(5)For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

There is clearly a "gain" to be had by deliberately providing misleading information to obtain an advantage.


Mags court - 12 months max (6 months NI)
Crown Court - 10 years max

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I don't think rail-specific Law is the right area to be looking at.

Maybe, but having looked again at the Conditions, I see:

10. The Railcard and all tickets issued at a Railcard discount are issued subject to the National Rail Conditions of Carriage and the Conditions in this leaflet. Copies of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage are available from any staffed station ticket office or online at www.nationalrail.co.uk/nrcc

Fraudulent use of Railcards and Railcard discounted tickets may lead to criminal prosecution.

 

[firespire]

They don't have any procedure if you move address for people to return the card and get a partial refund so presumably they don't care if you move away. How could they possibly have any evidence you weren't staying at any particular address when you made the application, a census isn't carried out every day of the year.

They don't have any criteria to define what living means, some people who are "living out of a suitcase" may give the address of their current hotel, someone without a home may give the address of a homeless shelter, others in temporary accommodation would include students.

I doubt they could trace anyone who gives a false address walking into a station but it does seem silly ATOC are issuing them to people who submit fully accurate applications outside the area and are issued one because they have a B at the beginning of their postcode.

 

[Old Timer]

They don't have any procedure if you move address for people to return the card and get a partial refund so presumably they don't care if you move away. How could they possibly have any evidence you weren't staying at any particular address when you made the application, a census isn't carried out every day of the year.

They don't have any criteria to define what living means, some people who are "living out of a suitcase" may give the address of their current hotel, someone without a home may give the address of a homeless shelter, others in temporary accommodation would include students.

I doubt they could trace anyone who gives a false address walking into a station but it does seem silly ATOC are issuing them to people who submit fully accurate applications outside the area and are issued one because they have a B at the beginning of their postcode.

Completely irrelevant in the case of a S5 RoR Act 1889 prosecution.

There is a clear loss of revenue and thus S5 is proven. This is supported by virtue of possession and use of a Railcard outside of the conditions of its issue and use. There are no technicalities here. Loss has taken place, the only debate is the awarded punishment. Indeed fraudulent misrepresentation would also fall under the Theft Act.

 

[firespire]

I suspect they can't ask for much proof of address how can they handle a couple of 16 year olds who want a one (cheaper than two 16-25 railcards), any old letter isn't proof, they don't have any bills in the name, it would be expensive to expect them to pay for a passport or provisional driving licence if they didn't have one. Their parents might be separated and they live with one every other weekend of the month, how does ATOC accurately define where they are "living".

 

[Old Timer]

I suspect they can't ask for much proof of address how can they handle a couple of 16 year olds who want a one (cheaper than two 16-25 railcards), any old letter isn't proof, they don't have any bills in the name, it would be expensive to expect them to pay for a passport or provisional driving licence if they didn't have one. Their parents might be separated and they live with one every other weekend of the month, how does ATOC accurately define where they are "living".

ATOC is not involved. Fare evasion is a Criminal Offence not a civil issue.

There are terms and conditions for the issue of the card. To obtain one outside of those issuing terms and conditions is to act outside the law. There are various sections, fraudulent misrepresentation, attempting to obtain by deception, etc, etc.

In the case of fare evasion, which use of the card constitutes when used outside its terms and conditions, the BT Police have the power to arrest in order to establish identities in such cases.

It is for the person to demonstrate proof of their identity not the other way around.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

How could they possibly have any evidence you weren't staying at any particular address when you made the application . . . .
. . . I suspect they can't ask for much proof of address . . .
. . . how does ATOC accurately define where they are "living".

See here :
https://secure.twotogether-railcard.co.uk/TwoTogether.do?source=buybtn&source_pg=/are-you-eligible/eligibility
That application process includes:-

To participate in the trial you must live within the following postcode areas of the West Midlands:
•B - Birmingham
•CV - Coventry
•DY - Dudley
•WS - Walsall
•WV - Wolverhampton

Please enter the postcode of where you would like your Railcard delivered: [ ]
Home postcode is required.

The successful applicant will have the card posted to the address provided.

It seems to me from your consideration of circumstances under which a cardholder may not be resident in the defined area that you are either eager to find a 'loophole' or perhaps even to abuse that condition.
If I am right, then you do so at your own peril; the potential consequences have been explained. The probablility of such a Fraud being detected is quite independent of the severity of Fraud.

 

[firespire]

The successful applicant will have the card posted to the address provided.

It seems to me from your consideration of circumstances under which a cardholder may not be resident in the defined area that you are either eager to find a 'loophole' or perhaps even to abuse that condition.
If I am right, then you do so at your own peril; the potential consequences have been explained. The probablility of such a Fraud being detected is quite independent of the severity of Fraud.

The card has no use to me, I'm not after one. If you walk into a train station clearly they don't post them to you, I just find it odd that they specially mention in the "Manual" that there is no requirement to check the validity of the address given. All I can deduce that it is like any other railcard you must meet the criteria only on the day issued for the card to be valid, ie. you must live in the defined area for a minimum of one day on which you obtain the card, giving a made up address is fraud. Like the 16-25 railcard you must be 25 on the day it is issued and the following day you can be 26 but your railcard is valid for a year.

 

[Old Timer]

The card has no use to me, I'm not after one. If you walk into a train station clearly they don't post them to you, I just find it odd that they specially mention in the "Manual" that there is no requirement to check the validity of the address given. All I can deduce that it is like any other railcard you must meet the criteria only on the day issued for the card to be valid, ie. you must live in the defined area for a minimum of one day on which you obtain the card, giving a made up address is fraud. Like the 16-25 railcard you must be 25 on the day it is issued and the following day you can be 26 but your railcard is valid for a year.

Stop trying to twist normal language. The Court would be asked to put the "normal" interpretation of living, not the one you are trying to offer.

Clause 2 of the Ts & Cs for the 16-25 Railcard explicitly permits the card to be bought whilst the person is 25 years old.

 

[nedchester]

Let's be honest here. It is highly unlikely that TOCs would go round trying to catch people out for 'address fraud'.

I have no real use for this card but say I bought one for myself and my wife and used the address of some relative to obtained the card when purchasing at Birmingham New Street. (Remember their is no requirement to check the address of the applicant - bit of a clue there)

So then my wife and I go round travelling from outside the area using a card the can be used nationally. Are RPIs going to start asking for address and even then what would be their grounds for that?

It's like applying for vouchers / special offers (one per person or one per address) people will often use a friends relatives address to get extra vouchers. Many people do this kind of thing. Technically it is illegal but in reality it is not one that would be enforced.

In some ways ATOC might see the fact that people from outside the area is a good thing and may help inform them that the railcard is popular enough to become a permanent feature.

 

[firespire]

I'm drawn to the idea that that they are secretly expecting a percentage of cards to spread across the UK and it forms part of the master plan, there is probably a Powerpoint presentation somewhere with predicted figures. They have chosen a highly populated central region and all the train companies need some data on how a card would be used in their region if the scheme went nationwide.

It's seems all a bit wink wink - 1) We have no desire to check the address given at the station, 2) Put down your regular travelling companion as cardholder number two, they can live in he Outer Hebrides for all we care. 3) Buy tickets at any station in the UK for travel no where near Birmingham if you want. 4) We don't have any rules for the card to be returned if you don't live in the area any more.

I can't see them wanting to take any time out of their day to check peoples private lives to disprove people's claims of events in their lives which resulted them going to live with Aunt Edith in Birmingham or found themselves living in short term accommodation in the area.

 

[AlterEgo]

2) Put down your regular travelling companion as cardholder number two, they can live in he Outer Hebrides for all we care.

That would be great, as they wouldn't be using the train, would they?

 

[Old Timer]

Let's be honest here. It is highly unlikely that TOCs would go round trying to catch people out for 'address fraud'.

I have no real use for this card but say I bought one for myself and my wife and used the address of some relative to obtained the card when purchasing at Birmingham New Street. (Remember their is no requirement to check the address of the applicant - bit of a clue there)

So then my wife and I go round travelling from outside the area using a card the can be used nationally. Are RPIs going to start asking for address and even then what would be their grounds for that?

It's like applying for vouchers / special offers (one per person or one per address) people will often use a friends relatives address to get extra vouchers. Many people do this kind of thing. Technically it is illegal but in reality it is not one that would be enforced.

In some ways ATOC might see the fact that people from outside the area is a good thing and may help inform them that the railcard is popular enough to become a permanent feature.

So basically then its sod the law, sod the terms and conditions as long as it suits me and to hell with all else.

With regards to address checking, any member of the revenue protection staff is authorised to ask for these days, either under caution or outside of a caution. A refusal or a belief that the information is not valid is sufficient to summon the Police, and THEY will pretty quickly establish that. Of course many TOcs have the ability to do an address check against records these days as it is. It is an offence under S5 to provide an incorrect address.

Remember under S5 of the 1889 Act an inspector can decide that the use of the railcard could possibly represent a S5 offence and therefore question further to either dispel or to obtain evidence to support that belief.

I'm drawn to the idea that that they are secretly expecting a percentage of cards to spread across the UK and it forms part of the master plan, there is probably a Powerpoint presentation somewhere with predicted figures. They have chosen a highly populated central region and all the train companies need some data on how a card would be used in their region if the scheme went nationwide.

It's seems all a bit wink wink - 1) We have no desire to check the address given at the station, 2) Put down your regular travelling companion as cardholder number two, they can live in he Outer Hebrides for all we care. 3) Buy tickets at any station in the UK for travel no where near Birmingham if you want. 4) We don't have any rules for the card to be returned if you don't live in the area any more.

I can't see them wanting to take any time out of their day to check peoples private lives to disprove people's claims of events in their lives which resulted them going to live with Aunt Edith in Birmingham or found themselves living in short term accommodation in the area.

That is not the matter in discussion.

The Conditions of issue are quite clear and to provide false information to obtain the card in order to obtain a reduction in fares which would not ordinarily be available constiutues THEFT. Dress it up as you will, defend it as you may try but in simple fact it remains deception to obtain the railcard and theft to obtain a discount on the fare payable.

The Theft Act is as good a place to start - look up fraudulent deception, fraudlent misrepresentation, obtaining goods or services by deceit, et, etc.

The Law in the UK assumes good faith and honest intention as the basis for all transactions, and this translates ultimately into "reasonable person" and the "man on the Clapham Omnibus".

Irrespective that ATOC may not check out address details, this does not by implication demonstrate tacit approval to ignore the conditions of issue of the railcard. These are quite clear and unambiguous. The railcard is NOT available to anyone who resides outside the specified area.

The NCoC make it an offence to use it because it is invalid when obtained by deception - which is what happens when someone outside the area obtains one.

 

[MikeWh]

There is no requirement that I can see to continue living at an address in the area for the full year. If you purchase it at a station there will be no requirement to send the card to the address. You could legitimately move the day you pick up the railcard, so I really cannot see that there would be any grounds for action. If records show that you have lived at your address for years you could legitimately say that you had to move temporarily while building work was carried out on your house, but didn't update the electoral roll or anything because it was only for a few weeks.

 

[jon0844]

I really don't think ATOC are that bothered, even if they have fixed the 'error' on the website. I think they want to keep a relatively small area to trial the service, and presumably get feedback later on.

Now, I am not sure why they're trialling it at all and haven't just launched it nationally. If it was a total flop, they could simply stop selling it at any time.

The fact it's limited, and then there will be a long gap between it going national (and would existing railcard owners be unable to renew during that period?) makes me suspicious about what they're hoping to achieve. I fear it's that demand and usage will be quite low, and it will then stop any plans for another national railcard.

 

[firespire]

ATOC must have great faith in everyone being honest, they don't even ask for a home address on the website simply an address you want the card to be sent to, they must assume everyone giving their Birmingham work address is being honest and doing it because they have shared unsecure mail at their home residence. ATOC have never asked anyone to notify them of a change of address on any railcard issued so are happy with their out of date records.

When you sign up to the terms and conditions they don't say if the card becomes invalid if you move to a home with a postcode on the other side of the boundary line. I was behind a Mature student at a train station once they asked if their 16-25 card was still valid now they had finished the course, the answer given was yes it is still valid up until the expiry despite them no longer meeting the conditions of first issue.
I can see people turning up at rail stations with the card saying I am the named primary card holder but no longer live in the area but the secondary card holder does live in the area do I need to have the pictures changed around or is the card still valid. Doubt station staff will be able to give an answer.

With regards to address checking, any member of the revenue protection staff is authorised to ask for these days, either under caution or outside of a caution. A refusal or a belief that the information is not valid is sufficient to summon the Police, and THEY will pretty quickly establish that. Of course many TOcs have the ability to do an address check against records these days as it is. It is an offence under S5 to provide an incorrect address.

Remember under S5 of the 1889 Act an inspector can decide that the use of the railcard could possibly represent a S5 offence and therefore question further to either dispel or to obtain evidence to support that belief.

An RPI has to check the tickets are valid, the card is present, the correct number of people are present, they match the people pictured on the card. Now you think RPI will be expected to start quizzing people on where they have lived since obtaining the card. What happens if the primary card holder says when they obtained the card the were renting a room in Birmingham after the wife had chucked them out or was living with parents but now have moved to Manchester. It's hard to find out this is against the terms and conditions and a court would want everything in black and white. The RPI will need to prove that they were not renting that room at the time they took out the railcard and obtained the card fraudulently. The police don't have a magic computer that knows who is co-habituating with who or who is lodging with anyone renting out a room at any time. The police release a lot of people on bail with no real idea of if the address they have given is correct, they have to accept what is given and if they don't turn up in court on the required day there is a lot of door knocking at 3 in the morning to get the current location of someone.

The idea of this railcard is they want to sell it people, they then want the two people to start using the train more and making them money. They don't want to waste large amounts of money on legal proceedings against people using terms and conditions which don't prevent people moving house and very little/no evidence that someone has lied to get the railcard in the first place and hope the person doesn't turn up in court with old rent receipts or a previous landlady.

If ATOC want to change the terms and conditions to make them clearer they need notify everyone who has signed up to the previous terms and conditions. Each person should then have then have the right to reject these new terms and conditions and return the card getting their money back if they don't like the new contract.

 

[jon0844]

The need for an address is more likely just for sending a renewal letter and/or advertising (as well as the card itself, obviously!). It's not as if you'd be given a PF for something and produce your railcard as a proof of address. I doubt a TOC could even get your address from ATOC under data protection rules, ignoring the hassle given it's not printed on the card.

A drivers license or passport on the other hand must be updated for your current address (or an address where you can be contacted). If you were asked for your address for a PF or prosecution, it would always be a current address or one where you can be contacted - not the address for the railcard.

 

[firespire]

I think that have chosen a selected area so it is easier to cover the area with publicity, I've read they have been sticking information through doors in the area. A valid trial is no good if people don't know anything about it. The railcard trial needs to closely match what a nationally issued railcard will be like ie. it must see if pairs of people are willing to pay £28 for a card which allows them to walk into any train station in the UK and purchase discounted tickets to anywhere. I do believe it is easier to make it crystal clear to people this is only a trial by getting them to match up their postcodes rather than giving it out more indiscriminately and people not reading the information fully and complaining if they find out they can't get a new one after May 2012.

 

[snail]

I do believe it is easier to make it crystal clear to people this is only a trial by getting them to match up their postcodes rather than giving it out more indiscriminately and people not reading the information fully and complaining if they find out they can't get a new one after May 2012.

By restricting the area of issue less stock will be needed and distribution should be simpler. The costs of sending out new photocard blanks to every station on the network would be huge compared to a limited number of stations in the West Midlands.

Issuing tickets is much simpler as standard stock is used, so that does not need to be restricted.

 

[island]

By restricting the area of issue less stock will be needed and distribution should be simpler. The costs of sending out new photocard blanks to every station on the network would be huge compared to a limited number of stations in the West Midlands.

But they could have allowed it to be issued online to any address whilst still only sending the card stock to the limited number of stations.

 

[jon0844]

They should have stated on the website (which is an effective way to promote it besides leaflets) that people outside the qualifying area could travel TO the qualifying area and get one from a ticket office - subject to stock etc etc.

In other words, they could have made it available to anyone but have a few restrictions because of the logistics mentioned above. I am sure that people who have heard about it and would like one, but live outside the area, would be the same people who could give feedback - and of course, want to use the card.

Ah, maybe that's the problem!

 

[firespire]

They should have stated on the website (which is an effective way to promote it besides leaflets) that people outside the qualifying area could travel TO the qualifying area and get one from a ticket office - subject to stock etc etc.

Think they just want an easy calculation - how many people live in area, what percentage of people bought one, extrapolate out the figures to the whole of the UK with out having to account for and eliminate people who visited Birmingham to get one. Still their data must be slightly skewed as I can't believe there is no one with parents in Birmingham not putting that address or Birmingham workers who commute in who aren't using their work address or asking to use their colleagues addresses.